| Post-WBA 14:13 - Sep 28 with 6874 views | Mistication92 |
Always thought they looked a cut above TBH. Both bad goals to concede though. Maybe that's Warburton's excuse to drop Lumley? |  | | |  |
| Post-WBA on 17:01 - Sep 28 with 1580 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Post-WBA on 16:20 - Sep 28 by WilloW4 |
A dozen 'Chances' by the byline.???? |
Call it a half chance if you like. Whatever makes you happy. |  | | |
| Post-WBA on 17:07 - Sep 28 with 1556 views | Dorse |
WBA were better than us today, obviously, but I thought that was more about their game-plan than our team being rubbish. They'd identified our many strengths (Chair, Eze, Wells, Hugill) and weaknesses (lack of width in the final third) and set themselves up accordingly. The battle between Furlong and Manning was primarily to prevent Manning from adding to the attack and it worked brilliantly. Kane, by contrast, was allowed to get into the middle third simply to open up the space behind him: in short, they didn't feel he was going to hurt them with the ball and they could get Pereira in behind.
Closing down Eze and Wells meant Hugill was winning possession with no-one to give it to. Chair couldn't get into the game much either, as the players he would try to hit with an out-ball were already covered. Dom Ball, I thought, was effective but, like Kane, WBA were quite happy for him to have possession because they knew full-well he wasn't going to have it for long (not his game - tackle/pass it). Not a criticism of us so much as an analysis of how WBA choked the life out of what is one of the most effective attacking sides we've had for years.
I was mightily impressed with their back to front transitional play: it was so fast! There was one moment in the second half, we'd won an attacking throw roughly level with their 18 yd line, lost possession and with about three one-touch passes they'd by-passed our whole midfield and nearly scored. Whenever we tried the same, we found our more creative players cock-blocked. WBA looked good; QPR not so much but not for want of trying. Nobody phoned it in today: we just beaten by a side that had done its homework.
I would expect us to revert to 4231 next match but simply because I doubt Warburton will be able to select Hall and Barbet is suspended. It might not be a bad thing under the circumstances: Hugill as the point of attack with 3 from Eze, Pugh, BOS and Chair behind. Perhaps Scowen and Ball at the base of the midfield.
Reset. Go again. URs |  |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
| Post-WBA on 17:12 - Sep 28 with 1518 views | PinnerPaul |
| Post-WBA on 17:07 - Sep 28 by Dorse |
WBA were better than us today, obviously, but I thought that was more about their game-plan than our team being rubbish. They'd identified our many strengths (Chair, Eze, Wells, Hugill) and weaknesses (lack of width in the final third) and set themselves up accordingly. The battle between Furlong and Manning was primarily to prevent Manning from adding to the attack and it worked brilliantly. Kane, by contrast, was allowed to get into the middle third simply to open up the space behind him: in short, they didn't feel he was going to hurt them with the ball and they could get Pereira in behind.
Closing down Eze and Wells meant Hugill was winning possession with no-one to give it to. Chair couldn't get into the game much either, as the players he would try to hit with an out-ball were already covered. Dom Ball, I thought, was effective but, like Kane, WBA were quite happy for him to have possession because they knew full-well he wasn't going to have it for long (not his game - tackle/pass it). Not a criticism of us so much as an analysis of how WBA choked the life out of what is one of the most effective attacking sides we've had for years.
I was mightily impressed with their back to front transitional play: it was so fast! There was one moment in the second half, we'd won an attacking throw roughly level with their 18 yd line, lost possession and with about three one-touch passes they'd by-passed our whole midfield and nearly scored. Whenever we tried the same, we found our more creative players cock-blocked. WBA looked good; QPR not so much but not for want of trying. Nobody phoned it in today: we just beaten by a side that had done its homework.
I would expect us to revert to 4231 next match but simply because I doubt Warburton will be able to select Hall and Barbet is suspended. It might not be a bad thing under the circumstances: Hugill as the point of attack with 3 from Eze, Pugh, BOS and Chair behind. Perhaps Scowen and Ball at the base of the midfield.
Reset. Go again. URs |
Not much to argue with there! | | | |
| Post-WBA on 17:45 - Sep 28 with 1428 views | hook_hoops |
| Post-WBA on 15:39 - Sep 28 by qprd |
While I think the entire team was pretty poor and sloppy, the player who had the biggest effect tactically (and negatively) was ball.
He's clearly not very good with the ball at his feet, and in the first half, seemed to be allowing himself to be marked out of the game. with the two wing backs down the pitch, two strikers and two attacking midfielders buzzing behind them, we needed a player who could collect the ball and make simple passes. instead, ball was pretty invisible, which had a threefold effect: 1) it forced the centrebacks to pass sideways to each other and backwards to the keeper, putting them under quite a bit of pressure (rather than slipping a simple pass to a holding MF) 2) without a simple forward passing option, it led our centrebacks to actually start dribbling up the pitch to advance the ball forward (as leistner and barbet did quite a few times) and 3) it forced them to kick it long, which made it harder for the forwards to control the ball and make the next pass (hence a lot of the sloppy giveaways)
ball is a limited player, so i dont necessarily blame him for shying away from the ball. warburton couldve made two adjustments to resolve this. one he could have moved cameron into midfield as well (in the way ollie used hall in a back 3), giving us a decent holding option in midfield. warburton made the tactical change to a back 4 with cameron as a second deep midfielder when bright came on, but by that point, it was too little too late. second, he couldve instructed one of eze and chair to slip into deeper positions to link up the forwards.
we clearly need someone to do the dirty work if we're going to play so openly. but balls inability to perform the holding role certainly cost us [Post edited 28 Sep 2019 15:40]
|
I don’t know how many games you’ve been to this season but Ball has been one of our most consistently effective players. Yes, he didn’t have the best of games today but who did! Unfair to single him out for criticism. | | | |
| Post-WBA on 17:53 - Sep 28 with 1405 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Post-WBA on 14:26 - Sep 28 by s1cRanger |
Obviously this is always going to be a forum to vent. But thought we looked dreadful today. No chances, no threat at all. I even forgot that half the players were playing (Chair, Eze)
Clear to see that despite the good results recently when we come up against a decent side in this division we really are nowhere near good enough to compete.
It's the hope that kills you as putting down a string of four wins and looking great to a performance like this really is gutting to see as a fan.
West Brom didn't look amazing in attack either but our quality was lacking today and we gave the ball away so many times and made stupid mistakes it was painful to watch. Add to this that their defenders had a very simple task of easily winning the ball from our front two and we were never going to trouble them.
Mid table team this season I am afraid lads. Then again who knew what to expect from a completely new squad.. |
Chair was our best player wasn't he? |  |
| |
| Post-WBA on 18:01 - Sep 28 with 1376 views | essextaxiboy |
| Post-WBA on 17:53 - Sep 28 by Antti_Heinola |
Chair was our best player wasn't he? |
By some distance IMO |  | | |
| Post-WBA on 18:04 - Sep 28 with 1369 views | Antti_Heinola |
Some very harsh comments on here, not least the idea that we 'only just' won our last two games, which were both games we fully deserved to win by any stretch of the imagination. Or apparently you only deserve to win games now if you beat 'poor' teams by 3 or 4 goals.
We weren't awful today - that's just reactionary disappointment. We didn't play well of course, but awful is 4-0, 5-0, 6-0. This was 2-0 in a game against a side that was in the play-offs last year and will be again this year, and that hasn't lost this season. For 80 minutes, while we were second best, it was pretty close.
Agree we didn't create enough, agree both goals were preventable, agree we showed too much respect and even looked nervous - especially of being done on the counter. But we weren't awful. Come on. Let's try and be a tiny bit moderate and not act like the tw@ts in parliament, eh? Not every defeat means we're awful, just as not every win means we're brilliant. 4 wins in 5 and the only team we lost to in that run is now top of the table. | |
| |
| Post-WBA on 21:37 - Sep 28 with 1175 views | CLAREMAN1995 |
| Post-WBA on 15:14 - Sep 28 by BlackCrowe |
Created bugger all but until the first goal i thought we were competing well enough. Finished the first half well and started the second well until they scored. Lumley at fault for a tame shot most def, but but Ferguson was just allowed to advance up the pitch without any challenge.
Eze and Wells very quiet today. And can't be too harsh on Barbet, took one for the team, it happens.
MOM for us has to be Leistner, followed by Manning.
Very very disappointing. [Post edited 28 Sep 2019 15:17]
|
I just watched the highlight clip and I though Barbet was unlucky as he was cutting inside and tangled legs but understand its always a red card in that situation .Its a tough call on our keeper but think its time for a change away from home next week and see what happens | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Post-WBA on 21:49 - Sep 28 with 1157 views | WilloW4 |
| Post-WBA on 17:01 - Sep 28 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Call it a half chance if you like. Whatever makes you happy. |
A dozen half chances from the byline... To a half a chance... Brilliant. So, no chances at all.!??! |  | | |
| Post-WBA on 22:02 - Sep 28 with 1131 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Post-WBA on 21:49 - Sep 28 by WilloW4 |
A dozen half chances from the byline... To a half a chance... Brilliant. So, no chances at all.!??! |
We had plenty of activity in their box and we hit their bylines plenty. In another match this might have given us a few goals but not today. | | | |
| Post-WBA on 22:08 - Sep 28 with 1122 views | nix |
| Post-WBA on 18:04 - Sep 28 by Antti_Heinola |
Some very harsh comments on here, not least the idea that we 'only just' won our last two games, which were both games we fully deserved to win by any stretch of the imagination. Or apparently you only deserve to win games now if you beat 'poor' teams by 3 or 4 goals.
We weren't awful today - that's just reactionary disappointment. We didn't play well of course, but awful is 4-0, 5-0, 6-0. This was 2-0 in a game against a side that was in the play-offs last year and will be again this year, and that hasn't lost this season. For 80 minutes, while we were second best, it was pretty close.
Agree we didn't create enough, agree both goals were preventable, agree we showed too much respect and even looked nervous - especially of being done on the counter. But we weren't awful. Come on. Let's try and be a tiny bit moderate and not act like the tw@ts in parliament, eh? Not every defeat means we're awful, just as not every win means we're brilliant. 4 wins in 5 and the only team we lost to in that run is now top of the table. |
I agree we weren't awful. It was one of those matches in which several of our players had an off day at the same time. But it wasn't representative of how we'd been playing in our last few matches. The Championship is a bit like though as there are so many matches that it's difficult to keep raising your game.
Even so, we were drawing at halftime and really gifted them their first goal. We seemed a bit out-thought for once today. They pressed us every time we had the ball and our younger players didn't quite have the nouse to get round this. Good learning experience, rather than a disaster. |  | | |
| Post-WBA on 22:08 - Sep 28 with 1122 views | WilloW4 |
| Post-WBA on 22:02 - Sep 28 by BazzaInTheLoft |
We had plenty of activity in their box and we hit their bylines plenty. In another match this might have given us a few goals but not today. |
We didn't have plenty of activity in their box at all... We were piss poor . We harldly got a sniff of knocking about the WBA box. | | | |
| Post-WBA on 22:16 - Sep 28 with 1109 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Post-WBA on 22:08 - Sep 28 by WilloW4 |
We didn't have plenty of activity in their box at all... We were piss poor . We harldly got a sniff of knocking about the WBA box. |
Perhaps we were at different matches. | | | |
| Post-WBA on 22:17 - Sep 28 with 1108 views | ozexile |
| Post-WBA on 22:08 - Sep 28 by WilloW4 |
We didn't have plenty of activity in their box at all... We were piss poor . We harldly got a sniff of knocking about the WBA box. |
We got nowhere near it. | | | |
| Post-WBA on 22:32 - Sep 28 with 1086 views | Miss_Terraces |
Another game on TV, that are team don't show up. Not having a dig, this team has acquired a good deal of credit in the bank.
