Bournemouth post match 1-1

[HighPeakFox]

12 minutes ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

Similar situation at Southampton though. Before we needed only a few shots to get a goal and a few crosses.  The last few games we've had loads of possession but little return for that.

 

And yes it seems our luck has changed so many chances would've gone in on another day.  Maybe Puel is just an unlucky manager?

I just think confidence is low and players are out of touch. It could just be as simple as that.

 

I will also accept that Mahrez disappearing for a while will not have helped whatsoever.

[Babylon]

6 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Last couple of home games we have gone a goal down during the first half. That skews the second half as teams are happy to try and hang onto what they have. gives a false picture of the game in stats as we are bound to register more possession, corners and shots as we chase an equaliser and the opposition dig in.

True, but then it's not like we aren't on top in these games from the start. The oppo are still coming here not really looking to have a game.

[Foxhateram]

1 hour ago, Beechey said:

People saying we're playing "defence first", yet in the last three games (not counting Man City, because come on) we registered 54 shots. Sorry, but for me, that isn't defence first. However, our defensive record under Puel is so much better than it was before he came in. The fact is that we're getting no luck whatsoever right now, our final ball is a bit missing, but other than that we're almost playing perfectly (minus us being a bit absent in midfield as always). We largely control the game and produce a plethora of chances (half or clear), we just don't finish them.

 

Still have full faith in him, and people calling for him to be sacked despite us being eighth are absurd.

Wow a plethora of chances. We've barely worked the keeper against Swansea and Bournemouth. Where are these chances that the gaffer and yourself keep talking about it? 

 

We're not controlling games. We keep conceeding sloppy goals and not looking like even trying to score until it's too late. Until Mahrez yesterday I literally felt like we could play all night and still not score. 

 

I don't want him sacked, I just feel like his adaptation are stunting the style of play that our players suit. Stuff this let him buy the players for his style rubbish. He should adapt his style to suit the resources he has and be looking to build upon the club ethos with added quality. 

 

I hate possession based football. It killed the game in the late 90's/ early 00's, made it difficult to watch. I much prefer direct and penetrative, driving at defences and taking risks to beat the last man. It's entertainment and it's exciting. But most of all, we've seen our best days as a club doing it that way. O'Neill, Adams (to some extent), Pearson and at first Claudio all got it right. Why sell out on it?

[Beechey]

38 minutes ago, Foxhateram said:

Wow a plethora of chances. We've barely worked the keeper against Swansea and Bournemouth. Where are these chances that the gaffer and yourself keep talking about it? 

 

We're not controlling games. We keep conceeding sloppy goals and not looking like even trying to score until it's too late. Until Mahrez yesterday I literally felt like we could play all night and still not score. 

 

I don't want him sacked, I just feel like his adaptation are stunting the style of play that our players suit. Stuff this let him buy the players for his style rubbish. He should adapt his style to suit the resources he has and be looking to build upon the club ethos with added quality. 

 

I hate possession based football. It killed the game in the late 90's/ early 00's, made it difficult to watch. I much prefer direct and penetrative, driving at defences and taking risks to beat the last man. It's entertainment and it's exciting. But most of all, we've seen our best days as a club doing it that way. O'Neill, Adams (to some extent), Pearson and at first Claudio all got it right. Why sell out on it?

Maguire missed a big chance that was blocked on the line, Iheanacho was blocked at about 2 yards, Morgan had 2 pretty clear headers that he missed, and Mahrez missed a one on one, Chilwell had a stunner that was blocked as well, surely your memory is not that selective? If not for Bournemouth's blocking, we probably would have won handsomely.

 

Why on Earth should the manager be hired on a basis of his own vision, then be forced to play a way he is not used to? Would that not precipitate worse results, surely? That's crazy talk.

 

It's pretty obvious why we need to adapt when you look back at last season isn't it? Teams can just sit back and we have absolutely no hope of breaking them down if we're solely a counter-attacking team. Now we at least control the game.

Edited 4 March 2018 by Beechey

[NotTheMarketLeader]

2 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

Yes, the style makes the ball not go in the goal. Not the players missing and a bit of bad luck, at all.

There were plenty of shots but not many clear cut chances if any.

 

Stats don’t tell the whole story; there is a dearth of creativity.

