Mr Jenkins 0 Posted February 9, 2013 DF if it was me one of Johnson or Tetty would drop out and Benno and Snoddy would switch sides with Wes still playing in the hole Russell Martin would have to be prepared to push forward a bit more with Benno dropping in behind him to defend the RB position if necessary. That''s what I would do at home but who knows? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr Jenkins 0 Posted February 9, 2013 It''s the curse of mid (ish) table mediocrity Nuffi Said. We have become used to something a bit more dramatic, either at the top or bottom end of the table. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CambridgeCanary 0 Posted February 9, 2013 [quote user="Desert Fox"]Morty,I really dont think we are a long way apart in our views, but I think the main difference is that we have players in our squad (like Fox and Surman who you have mentioned) that dont fit into our system. They have not suddenly become bad players overnight, although when thrust into roles that dont suit their style, I would admit they have looked poor. I guess what I am trying to say is that I am not 100% convinced that the system we play is not the only system available to us. This feels a bit like a chicken and egg debate, because I am sure that the counter argument is that CH only plays this sytem because of the limitations of the players that he has available. Even so, I still think CH has done an accepatble job edging us forward to the promised land of £75M p.a. Sky money with the one proviso that the club has advanced plans to recruit sufficient players and in depth to play whatever system the manager prefers. I reiterate that, if we lose BJ and AT for the same game, we will get murdered playing this system.[/quote]I too agree but I suggest you go further. Whenever we have played 442 this season we have looked poor and we''ve lost to Luton and got slaughtered at Fulham. There is a reason none of the good teams play 442 and that is because if you lose the midlife you lose the gameIt is indeed a chicken and egg argument. The players were good enough last season but can anyone deny that in the last third we lost form. We were found out big time and players lost confidence. We can all play alternate realities but I think that the huge adrenalin and confidence rush that took us to 12th in the Prem exhausted itself. Things needed to change. They are changing. This is part way through the process. It will not look perfect. Players we admired have not looked good this season. I loved Fox and rated Howson but they have not looked up to it this season Today Simeon was an embarrassment. Why would Hughton want to rely on that? This formation is the only option for us at the moment because at least if we don''t conceded then there is a chance we will get something. We need better attack options but that will come. This is a work in progress. I don''t accept that we should be complaining now. If we are playing this team and this way at Christmas then we should be very disappointed and very angry. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted February 9, 2013 [quote user="CambridgeCanary"][quote user="Desert Fox"]Morty,I really dont think we are a long way apart in our views, but I think the main difference is that we have players in our squad (like Fox and Surman who you have mentioned) that dont fit into our system. They have not suddenly become bad players overnight, although when thrust into roles that dont suit their style, I would admit they have looked poor. I guess what I am trying to say is that I am not 100% convinced that the system we play is not the only system available to us. This feels a bit like a chicken and egg debate, because I am sure that the counter argument is that CH only plays this sytem because of the limitations of the players that he has available. Even so, I still think CH has done an accepatble job edging us forward to the promised land of £75M p.a. Sky money with the one proviso that the club has advanced plans to recruit sufficient players and in depth to play whatever system the manager prefers. I reiterate that, if we lose BJ and AT for the same game, we will get murdered playing this system.[/quote]I too agree but I suggest you go further. Whenever we have played 442 this season we have looked poor and we''ve lost to Luton and got slaughtered at Fulham. There is a reason none of the good teams play 442 and that is because if you lose the midlife you lose the gameIt is indeed a chicken and egg argument. The players were good enough last season but can anyone deny that in the last third we lost form. We were found out big time and players lost confidence. We can all play alternate realities but I think that the huge adrenalin and confidence rush that took us to 12th in the Prem exhausted itself. Things needed to change. They are changing. This is part way through the process. It will not look perfect. Players we admired have not looked good this season. I loved Fox and rated Howson but they have not looked up to it this season Today Simeon was an embarrassment. Why would Hughton want to rely on that? This formation is the only option for us at the moment because at least if we don''t conceded then there is a chance we will get something. We need better attack options but that will come. This is a work in progress. I don''t accept that we should be complaining now. If we are playing this team and this way at Christmas then we should be very disappointed and very angry.