Wtf was that celebration of the second goal about? Slitting throat gesture is not on. | |
| |
| Post-WBA on 22:40 - Sep 28 with 1077 views | WilloW4 |
| Post-WBA on 22:16 - Sep 28 by BazzaInTheLoft |
Perhaps we were at different matches. |
No . We were deeply poor today. | | | |
| Post-WBA on 22:42 - Sep 28 with 1068 views | Ned_Kennedys |
| Post-WBA on 18:01 - Sep 28 by essextaxiboy |
By some distance IMO |
Leistner was our best player by some distance. Chair tried hard but it didn't really come off for him today I felt. |  | | |
| Post-WBA on 22:42 - Sep 28 with 1068 views | BazzaInTheLoft |
| Post-WBA on 22:40 - Sep 28 by WilloW4 |
No . We were deeply poor today. |
You should ask yourself why you aren’t this determined to hammer the point when we play well! | | | |
| Post-WBA on 22:43 - Sep 28 with 1066 views | WilloW4 |
| Post-WBA on 22:32 - Sep 28 by Miss_Terraces |
Another game on TV, that are team don't show up. Not having a dig, this team has acquired a good deal of credit in the bank.
Wtf was that celebration of the second goal about? Slitting throat gesture is not on. |
Absolutely agree.... Horrible gesture. How/why did he get away with it.?! | | | |
| Post-WBA on 22:51 - Sep 28 with 1046 views | WilloW4 |
| Post-WBA on 22:42 - Sep 28 by BazzaInTheLoft |
You should ask yourself why you aren’t this determined to hammer the point when we play well! |
I fly R flag when we play . I don't need to ask anything , we were shit today. Nuff said.!! I'm not hammer home a point at all, I just don't agree with you. | | | |
| Post-WBA on 23:03 - Sep 28 with 1012 views | WilloW4 |
What's your point.? | | | |
| Post-WBA on 23:53 - Sep 28 with 967 views | NW5Hoop |
This team is always going to be frustrating. They can play brilliantly, but it does depend on at least five of the wing backs, midfield and front two being pretty near the top of the game. Unless we can dominate in the final third and keep other teams on the back foot, we're going to be exposed in our own final third. The second half against Luton showed what happens when the attacking players can't dominate. But I don't mind too much: it's more fun than it has been for ages, and we're doing way better than expected.
The thing that concerns me is our ball retention. In the last couple of home games we've given the ball away needlessly so often. It's not that we're getting tackled well, or losing the 50-50s. It's that time and time again we are actually passing directly to the opposition, all over the pitch. | | | |
| Post-WBA on 06:36 - Sep 29 with 849 views | Hitch |
Alot of times in sport and life you are as good as your opposition allow you to be.
Today they were better.
But, there is always next time. |  | | |
| Post-WBA on 10:12 - Sep 29 with 718 views | A40Bosh |
| Post-WBA on 18:04 - Sep 28 by Antti_Heinola |
Some very harsh comments on here, not least the idea that we 'only just' won our last two games, which were both games we fully deserved to win by any stretch of the imagination. Or apparently you only deserve to win games now if you beat 'poor' teams by 3 or 4 goals.
We weren't awful today - that's just reactionary disappointment. We didn't play well of course, but awful is 4-0, 5-0, 6-0. This was 2-0 in a game against a side that was in the play-offs last year and will be again this year, and that hasn't lost this season. For 80 minutes, while we were second best, it was pretty close.
Agree we didn't create enough, agree both goals were preventable, agree we showed too much respect and even looked nervous - especially of being done on the counter. But we weren't awful. Come on. Let's try and be a tiny bit moderate and not act like the tw@ts in parliament, eh? Not every defeat means we're awful, just as not every win means we're brilliant. 4 wins in 5 and the only team we lost to in that run is now top of the table. |
Sensible assessment mate |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