[inckley fox]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

True, but then it's not like we aren't on top in these games from the start. The oppo are still coming here not really looking to have a game.

I'm not sure that's the case any more than it has been for the past two years, and any more than it is for other sides.

 

We have to be careful that we're not making excuses for our less entertaining style by saying that other teams don't allow us to be an attacking force, nor by trying to convince ourselves that - come on, everyone - this really is pretty entertaining after all.

 

People say that the injury to Amartey was crucial. Of course, he'd started well and things went wrong shortly after his exit. But I don't think it's accurate to say that he, nor the change in shape, was crucial. We were already failing to create clear-cut chances, they were carving out half-chances, Vardy was isolated again and we were over-complicating things in deep positions, either surrendering possession or having to hoof clear.

 

Also, it'd be misleading to see our recent shooting stats as evidence of attacking football. From where I'm standing, you'd have to have been doing something else for the first 60 minutes recently to believe that we're creating a sustained threat. A huge percentage of those shots has come when we're throwing the kitchen sink at opposition, trying to get back into games, snatching at things, lofting balls into the box.

[sycokilla]

18 hours ago, Foxhateram said:

I said when he arrived that I hoped he would allow us to keep the ball better but not at the expense of our counter attacking style. He's ended up making the same mistake as Claudio. Possession based football is not effective in this league anymore, teams know how to counter it (ironically).

 

Arsenal are finding the same problem. Our direct and penetrative style was ahead of the game, we played a style of play everyone else is now replicating. But we've sold out on it. Why?   Vardy is best used when balls are played down the channel for him to pace onto, didn't see one of those balls today. It's not 'hoofball'  it's direct and effective football. High pressure, quick and direct play. That is our style.  Haven't seen any of that for months now. 

 

We have to get back to what makes us tick. At first it seemed like he was going to keep our style and tweak it. Which was great and led us to 8th place. Since then we've been in lower table form. Surely he can see what's wrong?

 

 

Dont quite agree with that possession football is not effective in this league, Man city seem to be running away with the title doing exactly that.

 

[inckley fox]

15 minutes ago, Beechey said:

Maguire missed a big chance that was blocked on the line, Iheanacho was blocked at about 2 yards, Morgan had 2 pretty clear headers that he missed, and Mahrez missed a one on one, Chilwell had a stunner that was blocked as well, surely your memory is not that selective? If not for Bournemouth's blocking, we probably would have won handsomely.

 

Why on Earth should the manager be hired on a basis of his own vision, then be forced to play a way he is not used to? Would that not precipitate worse results, surely? That's crazy talk.

 

It's pretty obvious why we need to adapt when you look back at last season isn't it? Teams can just sit back and we have absolutely no hope of breaking them down if we're solely a counter-attacking team. Now we at least control the game.

But we're not outmanoeuvring sides by doing this any more than we were under Shakespeare. It's a different type of brick wall we're running into. And while I accept that it's useful to control a game at times, it doesn't change the fact that we look more effective as an attacking threat when we throw caution to the wind, commit men forward, go direct. 

 

Game management and team selection tells you a lot. We went from a 4-2-3-1 with Vardy hugely isolated in the Stoke game, and tried to solve that problem yesterday by dropping one attacking midfielder and adding a midfielder who sat deeper (until the change in system). It doesn't matter how you choose to play, if you knock the ball around in your own half with few runners up ahead, you're going to struggle to score goals. We've learnt how to play more intricate football, but we're not using it to break sides down in their own half. Our chances still tend to come from the more direct approach.

 

So I'm all for managing games - but if it means that we over-complicate things and either give the ball away or hoof clear towards a lone diminutive striker -then we need to think again. It needs to be a Plan B, or part of Plan A, rather than the default setting.

[Beechey]

1 minute ago, inckley fox said:

But we're not outmanoeuvring sides by doing this any more than we were under Shakespeare. It's a different type of brick wall we're running into. And while I accept that it's useful to control a game at times, it doesn't change the fact that we look more effective as an attacking threat when we throw caution to the wind, commit men forward, go direct. 