[/quote][Y] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RvWs 4 year contract 0 Posted February 9, 2013 [quote user="morty"]Well firstly, I shall point out the lone striker role is an extremely one not only to play, but to look good playing. Becchio actually won more headers today that Holt normally does for starters. The manager has already said he intended to play Holt and Becchio today, but was forced into last minute changes due to the late injury, so all things considered, Becchio did an adequate job.Wes was frankly unplayable at times, and Snodgrass was excellent. Bennet had an okay game, I''m not convinced by him, and he is way behind Pilks in my opinion.Fulham came here with a similar game plan to ours, and we cancelled each other out for long periods, but I think if you check (I haven''t) we had more shots on goal than them.Also before the game I was pondering the Fulham team, and frankly, most neutrals would have heard of virtually their whole team, they are all seasoned Prem campaigners.We are a small club, we have no financial backing outside of what every other team gets, and frankly we are probably punching slightly above our weight. So, looking at the bigger picture, yes there are positives.A few armchair managers on here need to get a bit real frankly.[/quote]Superb post Morty my man. Superb. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Desert Fox 0 Posted February 9, 2013 Cambridge Canary,A really good post and I agree with virtually all of your sentiment. For me, the main issue is that the club is already in advnced plans to do something about our squad depth and that Ewan Chester is already lining up players who are in weaker contractual psoitions than those that we have been lined with. With the near absence of debt and a big increase in Sky money, CH will probably have a war chest of somewhere circa £25M to £30M. Part from the club doing th encessary homework behind the scenes, I hope that we can have a good run before the end of the season so that payers that maybe thinking of joing us are persauded that we can play attractive footbal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yellowbeagle 0 Posted February 9, 2013 Hughton will still have done a good job this season if we stay up regardless of how we are playing. Personally i can see why he would have wanted to get the defence working but the attacking play has been sacrificed to worrying extent. I''ll be happy if we stay up and he''s improved the defence and hopefully he''ll work on the attacking side during the summer to make us a more balanced team, however if we are playing premier league football next season and still looking like we''re not sure where the oppositions goal is then i''d be more inclined to want to see a change. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Desert Fox 0 Posted February 9, 2013 Yellowbeagle,I think your post probably sums up the views (give or take) of a fair few posters on the board. Lets just hope we can secure safety as soon as possible so that we can start planning for next year early and from a psoition of strength. I dont think I coudl stomach another last day of the season scenario al al Fulham, but this time against Citeh! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Highland Canary 78 Posted February 9, 2013 At the end of the season I suggest that we''ll be discussing who''s leaving rather that who we might attract here whilst having to adjust to losing more than 50% of turnover. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Desert Fox 0 Posted February 9, 2013 Highland,I have a tendency to worry too, but even so, at the currenttrajectory I still feel that we will avoid the last day of the season anxietyby a few points. I know the bookies odds bring no security, but they don’t seemto think we will go down and unless there is a huge improvement from thecurrent bottom three, I think we can grind out enough points, howeverdissatisfying this may be for some, myself included. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Highland Canary 78 Posted February 9, 2013 I guess my issue would be - can we score a sufficient number of goals to stay up? If we go one behind to Everton, Soton etc I simply can''t see us getting two back at the moment. We can''t rely on keeping a clean sheet every week. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Desert Fox 0 Posted February 9, 2013 Highland,I guess that you have to place results in to a context. Against both Fulham and QPR we were playing sides who were sitting deep (much like ourselves) with the hope of winning 1-0. These formations tend to nullify each other. However, against a more open Spurs, we could have score more than the one that we did. I guess what I am trying to say is that we often look better against better teams who have the cofidence not to stifle. Having said this, I am not hugely optimistic of getting much out of our next two matches against top 5 teams and would bite your hand off for a couple of boring 0-0 draws. Needs must, but once we get past say 33 points, teh finisging line is is within touching distance of a victory. Like many on here, I dont think 40 points will be needed for safety this year.OTBC Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,898 Posted February 9, 2013 Interesting discussion. Good points both in support of Hughton''s tactics and against. I understand the frustrations but we are where we are. Everything is a gamble. This formation or a more expansive attacking formation. It''s not cast in stone that by trying harder to win these games that we''d get a better result. We could just as easily make the kind of changes being asked for and go on to lose. An attacking substitution does not mean we turn a draw into a win. No more than a defensive change would mean we don''t drop two points from a winning position. So cards on the table. What team would you guys have put out today and how would you have set them out to play? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Desert Fox 0 Posted February 9, 2013 Nigel,You asked "So cards on the table. What team would you guys have put out today and how would you have set them out to play?".In all honesty, give or take the timing and sequencing of the subs, I wouldnt have done a lot different to CH. This doesnt make me feel great about today''s performance, but is perhaps a relaity check of the depth of the squad that we have and its ability to fit into our current system. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Highland Canary 78 Posted February 9, 2013 Do we all really believe that our current system will yield the say three victories we need? We have to target Reading, Southampton etc as winnable matches. But I''d take a 0-0 against Everton.So today - notwithstanding we would have had a more open midfield - I would have played Holt instead of Tettey and gone 4-4-2. With Holt''s injury I''d have started KK in his place. The lack of creativity with our current system means we have to change tactics. Lose 2 and win 1 and we''re no worse off. And a victory might help to improve the players'' belief. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,898 Posted February 10, 2013 Highland, I believe Holt was injured or he was going to start with Becchio. Kamara is apparently not fit enough to start. So your option would have been Becchio and Jackson. That''s your call but not for me. Dezza was honest. But I take anything you say with a huge pinch of salt since you have never, ever posted anything positive and where we are in relation to your publicised expectation is sooooo good I''d expect you to be permanantly p1ssed[B][<:o)] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Monty13 2,733 Posted February 10, 2013 Enjoyed reading this thread, its been a good debate.I like Hughton, and I think negative or not he will keep us up this year. But I think some of the (fairly constructive) criticism of his tactics on here is justified.I like 451, its a great formation, versatile and effective if used correctly. That is the reason it''s now the default formation (or variations of it) for nearly all top teams.I agree, and have said before, that the defensive two is our issue going forward. They do an excellent defensive role but sit so deep and do not push forward enough when we have the ball. I think this is partly the fault of the coaching/tactics, partly the fact they are both defensively minded players.I''d like to add one thing for debate though, and its the opinion of Howson. There seems to be much derision of his performances this year. To be fair he has played in some pretty abject performances. But mainly these have been in a 442 or replacing Wes (mainly late on) behind the striker.While I think BJ and Tettey do a sterling job when we are the underdogs, I would personally agree that we can''t play both, especially at home against similar level opposition and expect to win (although we probably wont lose). People have said we don''t have the personnel, that''s why they both play, but to me Howson is the one player who, when on his game, can play alongside one of the other two, and provide cover to the defence, while providing more going forward than either of them can.I can only remember one instance (although i am sure someone will prove me wrong!) of our playing 451 in the Prem this year and Howson playing alongside one of the other two in those berths. That game was Swansea, and we went in at half time dominating and having scored 3. Ok the second half we took it to the wire, but they came out and out played us in the second half , but we still won the game. If wed had Tettey fit subbing him on for Howson at that point would have made perfect sense to hold our lead.So why has Howson not been used more as a partner for either BJ or Tettey when we want to try to win the game, but maintain the discipline and the shape against similar level opposition? Instead he has been reduced from our only real all round central midfielder to a bit part replacement, and frankly sub standard, Wes. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rock The Boat 1,332 Posted February 10, 2013 Clearly the Board think we have enough in the locker to get us over the finishing line this season, hence the lack of panic-buying in the January transfer market. In my opinion the board did the right thing and it is all about holding our nerve until we can bring in better quality in the summer. We are a club in transition and we will come out of this stronger than ever next season. I think the fans have every right to feel frustrated by the current negative,boring style of play, particularly as this is not what we have become used to, but having said that we need to look at the bigger picture of where we are. I think that''s what the Board are doing and I support them in this strategy even if it means dire football in the short-term; just so long as we can get to 40 points.It''s a bit like going to the dentist. You know it''s going to be painful but you have to do it because it''s a lot less painful in the long run. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Highland Canary 78 Posted February 10, 2013 Nutty, the fact that arguably Jackson was our only other fit other striker is pertinent. As I''ve argued continually - we should have strengthened this area in the Summer let alone in January. We are incredibly exposed to injuries to Holt and Becchio. I make no apology for seeing the glass as half empty - I still see our season unravelling in front of my eyes - but shall try and take comfort from those who suggest we''ll win our next three home games. Personally, I still don''t fancy needing to beat Villa and West Brom, or needing to go to Man City needing a point or worse.Does anyone think we can beat Everton at the moment? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dpit 1 Posted February 10, 2013 Are we playing very differently from the 10 match unbeaten period? Not really. The difference is we have not had the luck/confidence to tuck away the odd goal as we did then. Two week break coming up and time for Becchio and Kamara to bed in. We''ll sneak. 1-0 win at somecstage and the confidence will come and we''ll win a couple more and end up about 5 clear. Then will come the crucial period. How we invest over the summer will be very interesting. Hughton knows we need more quality - his pursuit of Hooper shows this. I think we could be seeing a more flexible approach next yearOh and by the way guys and gals, well done. 5 pages of impassioned and intelligent debate and no sign of childish name calling or high handed arrogance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr Brownstone 0 Posted February 10, 2013 Actually Highland, and I said this before the game, I think we''ll stand a better chance of beating Everton than Fulham. Everton are still chasing a European spot and will come here wanting the 3 points and will attack us, which will play to our strengths. Fulham were always going to be happy coming away from here with a point, it''s these games where we are expected to make the running where we struggle. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Roodge 0 Posted February 10, 2013 dpit wrote the following post at 10/02/2013 7:11 AM:Oh and by the way guys and gals, well done. 5 pages of impassioned andintelligent debate and no sign of childish name calling or high handedarrogance. The best thread I seen here for a long time, nice one!!!!!! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crabbycanary 2 Posted February 10, 2013 Wow, went out for the evening and a very interesting and tempered post has taken most of my morning to read. I am with Morty, Ricardo, Cambridge, Nuff Said et al. This time next season, and if certain situations are still happening, then my mind will have changed. Transition for me at the mo, and although it hasn''t been mentioned yet (sorry) I believe if Lambert was still in charge, we would be where Villa are now. I feel it is relevant to mention this, as it is last season, that this season, is being judged/compared with, expectation wise.Hughton has recognised the next part of the development by wanting to play two up front in a home game against a mid table team. You could tell that Hughton was frustrated with the Holt injury and, yes he did not have other options to play a different two up front, once Holt was out.Work in progress for me. Pleased where we are at the mo, can things be improved? Yes they can, but then I am sure Sir Alex would say the same about his team. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ron obvious 1,710 Posted February 10, 2013 I''d avoided this thread until now, expecting the usual whingefest. Turns out to be the best, most constructive thread on here for ages!My two penn''orth says that we underestimate the value of game-time together. We had a squad who knew each other''s game & could play in several formations, generally giving the opposition something to think about. I think we came as a big surprise to many established, rather complacent Prem teams.You can never step in the same river twice. This season was inevitably going to be a completely different affair to last; I think one of Lambert''s main reasons for going was a fear he would fail, especially after the way we tailed off at the end last year. A new manager changes the whole psychology of the dressing room - Swansea have done extremely well, in that they have one who has actually managed to build on an already excellent foundation, but this is very rare.Hughton''s style is more measured & calculating than Lambert''s, that''s clear. There is no doubt in my mind that the overall quality of the team could not sustain us for much longer, so a rebuilding job was necessary. This unfortunately led to a complete loss of cohesion. I was worried sick after the first Fulham match, we looked like a bunch of clueless League One players chucked together at random. It was going to be a long, embarrassing season. However we now look solid, capable but boring (as long as we don''t lose key players) &, despite everything, unlikely to be relegated.Perhaps I''m a bit odd, but I don''t mind watching games such as yesterday''s (but then, I didn''t pay for it!). I find them absorbing & fascinating, even though frustrating, as you know that if they can just get it to work they are capable of some terrific football; don''t forget the quality of some of the games pre-Christmas was exceptional, as good as any last year.It''s going to be a bit of a grind till May, but I look forward to next year with eager anticipation! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZLF 334 Posted February 10, 2013 Sadly a few points is all we have to consider. The only point I would disagree with is 4231/4411 itself is not a negative system. 