- This topic has 47 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 9 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Ok JR stats in their simplest form……1 striker 55mins 0 goals .2 strikers 35 mins 3 goals.
Plus 55 minutes of turgid, boring football then 55 minutes of fast tempo, fast flowing,high pressing football.[/quote]
I thought it was 8 mins added time not 20! :)
The turnaround was f-all to do with suddenly playing two upfront in my opinion.
Rather than any interaction between two strikers, the sudden resurgence was caused by an increase in tempo – which came about by the two players brought on having more urgency, and more attacking intent about them.
Grigg will get goals if we get balls into the box (as Tez has said) from out-wide. Which brings me on to my only real gripe from last night….
James isn’t a wingback. He’s a decent, steady, left back.
He can’t beat a man, doesn’t cross and doesn’t push up high enough. He constantly looks to pass inside, and it usually slows things down. Daniels on the other hand, even though he’s a Centre Half, was getting past players down the right, pushing up and getting crosses in, and not by coincidence, most of our chances in the first half came from the right.
When McCann came on however, suddenly there was a threat down the left as well as the right.
I can only presume that Caldwell feels that James is better defensively – so that why he starts. Or maybe it’s the fact that we paid a million quid for him, so Caldwell feels he needs to justify that by playing him.
And for the record, I thought Perkins had a poor game last night and based on that, I’d start McCann there for the next one as I think Perkins could probably do with a rest.
The turnaround was f-all to do with suddenly playing two upfront in my opinion.Rather than any interaction between two strikers, the sudden resurgence was caused by an increase in tempo – which came about by the two players brought on having more urgency, and more attacking intent about them.
Grigg will get goals if we get balls into the box (as Tez has said) from out-wide. Which brings me on to my only real gripe from last night….
James isn’t a wingback. He’s a decent, steady, left back.
He can’t beat a man, doesn’t cross and doesn’t push up high enough. He constantly looks to pass inside, and it usually slows things down. Daniels on the other hand, even though he’s a Centre Half, was getting past players down the right, pushing up and getting crosses in, and not by coincidence, most of our chances in the first half came from the right.
When McCann came on however, suddenly there was a threat down the left as well as the right.
I can only presume that Caldwell feels that James is better defensively – so that why he starts. Or maybe it’s the fact that we paid a million quid for him, so Caldwell feels he needs to justify that by playing him.
And for the record, I thought Perkins had a poor game last night and based on that, I’d start McCann there for the next one as I think Perkins could probably do with a rest.
Pretty much my thoughts exactly, almost word for word what I said at half time, ref Daniels, James and Perkins. James is probably my biggest disappointment, hasn’t gone past a player since very early part of the season, can defend though.
The turnaround was f-all to do with suddenly playing two upfront in my opinion.
Rather than any interaction between two strikers, the sudden resurgence was caused by an increase in tempo – which came about by the two players brought on having more urgency, and more attacking intent about them.
Grigg will get goals if we get balls into the box (as Tez has said) from out-wide. Which brings me on to my only real gripe from last night….
James isn’t a wingback. He’s a decent, steady, left back.
He can’t beat a man, doesn’t cross and doesn’t push up high enough. He constantly looks to pass inside, and it usually slows things down. Daniels on the other hand, even though he’s a Centre Half, was getting past players down the right, pushing up and getting crosses in, and not by coincidence, most of our chances in the first half came from the right.
When McCann came on however, suddenly there was a threat down the left as well as the right.
I can only presume that Caldwell feels that James is better defensively – so that why he starts. Or maybe it’s the fact that we paid a million quid for him, so Caldwell feels he needs to justify that by playing him.
And for the record, I thought Perkins had a poor game last night and based on that, I’d start McCann there for the next one as I think Perkins could probably do with a rest.
Pretty much my thoughts exactly, almost word for word what I said at half time, ref Daniels, James and Perkins. James is probably my biggest disappointment, hasn’t gone past a player since very early part of the season, can defend though.[/quote]
Likewise with James.
For me, he’s the biggest problem in that team at present.
As Caldwell is playing a similar system and style to Martinez, I keep thinking back to when Beausejour was playing on the left.
Yes he had his limitations, but he pressed forward at every opportunity, got crosses into the box, and even chipped in with the odd goal. Grigg would get chance after chance with a player like that.
With James you see nothing like that, and he reminds me of Gary Neville. He’d be decent in a 4-4-2 with an out and out winger in front of him, but he offers no threat whatsoever going forwards.
Hiwula meant the centre backs had someone else to pick up instead of two-ing up on Grigg.Watched the tv re-run this morning and both pundits said the same .We overplayed ,build up too slow and lone forward struggling without support.They put our turn around down to the substitutions and a more direct style……but I suppose they know eff all too…
Like I have said on numerous occasions our problem is the two centre midfielders they play way too square from one another
Hiwula meant the centre backs had someone else to pick up instead of two-ing up on Grigg.Watched the tv re-run this morning and both pundits said the same .We overplayed ,build up too slow and lone forward struggling without support.They put our turn around down to the substitutions and a more direct style……but I suppose they know eff all too…Who is saying that wasn’t the reason we won?
Standish hit the nail on the head with one word. Tempo. The Tempo changed with the substitutions from the dull to more exiting. Could the tempo have changed without the changes? That is questionable. Would it make a difference starting that way? I would like to think so but again that is questionable.
I know we have changed the course of the game on many occasions this season. The game at Fleetwood changed when we brought on the subs and went for it but starting that way at Scunthorpe was a different kettle of fish.
Whatever, our man Gary is getting a dab hand at interventions during a match and doesn’t it just add to the excitement when we storm back like last night and all though personally I am a lover of an high pressing old fashioned game it is hard to argue with that league position. Also it is fantastic to see Latics bounce back after that mini December blip with three great wins and a draw. Roll on the next two home games and let us see then where we are in the table.Standish..”The turnaround was f-all to do with suddenly playing two upfront in my opinion”Call me pedantic but you said “They put our turn around down to the substitutions and a more direct style……but I suppose they know eff all too…
How are the 2 things the same?
I think everyone agrees the substitutions and more direct style turned around the game, it’s what everyone wants too. The difference was what I’ve been banging on about for weeks, tempo, urgency. I would also argue whether we actually went 2 up top or just supported the lone striker when we went forward. Hiwula was everywhere.
Hiwula meant the centre backs had someone else to pick up instead of two-ing up on Grigg.Watched the tv re-run this morning and both pundits said the same .We overplayed ,build up too slow and lone forward struggling without support.They put our turn around down to the substitutions and a more direct style……but I suppose they know eff all too…I thought that’s what I pretty much said!
‘…the sudden resurgence was caused by an increase in tempo – which came about by the two players brought on having more urgency, and more attacking intent about them’
As for 2 up front, we started with two strikers against Blackpool. And we all know how well that went!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
