| SJ 08:29 - Dec 6 with 5769 views | gazza1 |
I am not blaming any one person for the defeat yesterday.....there were many as far as I am concerned, defenders, midfielders and forwards however and please do not think that I apportion any extra blame on SJ,......
.....but what actual position in midfield does he play, his prime midfield position?? what are his key responsibilities when we play the match?? - I can't work it out tbh.
[Post edited 6 Dec 2021 8:30]
|  | | |  |
| SJ on 09:49 - Dec 6 with 2319 views | QPROslo |
| SJ on 08:55 - Dec 6 by gazza1 |
Willock is wasted at LWB...... |
Yes he is to an extent. But when needs must like last night I think he should have played there if as Warburton wants, we play the same formation. | | | |
| SJ on 09:50 - Dec 6 with 2311 views | QPROslo |
| SJ on 08:58 - Dec 6 by EastR |
The problem yesterday wasn't down to any one player, it was our shape. They outnumbered us in the central areas and when we lost possession they were able to play the ball forward through the middle with ease. Both their goals came from the same place, central outside the box in front of the back 3.
I thought that's where Field have been playing. |
Where he should have been playing! | | | |
| SJ on 09:52 - Dec 6 with 2298 views | qprd |
Read the first post and didn’t bother reading anything in this thread
Absurd to even question SJ in any respect … played well as he could given the way the game played out
Midfield wasn’t particularly going to be involved defensively bc Stoke was absorbing pressure and trying to counterattack …
Our attack was more down the flanks so he was tactically taken out of the game in attack as well
I’m all for criticising players but only when it’s based on what actually happens in the game… | | | |
| SJ on 09:54 - Dec 6 with 2294 views | Esox_Lucius |
| SJ on 09:26 - Dec 6 by gazza1 |
I do not believe that Charlie is not 1st choice......current form suggests that Dykes is but he is still pretty limited, some may say Gray should be 1st choice. All 3 currently are pretty average despite Grays winner at Derby.
As for Dom Ball, shocked that he has not had a 'sniff' for the last several matches....can you imagine if he had given the ball away for our two of the last 3 goals that we conceded. I would also suggest there would have been big questions about the last goal that Stoke scored as well, something like 'WTF was our DCM Dom doing for that goal'!!! There was no CM anywhere is sight!!!
Field done nothing yet apart from getting onto the field, yesterday he was out of his depth at LWB and Thomas has been disappointing overall.
But hey, you just would not understand...perhaps one day but not yet. |
Willock is wasted at LWB......
Basic schoolboy error. |  |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| SJ on 09:56 - Dec 6 with 2288 views | ParkRoyalR |
| SJ on 09:50 - Dec 6 by QPROslo |
Where he should have been playing! |
Yes, agree.
I stayed behind after yesterday's game and Ramsey, Banfield and other coach were in the centre-circle for maybe 15 minutes during warm-down and it looked like they were going through defensive set-ups to counter 1st goal yesterday and at Derby.
We might see Field in as CDM at Sheffield in place of Dozzell, let's see. | | | |
| SJ on 09:57 - Dec 6 with 2287 views | DWQPR |
Look, this team is made up of youth players coming through, inexpensive journeymen and younger players with dodgy injury records. Had Charlie stuck his boot through the ball we would have equalised and given the way the second half was going would probably have romped home at a canter. 24 shots yesterday, nine saved by their keeper, some of them absolutely fantastic saves and 17 corners. All clubs get games like this, City do, Liverpool do that lot down the road do, everyone and although it wasn't as one sided as the Bristol City match the second half wasn't far off. They registered four shots in the second half against our sixteen. And all this without our recognised wing backs on both sides of the pitch who play a big part on how we set up. Just one of those days. Time to get back on the horse and start riding again.
And if there is one player for me that has gone off the boil then it is Dickie, he seems to have lost his confidence in going forward and is more inclined to look for that sideways pass. But based on what we have spent, what our budget is and where we are at this time along with the style of play then I'll carry on enjoying the season. | |
| |
| SJ on 10:13 - Dec 6 with 2250 views | LazyFan |
| SJ on 09:16 - Dec 6 by gazza1 |
My opinion re his fitness.....MW would not play him unless he is fully fit. He says it all the time that he looks after the players - 100%, hence, one of the reasons, why we have the team spirit that we have. |
I am not sure that's always the case. Warbs has said in the past if I recall, that players were playing with a knock. Also for example Gray said he came back a week early just because he wanted to play.
SJ did not look his usual self, that may be down to carrying a knock or it maybe be down to he was marking their playmaker.
Dozzell lost the ball and the defence got totally caught out. Once in behind QPR, we have no pace to catch up as that is usually our fullbacks with the pace (Mccalum or Moses).
They hardly had any chances really, but just like Bristol City were clinical in finishing them off. And their goalkeeper decided to challenge for MoM as well.
The first goal is just one of them things, it happens when you play so many games. But if you miss a penalty, don't take numerous chances and then gift the oppo space to have free shots at goal with their best-attacking player, then really you can expect nothing from a match except defeat.
In my view, their injuries did not affect their defence so, they could keep us out (only just it seems), whereas ours totally exposed us down the wings. Not to mention Kakay was on the graveyard shift with absolutely no coverage whatsoever, totally on his own. |  |
| |
| SJ on 10:21 - Dec 6 with 2219 views | EastR |
thanks Oslo, yes I missed out that important word | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| SJ on 10:38 - Dec 6 with 2172 views | wortonranger |
| SJ on 09:57 - Dec 6 by DWQPR |
Look, this team is made up of youth players coming through, inexpensive journeymen and younger players with dodgy injury records. Had Charlie stuck his boot through the ball we would have equalised and given the way the second half was going would probably have romped home at a canter. 24 shots yesterday, nine saved by their keeper, some of them absolutely fantastic saves and 17 corners. All clubs get games like this, City do, Liverpool do that lot down the road do, everyone and although it wasn't as one sided as the Bristol City match the second half wasn't far off. They registered four shots in the second half against our sixteen. And all this without our recognised wing backs on both sides of the pitch who play a big part on how we set up. Just one of those days. Time to get back on the horse and start riding again.
And if there is one player for me that has gone off the boil then it is Dickie, he seems to have lost his confidence in going forward and is more inclined to look for that sideways pass. But based on what we have spent, what our budget is and where we are at this time along with the style of play then I'll carry on enjoying the season. |
Brilliant summary. Couldn’t agree more. |  | | |
| SJ on 17:09 - Dec 6 with 1975 views | gazza1 |
| SJ on 09:48 - Dec 6 by ParkRoyalR |
Out of his depth....shocked that he has not had a sniff...Gazza for all of us to go to football and know or sit near to someone and think what game is he watching...you are that man!
The key question after yesterday's game for the 99% is would a change of formation with Field at CDM have helped prevent those 2 goals and bolster our midfield?
I believe it would have helped put pressure on their midfield and helped with a long standing area of weakness in this team, closing down the space in front of our centre backs.
Now back to Dom.... |
I am not going to talk to you about this topic because you have not got a clue or an answer......see what my opening post says if you can understand it. Sadly, currently, nobody has answered it so I would suggest that most do not know, even you dont know bu tI suppose that is to be expected  | | | |
| SJ on 17:31 - Dec 6 with 1932 views | Silverfoxqpr |
| SJ on 17:09 - Dec 6 by gazza1 |
I am not going to talk to you about this topic because you have not got a clue or an answer......see what my opening post says if you can understand it. Sadly, currently, nobody has answered it so I would suggest that most do not know, even you dont know bu tI suppose that is to be expected |
I'll answer it for you Re: you're opening post................
Please refer to the Huddersfield match. |  | | |
| SJ on 17:48 - Dec 6 with 1903 views | A40Bosh |
| SJ on 10:38 - Dec 6 by wortonranger |
Brilliant summary. Couldn’t agree more. |
Agree but will add a couple of things
When I saw the team sheet I presumed he was going 433 with the Barbinger of Doom and his left foot at left back, then with Field to sit in front of the back 4 and with SJ and Dozzell in front of him. Not sure how long Field spent prior to Sunday working on sitting in at LWB but clearly it just did not work. It is no coincidence that the stats on our points with and without Wallace show the difference we have in stretching teams and getting behind defences when either Chair or Willock, or both are playing pretty passes in front of the oppo box and next thing the Flying Scotsman builds a full head of steam from his starting point and is already past and ahead of the defender who has to turn and chase him once the overlap ball is played. Moses has not perfected this yet, so without Wallace on the left and Albert on the right much of our service in to the box is thwarted and we just pass sideways back and forward across the back, SJ comes too deep to collect and then just stands there and has to risk a miracle disguised pass that then gets intercepted.
We need our wings backs fit and flying the way we are set up as we are not good at changing set up and adapting quickly.
2ndly I can't make out if Rob Dickie's naturally body shape is rolled shouldered which makes him look like he has his head down, but after some escapes and their first goal I wanted to scream at him to get his head up. Either accidentally or otherwise he does look he is playing with apprehension and he is worried about making mistakes |  |
| |
| SJ on 01:32 - Dec 7 with 1786 views | Hooparoo |
I love Stefan but he’s so left footed. So many times he has to twist and turn to get it on his left foot. You have to at least be able to wall pass a few metres with either foot when playing in central midfield to be effective. Contrast that with Amos who can pass with both feet which gives him lots more angles. |  |
| |
| SJ on 02:51 - Dec 7 with 1758 views | bob566 |
Just a bad day. We could have scored a few on another day. Barbet was immense. Thought dickie and kakay were poor. No wingbacks cost us badly. Chair looked like he was carrying a knock too. Crap penalty by Charlie but hey ho. | | | |
| SJ on 04:58 - Dec 7 with 1742 views | WestbourneR |
Really like SJ, like Dozzel. Still not sure its the best balance with them together. |  |
| |
| SJ on 07:58 - Dec 7 with 1647 views | kernowhoop |
I was bothered about the number of times that Barbet mis-placed a pass. There is more to a successful pass than the person trying to make it, of course. Do his colleagues make themselves available sufficiently for him? The long ball from his left foot needs to be used sparingly. | | | |
| SJ on 08:13 - Dec 7 with 1604 views | westberksr |
| SJ on 08:55 - Dec 6 by gazza1 |
Willock is wasted at LWB...... |
how so?
I agree that he would be best served where he usually is, but.....
the shape of the team overall may have been better served if Warburton insisted on keeping that formation. Nothing stopping him marauding forwards like Wallace and Field certainly wasn't the answer, which I think was pretty clear.
this could have left Field free to play CDM (his best position IMO) and allowed SJ to play slightly further forward & able to join in the intricate play with Chair, Willock etc
Either way I feel the issues on Sunday didn't start with SJ's performance, but the overall shape for the manpower available was wrong when you have a wing back formation and no wingbacks. Added to that Barbet trying (& failing) to out muscle their CF, also being incredibly wayward with his passing.
Overall a bad day at the office; albeit 1 very poor penalty away from another potential positive result; despite our shortcomings on the day.
now, please tell me I don't understand in your usual condescending manner |  | | |
| SJ on 08:53 - Dec 7 with 1563 views | gazza1 |
| SJ on 08:13 - Dec 7 by westberksr |
how so?
I agree that he would be best served where he usually is, but.....
the shape of the team overall may have been better served if Warburton insisted on keeping that formation. Nothing stopping him marauding forwards like Wallace and Field certainly wasn't the answer, which I think was pretty clear.
this could have left Field free to play CDM (his best position IMO) and allowed SJ to play slightly further forward & able to join in the intricate play with Chair, Willock etc
Either way I feel the issues on Sunday didn't start with SJ's performance, but the overall shape for the manpower available was wrong when you have a wing back formation and no wingbacks. Added to that Barbet trying (& failing) to out muscle their CF, also being incredibly wayward with his passing.
Overall a bad day at the office; albeit 1 very poor penalty away from another potential positive result; despite our shortcomings on the day.
now, please tell me I don't understand in your usual condescending manner |
I cannot recall speaking to you in a condescending way.......so not sure why you moaning!!!
As for your comments.....imho Willock needs to be a reasonably 'free agent' to use his positive attacking skills when he goes out on the pitch, same as Chair, really, and hence why I say he is wasted as a LWB.
As I have said it just is not as easy to change players positions or team formations when you have been working those ways in training for months. Before the match I said I would not think that he will play 4 at the back - I also said that Field was the most likely to play at LWB because there was basically nobody else from the players that MW selected apart from Barbet but he is too important at CB.
As for SJ, I am not blaming him for the defeat, purely haven't understood his position in the team for the past few week apart from that he is playing a midfield role. Still not a lot about SJ and his position/role in the team.
Simple really!!! | | | |
| SJ on 10:10 - Dec 7 with 1483 views | westberksr |
| SJ on 08:53 - Dec 7 by gazza1 |
I cannot recall speaking to you in a condescending way.......so not sure why you moaning!!!
As for your comments.....imho Willock needs to be a reasonably 'free agent' to use his positive attacking skills when he goes out on the pitch, same as Chair, really, and hence why I say he is wasted as a LWB.
As I have said it just is not as easy to change players positions or team formations when you have been working those ways in training for months. Before the match I said I would not think that he will play 4 at the back - I also said that Field was the most likely to play at LWB because there was basically nobody else from the players that MW selected apart from Barbet but he is too important at CB.
As for SJ, I am not blaming him for the defeat, purely haven't understood his position in the team for the past few week apart from that he is playing a midfield role. Still not a lot about SJ and his position/role in the team.
Simple really!!! |
i'm not moaning Gazza but there are others you've told they don't understand so expected similar feedback. I think we all 'understand' to some degree but have different solutions to the same problem.
Field clearly didn't work at LWB; so if MW persists with that formation the players chosen will need to change IMO | | | |
| SJ on 10:57 - Dec 7 with 1437 views | gazza1 |
| SJ on 10:10 - Dec 7 by westberksr |
i'm not moaning Gazza but there are others you've told they don't understand so expected similar feedback. I think we all 'understand' to some degree but have different solutions to the same problem.
Field clearly didn't work at LWB; so if MW persists with that formation the players chosen will need to change IMO |
West....if people rude or abusive to me then they get it back - that's how I was taught. I do not recall you ever being like that so no issues......
Sadly West, many do not understand, sadly there a many that do not like it because I have my own opinions which go against the grain and they do not agree so their comments are unreasonable.
I agree that Field did not work, I agree he is not a LWB and I am sure MW and his team discussed it 'long and hard' and decided he was the answer rather that Willock, Barbet or even changing his recognised system of 3 x CB's. I still think he will keep 3 x CB's unless he is in a 'right corner' and decides to 'bite the bullet' and go for a game or two with 4 at the back until we get some players fit again. I would also suggest that the senior players would have an input into the way we play, likewise Field would have had his say about playing LWB against Stoke - I doubt very much that he was just told that he was playing out of position at LWB - discussions would have happened, both team and 1-2-1 chats. | | | |
| SJ on 12:31 - Dec 7 with 1354 views | HantsR |
I noticed that SJ looked up towards where I was sitting in SAR and tried to get someone's attention, waving a couple of times. I think it was in vain and wonder if he was waving to the gentleman near me who sported some Norwegian credentials, but was looking at his phone at the time.
Otherwise I can only think that SJ was concerned about the Trafalgar Square Xmas tree, or maybe just pining for the fiords? |  | | |
| SJ on 12:44 - Dec 7 with 1332 views | westberksr |
| SJ on 10:57 - Dec 7 by gazza1 |
West....if people rude or abusive to me then they get it back - that's how I was taught. I do not recall you ever being like that so no issues......
Sadly West, many do not understand, sadly there a many that do not like it because I have my own opinions which go against the grain and they do not agree so their comments are unreasonable.
I agree that Field did not work, I agree he is not a LWB and I am sure MW and his team discussed it 'long and hard' and decided he was the answer rather that Willock, Barbet or even changing his recognised system of 3 x CB's. I still think he will keep 3 x CB's unless he is in a 'right corner' and decides to 'bite the bullet' and go for a game or two with 4 at the back until we get some players fit again. I would also suggest that the senior players would have an input into the way we play, likewise Field would have had his say about playing LWB against Stoke - I doubt very much that he was just told that he was playing out of position at LWB - discussions would have happened, both team and 1-2-1 chats. |
fair enough; I'm not regular enough on here to know the various histories of posters and their relationships  | | | |
| SJ on 12:52 - Dec 7 with 1311 views | TheChef |
| SJ on 12:44 - Dec 7 by westberksr |
fair enough; I'm not regular enough on here to know the various histories of posters and their relationships |
We should probably have a cut out and keep guide  |  |
| |
| SJ on 13:58 - Dec 7 with 1223 views | BklynRanger |
Stef and Dozzell seem to rely on communication to decide/know when one should go and the other hold, so it's pretty interchangeable. In general though I'd say Dozzell is playing as the deeper lying of the two with Stef having a free role when the pattern of play allows it.
But other teams have seen what he can do for us at times and it's not that complex of a job to mark him tightly, ideally with someone who has more legs than him, which is quite a few players. Yer man Vrancic was able to subdue him a few times on Sunday which is not a massive surprise - Vrancic has arguably a better CV than him, at club level anyway.
The problem is when he is really on it he's such a driving force for this team that it's disappointing when he isn't, for whatever reason - on those days I suppose it's time to pull out the Warbism that begins with something like "If Stefan still had the legs of a 27 year old...." |  | | |
| SJ on 14:33 - Dec 7 with 1171 views | R_from_afar |
| SJ on 08:44 - Dec 6 by gazza1 |
It wasn't SJ....it was Dozzell that gave the ball away!!! [Post edited 6 Dec 2021 8:46]
|
Yes, but look at where it was: In the middle of their half. I don't believe it's fair to lay all the blame for that goal at the feet of someone who lost the ball that high up the pitch. The shape and vigilance of the team should have been such that we could cope with conceding possession there. It was a collective failure. |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