 

Game management and team selection tells you a lot. We went from a 4-2-3-1 with Vardy hugely isolated in the Stoke game, and tried to solve that problem yesterday by dropping one attacking midfielder and adding a midfielder who sat deeper (until the change in system). It doesn't matter how you choose to play, if you knock the ball around in your own half with few runners up ahead, you're going to struggle to score goals. We've learnt how to play more intricate football, but we're not using it to break sides down in their own half. Our chances still tend to come from the more direct approach.

 

So I'm all for managing games - but if it means that we over-complicate things and either give the ball away or hoof clear towards a lone diminutive striker -then we need to think again. It needs to be a Plan B, or part of Plan A, rather than the default setting.

Can't argue with that, we lack movement in the final third at the minute. It's part of the reason I'm always so happy to see Diabate come on, he at least offers runs.

[inckley fox]

28 minutes ago, sycokilla said:

Dont quite agree with that possession football is not effective in this league, Man city seem to be running away with the title doing exactly that.

 

They have the players to play it. We have players who favour direct counter-attacking football, with pace and pressing. Keeping hold of the ball adds a great extra dimension to that but it can't, for a side like ours, replace it. That's for the teams who have the specific qualities required to do that and I'd agree that lower sides who aspire to play like Barcelona frequently come a cropper. 

 

It's fine trying to keep the ball more (on the condition that we field the players who best know how to do that). But we can still make sure our system allows support for Vardy, movement ahead of the ball, rather than simply filling out midfield. We shouldn't be scared to throw men forward, get balls into the box. It's about positivity in your planning, as well as style.

 

I do hope his eagerness to implement something which hasn't yet worked for us, and didn't work for him previously in English football, doesn't define his era. It worried me when he said recently that he wouldn't compromise his footballing principles - it sounded a little Tony Mowbray to me.

 

However I noticed something interesting in his post-match interview. He said 'how we played in the second half - that's how we'll play from now on' - does that mean he's more conscious of these things than we give him credit for and is willing to rewind a little? Or did he just mean that we won't be so crap in the first half next time out because these ideas will work out, come what may?

Edited 4 March 2018 by inckley fox

[Guest ttfn]

It wasn’t that bad. Had we run out 2-1 or 3-1 winners I don’t think Bournemouth really could have had cause for complaint. There must have been more than 5 occasions where the ball ended up in their six yard box, 3 of which ended up with us having attempts (Morgan x2 and Iheanacho).

 

The shape of the team was fine when we started 4-3-3. It gave us a good grip on midfield despite James and Silva’s shortcomings (more of which later) and we were in control until Amartey went off, at which point Puel appears to have had a bit of a brain fart in changing to a back 3 which served only to confuse our centre backs and Albrighton and isolate Vardy. Once we went to 4-4-2 after the hour things looked much better even if Iheanacho somehow continues to fail to do anything particularly constructive in league games.

 

The last half hour was as one-sided as you’ll see and we were well worth a goal at the end. As far as the shape of the game went from where I was sat it looked like we were the better side for half an hour, they were better for 15 minutes and the rest of the game it was fairly even. On another day we would have won that game, as with the Swansea and Stoke games before them.

 

We need to separate the poor performances from the poor results. The performances are not good at the moment, but to suggest that they’re indicative of a side looking likely to be relegated next season is misleading. In each of the last 3 home matches we’ve drawn to poor sides who’ve come here to defend. And all 3 of them will count themselves fortunate to escape with a point. Forget possession or shots statistics for a moment- expected goals focuses on the quality of chances created and in each of those games we’re a clear goal better than our opponents - we’re just not taking our chances and unfortunately they are.

 

It is extremely frustrating that we seem to create very little until we “have” to but a lot of the time we’re getting into promising positions to do so and then individual errors are costing us. A couple of very poor Mahrez passes killed great counter-attacking chances at 0-0 yesterday and Albrighton had an absolute stinker, surely one of the worst games of his professional career. A key part of our title-winning success was our freakish conversion rate of counter-attacks. We’re still getting opportunities to do it, but individual errors (or in the case of one second half break, the officials) are letting us down.

 

There’s a lot to be frustrated about with Puel but for me it mainly comes down to selection. If we’re going to play a possession game we need full backs who can overlap and Amartey was out of the side for too long. James is great for games where we won’t see a lot of the ball but he’s not worth a place in the side for games like the 3 we’ve just had at home. He had the fewest passes of any of our players who played more than 20 minutes yesterday, which for any central midfielder is absolutely incredible let alone one in a side with a focus on short passing. If we’re going to pick open packed defences we need ball players first and foremost. Iborra is not exactly world class but he does know how to move the ball up the pitch quickly and should be in the team. That said Silva, who we’d hoped would be a more creative option, was very wasteful and didn’t deserve to stay on and our inability to properly integrate him despite a 4 month lead time before his debut is really concerning.

 

Back on Iborra the other thing he gives us is the option of having a Fellaini-style number 10 for instances like the last few minutes yesterday. With no Slimani or Ulloa we need all the presence we can get in the penalty area.

 

There’s a lot which can be fixed quite quickly in my opinion which is why it’s frustrating to see the same things happening game after game. I do understand others’ frustrations with Puel but the reality is that he’s steadied the ship and we’re obviously a work in progress, as Southampton were last season. 7th place remains a realistic target and we’re in the QF of the FA Cup. Had that been offered to me inthe aftermath of the reverse fixture I’d have snapped your arm off - look at the ridicule that one poster got from virtually everyone for thinking we could finish top 8 back when Shakespeare was manager and yet here we are, 8th.

 

 

 

 

[inckley fox]

1 hour ago, Foxhateram said:

Wow a plethora of chances. We've barely worked the keeper against Swansea and Bournemouth. Where are these chances that the gaffer and yourself keep talking about it? 

 

We're not controlling games. We keep conceeding sloppy goals and not looking like even trying to score until it's too late. Until Mahrez yesterday I literally felt like we could play all night and still not score. 

 

I don't want him sacked, I just feel like his adaptation are stunting the style of play that our players suit. Stuff this let him buy the players for his style rubbish. He should adapt his style to suit the resources he has and be looking to build upon the club ethos with added quality. 

 

I hate possession based football. It killed the game in the late 90's/ early 00's, made it difficult to watch. I much prefer direct and penetrative, driving at defences and taking risks to beat the last man. It's entertainment and it's exciting. But most of all, we've seen our best days as a club doing it that way. O'Neill, Adams (to some extent), Pearson and at first Claudio all got it right. Why sell out on it?

I've been quite surprised at the number of people who want him out.

 

Firstly because he's been here for such a short time and will, I'm confident, comfortably achieve his primary short-term objective, which was to stay up. He may also yet take us to one of our best Cup runs in the past few decades (perhaps even better than that) and lead us to a very respectable finish. Just five or so games back we were ecstatic with the guy and you can't help but think that the Mahrez saga, which would have floored a lot of sides, has had its impact.

 

I agree that he needs to back-track a little stylistically, shape-wise, and I can see how, from here on in, things could go wrong for him: He could keep pushing an overly negative, possession-based game (which didn't work out for the last few City managers who touted it, or for him in his only other PL stint), could get knocked out of the Cup, slip into lower mid-table, lose key players in the summer and either misspend funds or fail to gel a new-look side. But none of that has happened yet, instead he's having a fairly understandable blip with a side which, under every manager it's ever had (including two of the best in our entire history), has been prone to huge nosedives in form.

 

That's not to say he's getting things right, nor that he will get it right, nor that he isn't well-overcooking the possession game. It just means that talk of firing him already is very premature.

[Tringfox]

47 minutes ago, sycokilla said:

Dont quite agree with that possession football is not effective in this league, Man city seem to be running away with the title doing exactly that.

 

Yes but the difference is Man City have technically gifted quality players that can play decent football...we can’t!!

[yorkie1999]

We can’t play possession football with Morgan simply because he needs too much time to control the ball and invites attackers on to him, the system puel wants to play just does not work with the players we have and against sides who sit back, how can we break a side down with 2 defensive midfielders, one being as slow as fvck. It’s all too disjointed

[Tringfox]

3 hours ago, Beechey said:

People saying we're playing "defence first", yet in the last three games (not counting Man City, because come on) we registered 54 shots. Sorry, but for me, that isn't defence first. However, our defensive record under Puel is so much better than it was before he came in. The fact is that we're getting no luck whatsoever right now, our final ball is a bit missing, but other than that we're almost playing perfectly (minus us being a bit absent in midfield as always). We largely control the game and produce a plethora of chances (half or clear), we just don't finish them.

 

Still have full faith in him, and people calling for him to be sacked despite us being eighth are absurd.

Can I ask are you going to the games?

[Guest Col city fan]

I think there's a lot of positivity going on in here, and fair enough.

But the stats are two wins in 13 games.

That's poor by anyone's reckoning. It's a good job the general standard of the Prem this season is naff.

[Beechey]

Just now, Tringfox said:

Can I ask are you going to the games?

Nope not in a little while, not a ST holder and couldn't really afford the ticket prices week on week since I've had to drop my work shifts to accommodate my Master's

Been to a few this season, hopefully will  again soon, though.

[Tringfox]

13 minutes ago, Beechey said:

Nope not in a little while, not a ST holder and couldn't really afford the ticket prices week on week since I've had to drop my work shifts to accommodate my Master's

Been to a few this season, hopefully will  again soon, though.

You mentioned we’re getting no luck at the minute, well what I saw yesterday we were lucky not to be 3-0 by halftime, we were lucky not  to concede another penalty with Ndidi and we were very lucky to come out of that game with a draw! And that’s just yesterday!

[NotTheMarketLeader]

1 hour ago, Beechey said:

Maguire missed a big chance that was blocked on the line, Iheanacho was blocked at about 2 yards, Morgan had 2 pretty clear headers that he missed, and Mahrez missed a one on one, Chilwell had a stunner that was blocked as well, surely your memory is not that selective? If not for Bournemouth's blocking, we probably would have won handsomely.

 

Why on Earth should the manager be hired on a basis of his own vision, then be forced to play a way he is not used to? Would that not precipitate worse results, surely? That's crazy talk.

 

It's pretty obvious why we need to adapt when you look back at last season isn't it? Teams can just sit back and we have absolutely no hope of breaking them down if we're solely a counter-attacking team. Now we at least control the game.

So we would have scored more if the opposition let us eg.didn’t make blocks.

 

How selfish of them.

 

We are controlling the games in our own half or in terms of possession but sadly we don’t get awarded three points for that.

 

We of all fans should know that reality.

[Beechey]

15 minutes ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

So we would have scored more if the opposition let us eg.didn’t make blocks.

 

How selfish of them.

 

We are controlling the games in our own half or in terms of possession but sadly we don’t get awarded three points for that.

 

We of all fans should know that reality.

Can Puel legislate for the other team defending well and blocking absolutely everything? No. Can he legislate for players missing clear chances? No. What do you lot want from him?

 

Sorry mate, but that's rubbish. 48% of our passes went into the final third yesterday, not in our half. Almost 80% of our passes went forwards yesterday. Not sure what else to say other than that you're statistically wrong. You can claim that we're just passing it around at the back or whatever all you'd like, but that doesn't really bare out either when you see that we had 16 shots from inside their box yesterday too (if we were attacking really poorly, like you suggest, you'd expect lots of long range efforts). Like I said, our final ball is missing. We weren't incisive enough yesterday, and Albrighton had a particularly poor game I thought. Much rather have Diabate play for a few games.

Edited 4 March 2018 by Beechey

[foxinsocks]

19 minutes ago, Beechey said:

Can Puel legislate for the other team defending well and blocking absolutely everything? No. Can he legislate for players missing clear chances? No. What do you lot want from him?

 

Sorry mate, but that's rubbish. 48% of our passes went into the final third yesterday, not in our half. Almost 80% of our passes went forwards yesterday. Not sure what else to say other than that you're statistically wrong. You can claim that we're just passing it around at the back or whatever all you'd like, but that doesn't really bare out either when you see that we had 16 shots from inside their box yesterday too (if we were attacking really poorly, like you suggest, you'd expect lots of long range efforts). Like I said, our final ball is missing. We weren't incisive enough yesterday, and Albrighton had a particularly poor game I thought. Much rather have Diabate play for a few games.

but here's is the thing... we had loads of possession but it didn't translate in to goals... against Swansea, stoke or b'mouth.  IF we play for more possession then we have to have routes to scoring... oh yes unless we wait for s free kick that mahrez can place.  I want puel to succeed. to do that he must review his own decisions.. tactic, selection... use of sub (- he readily subs in last 10 mins to chase the game... but he doesn't sub early to change the game... he just lets is drift on).  He needs to look to see why his words (before the game or at HT) aren't heeded... or if they are the right words.   To be great he has to examine everything ---- including himself.

 

I can accept a move to possession based foot ball if there is an end product... that's his challenge - I hope he sorts it

[Shanghai]

4 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

I just think confidence is low and players are out of touch. It could just be as simple as that.

 

I will also accept that Mahrez disappearing for a while will not have helped whatsoever.

Team is 11 player 

[Clever Fox]

16 hours ago, jayfox26 said:

I get your points and a draw at home to Bournemouth isn't the end of the world but 3 consecutive home draws against bottom half opposition is very poor. I have stuck by Puel when he's been getting criticism recently but we haven't been great for a while now. Yes the Mahrez incident won't have helped but surely we should be over that now and getting results again. It's  all well and good us having possession and having 15 corners every game but it's results that count and recently our results have been poor so Puel rightly is getting criticised. And your comparison to Guardiola losing to Wigan is ridiculous. That was an aborration for Man city, today was not an aborration for us as we have had several poor results recently. 

Make no mistake Bournmouth are a decent side and Howe is a good Manager.

Puel can only work with the squad he inherited which isn't good enough.

You can think what you like about the Man city result, Fact is they were beaten by a league one side.

Football is littered with results like that, That's what make it such a great game. It's on the day that counts.

Nobody has a divine right to win no matter how much better they may be.

I just can't see how anyway can blame Puel when he's had no chance to bring in his own players. He needs to move out at least 6 or 7 players and bring in at least 4 or 5. Then you can judge him not before.

Utd have spent something like 700 million in recent seasons Mourinho 300 million of that to move from 4th to 3rd. Does that make Mourinho a bad manager. No it doesn't it just demonstrates how difficult it is to progress in this league. 

Puel may prove to be a disaster, But I haven't seen signs of it yet. And that's from having to work with someone elses Tools. He's signed one player in Diabate and that is looking like a decent signing. A few more of the right quality is all we need. He deserves a full season.

[l444ry]

Win next week and then overcome Chelsea and everyone will wish they'd never written some of the stuff above. Not beyond the realms of possibility.

[Clever Fox]

6 hours ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

Rubbish. 

 

Nothing I have seen would get me to hand over a transfer kitty to Puel if this is the type of football we have to endure.

You don't think Diabate was a good signing. 

He has inherited a team with better players and winning pedigree than any other outside of the top six.

If that was the case why were we losing when both Ranieri and Shakespeare were in charge with largely the same squad.

This is very talented squad and outside of the first six games (new manager bounce) he has negated any attacking threat we have and is playing the most boring, negative, possession based football you are likely to see.

No it isn't. It's a decent Squad which lacks Balance, With one Superstar carrying some average players.

Now always reactive, we begin every game as a training excerise, until the opposition score, which begins a second

half panic.

Foolish, Did we play the way you suggest against Man City first half, no we didn't. We were brilliant until half time.

 

A good manager gets the best out of the players at his disposal. That’s not happening.

Like Mourinho is doing at Utd or Wenger at Arsenal or even Big Sam at Everton.

With his Southampton tenure as past form, we have ample evidence that he is not playing to our player’s strengths resulting in a shocking spectacle.

Southampton sold there best players then expected the same results. How stupid is that.

Look at how Swansea are playing with a manager who encourages the midfield to get forward, with a squad which I think is relatively poor. They have the same players but a manager who has galvanised them to an extent that they are now going out to win games.

To use your own phrase, New Manager Bounce. They also brought in Two players in the window.

‘The Cup run’ is bollox and the only thing keeping fans off his back; all wins were over lower league sides.

You wouldn't say that if like me you seen us lose 3 Cup Finals in the 60s. Now your moaning about something we have no control over the Cup draw. 

Get rid at the end of the season for me, he’s not the man for us.

He wasn't my choice either but now that he's here he deserves a fair chance to take us forward. He can't do any worse than Shakespeare or Ranieri in recent times.

I pay to be entertained not be bored to sleep.

That doesn't give you the right to dictate Club policy. Thankfully we have professional people at the Club to make those decisions. But then you always have the option of supporting someone else.