442 can be even more defensive. The problem is how we are using it, we sit too deep and don''t push on, defend from the front or provide any pace or movement. We lack confidence on the ball and so sit deep and invite trouble. You can do that in any formation. Move the play up the pitch and get the midfielders moving, and better mobility up front. Kei looks as if he will bring that. Lose the rigidity. It does not have to be less secure Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ZLF 334 Posted February 10, 2013 And more importantly we have been less successful with 442 this season than 451. We looked no better yest when we had Jackson and becchio up front. So it''s not just Ulf formation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,898 Posted February 10, 2013 If we stay up this season it will be because we are a solid football team. I''ve got no idea if we''d have been in a better position if we still had Lambert instead of Hughton? The way last season ended suggests to me not. But there is no definitive answer either way. Would we have more points if we''d played two up front more often? I suspect not because as Zip says the evidence suggests not. Would we have won more games if we''d made earlier substitutions? maybe, or maybe we''d have lost more. There''s no certainty that bringing on another forward with 30 minutes to go will mean we go on to win. The disruption could easily mean we go on to lose. Would we score more goals if we''d spent millions on plans c or d in the transfer window? Still no guarantees. Doesn''t seem to have worked for QPR yet. There are no bad sides in this league. Just go back and read the threads from the beginning of the season when many posters had us as certs to be relegated because they believed that this league was way stronger than last season. It''s arrogant in the extreme to believe we should be beating the likes of Fulham. Just take a step back and look at Fulham objectively. If we stay up by whatever means it will be a massive achievement. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lappinitup 629 Posted February 10, 2013 [quote user="Highland Canary"]As I''ve argued continually - we should have strengthened this area in the Summer let alone in January.[/quote]You can argue all you like but it''s unlikely anymore money was available at that time. The priority in the summer was always to strengthen the defence and if there was no more money available for strikers after buying eight players then your arguement is futile. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Highland Canary 78 Posted February 10, 2013 We''ve also debated this point. In my view there was/is a complacency in respect of our strikers. It was certainly evident after Christmas last season that Morison had lost form. Jackson isn''t a PL quality striker. So in the Summer we (arguably) weakened this position further by loaning out Vaughan. We should have got a player in the Summer.By January our lack of striking options was exposed to all. But for whatever reason we buy no one. So, we''re left with only two first choice strikers - a huge risk given injuries etc.With the monry on offer next season there was a strongq case to overpay to bring another quality striker in to get us over the line next season. As an accountant I fully understand the funding implications of this but would view this effectively as an insurance cost.Where we differ - and I fully accept this is a minority view - is that I don''t see us as capable of getting the goals we need to stay up. I hope I''m wrong. I still think it was an incredible gamble with our PL status to sit on our hands - or, at least, play our hand badly in my opinion. Time will tell but the more I read that will win the next three home games, the more I worry that we''ll need points against Villa and West Brom - not an appealing prospect. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
killiecanary 0 Posted February 10, 2013 What a good thread this has been.There seems to be little argument that the lack of cutting edge in the final third is down to the midfield selection. But one thing that struck me watching Grant Holt recently has been how little time he actually has been spending in a central attacking role. Now this is exactly what some of the best proponents of the lone striker role do - play wide, move from side to side and generally annoy the hell out of the back four. I''ve seen some questioning of Holt recently, but for me he is doing the role he has been asked to do actually very well indeed - see the first hour v Spurs as a good example.What to my mind is missing now is the midfielders getting beyond him in numbers to find holes in the opposition defence. I felt sorry for Becchio yesterday - home debut, must have been keen as mustard to do well, and he was so isolated all day that no-one could have done much...i was encouraged by him when Jackson came on and he had some help.I dont know if we actually have the box-box midfielders we need to give that assistance the striker needs - Howson probably is the most suited to the role, and as someone here pointed out, he did play that role against Swansea in the first half to perfection. But for some reason he isnt getting a look in...I understand Camara has played all across the midfield in his time, and he certainly seemed to have plenty of pace and energy yesterday so maybe he will be an option there as well as up front?I am still completely with CH, and I agree with many on here that this first year is about consolidation and starting to build his own team. I actually think we will stay up relatively comfortably, and expect us to be safe by the time Villa come desperate for points. Next season will be the true test of CH and the team he is building, for the moment take the points as they come and secure Premiership football again for next year. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites