West Brom - Post match

[sbfox]

4 minutes ago, Guppys Love Child said:

Ok you are more than initialed to your opinion ( well it is a forum👍) but my final sentence was probably a key point to my post (and my posts in other threads) and maybe you could apply a smidge of tongue in cheek to the comment, but I do deeply think we need to mix up the style more and not stick so ridgeley to the pass the hell out of everything to 'find the Solution's' as per Enzo.

I guess what I'm alluding too is that maybe we should try to create more of these breakaway situations and not use the passing bore fest as a only way we play. 

But what 'style' do you mean? 

[sbfox]

Just now, Chrysalis said:

I see the issue now, you see things like that counter goal as "beneath" possession, because perhaps you feel possession is a higher level of football or something.  But in my opinion those type of goals still need skill, you have to get your pass right with the pace of the player moving forward, stay onside, and also a test of fitness and endurance as well as composure. 

They literally just ran in straight lines. It's no better or worse than any other goal we've scored, but we're not going to win this league playing counter attacking football. 

[LCFCJohn]

2 minutes ago, sbfox said:

The second goal is a poor example. We literally just ran in straight lines - no real 'skill'. 

 

Still not sure what playing with 'pace' means when you're playing against 11 men sat within 30 yards of their own goal, but sure. 

What would you have rather happened? Kelechi to check back, play it back to Hermansen so we could build from the back and try and beat the whole West Brom side back in their positions and score from 30+ passes instead?

 

If you don’t ’get’ what playing with pace is after it’s been spelt out to you, sorry you’re either being deliberately awkward to prove your point or, and I hesitate to say it as I don’t like insults, but a bit of an idiot. I hope the former.

 

What don’t you get?

[Nolucklcfc]

Big mention for vesterguaard by the way. Colossal 

[gurru991]

13 minutes ago, ithuriel said:

Our away form is outstanding, just need a new striker in  Jan to give us more teeth when trying to take a bite out of the opposition.

Agreed .. We definitely could use a proficient striker !!  Good ones are hard to find !!

[cityfanlee23]

1 minute ago, Lillehamring said:

This didn't happen, regardless of what you heard - there were times when we went back - but these two were actually starting to really click and, but for a better final ball/finish, looked like our best route to a goal (which proved to be the case).

From the few shots i saw of maresca, it was usually frustration he expressed when we wasted good progression.  towards the end, we were operating some fine game management, with some passing phases that kept west brom out of the game - maybe that was what they were referencing?

 

I don't think it is that he doesn't want us to attack, it's more that he wants us to keep the ball, so picking our moments when to risk an attack or when to just keep the ball away from them, which we did pretty well.

So the commentators were lying then. 
 

I watched Fatawu stop an attack and pass it back and the commentators immediately noted that Enzo was encouraging it and said he had done it multiple times. 
 

all I can say is what I saw which was players opting to stop a clear dangerous opportunity to pass it backwards and kill it off, maybe they saw something I didn’t but it happened multiple times. I can then only add what was said by the commentary who noted the same thing as me, but with their perspective being that it was being encouraged by the manager, that part i didn’t see but I have no reason to believe the commentators were making it up since it happened multiple times. 
 

respect your posts a lot but these “nuh uh” responses don’t really add much. Given the sheer amount of times we have absolutely wasted attacks with sideways and backwards passing throughout the season I really struggle to find any other logical reasoning other than it’s being encouraged. 
 

Agree with the last part though, it’s exactly what Puel wanted, Puel constantly referenced picking the right moment and that we should encourage recycling to be ball until a better opportunity arises. Unfortunately for Puel those opportunities rarely came, thankfully they have come for us so far this season, I don’t believe it’s the system that has been primarily responsible for that, a mixture of system tiring teams out and having the quality to grind out games.

[LCFCJohn]

4 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

I think I see the issue now, you see things like that counter goal as "beneath" possession, because perhaps you feel possession is a higher level of football or something.  But in my opinion those type of goals still need skill, you have to get your pass right with the pace of the player moving forward, stay onside, and also a test of fitness and endurance as well as composure. 

 

But anyway, the goal proved you can mix in counter's whilst also playing possession.  We could have chosen not to snatch that chance and instead start passing it around, west brom go back into defensive shape, and then do you think we would have got the winner?

On your last paragraph, even as a side playing with possession, when losing, the opposition will come forward and put pressure on us at the end of a game and that will mean we end up under pressure. 
 

By mixing in counter attacking at the end, as you say, it was literally the difference between us turning 1 point into 3 today compared to turning 3 into 1 on Wednesday. It’s that simple!

[cityfanlee23]

27 minutes ago, Tommy Fresh said:

After his comments about Fatawu he's probably praising him for being a bit more controlled

Possibly, but I don’t see why you’d want Fatawu controlled in those situations, we wasted so many great opportunities and very nearly paid the price.

[sbfox]

2 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

What would you have rather happened? Kelechi to check back, play it back to Hermansen so we could build from the back and try and beat the whole West Brom side back in their positions and score from 30+ passes instead?

 

If you don’t ’get’ what playing with pace is after it’s been spelt out to you, sorry you’re either being deliberately awkward to prove your point or, and I hesitate to say it as I don’t like insults, but a bit of an idiot. I hope the former.

 

What don’t you get?

There's nothing to get. We scored on a counter following a good defensive header that fell fortunately. 

 

That isn't "playing with pace", its footballers doing their job and scoring an easy 3 on 1.

 

You don't like insults but then use one? Nice one boss. 

[MPH]

You have to feel sorry for Ipswich. Having their best season for .. what 10-15 years and being overshadowed in the media by us. They are 2-0 already btw.

[Ian Nacho]

Could be a season defining win. Massive given that teams around us are winning so far this afternoon. 

[Silverfox14]

Good result……but not entirely convinced by performance. Would like to see wingers threaten on the outside more often.

[whoareyaaa]

3 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

On your last paragraph, even as a side playing with possession, when losing, the opposition will come forward and put pressure on us at the end of a game and that will mean we end up under pressure. 
 

By mixing in counter attacking at the end, as you say, it was literally the difference between us turning 1 point into 3 today compared to turning 3 into 1 on Wednesday. It’s that simple!

but West Brom had all there players in our box, its hardly counter attacking football.. we got a break with the ball and managed to get through 

[Lillehamring]

22 minutes ago, NaijaFox said:

With all due credit to West Brom, we were well on top when we scored and frankly should’ve (cautiously) pushed on instead of seemingly settling. In fact, we were on top for virtually the entire second-half - until, ironically, after we scored. Bemusing really.

We were well on top, but that changed the moment we scored - they have great home form and the sixth best attack in the league and they started to really push for the first time in the game.  The idea of us pushing on would have left us even more exposed than we already were - by and large, for the last 20 minutes we did well to use up the time, created a few chances to get a second and limited them to a goalmouth scramble.  Sounds like a sensible way to see out a game - you can't do everything, but sometimes you can do enough.

[LCFCJohn]

5 minutes ago, sbfox said:

There's nothing to get. We scored on a counter following a good defensive header that fell fortunately. 

 

That isn't "playing with pace", its footballers doing their job and scoring an easy 3 on 1.

 

You don't like insults but then use one? Nice one boss. 

As I say, reluctant to but sometimes when banging your head explaining the obvious over again it’s hard to not! 
 

You are not answering direct questions but repeating the same thing about pace. Literally, that was the difference between turning 1 point into 3 compared to 3 into 1

on Wednesday. That’s all you need to know but you’re embarrassed by it somehow?

Edited 2 December 2023 by LCFCJohn

[Lillehamring]

25 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

Looked like a clear counter type move to me with KDH and Winks sprinting forward to score the winner.

 

Hopefully they didnt get told off afterwards for getting forward and scoring too quickly.

I think he's saying that whilst it was a counter-attacking move (inevitably, it could be nothing less) - it wasn't through being set up to play counterattacking football. 

[Bob Hazels shorts]

1 hour ago, The Doctor said:

The weirdos calling for Enzo to go must be in tears. Like there are concerns with game management today and Wednesday, we looked comfortable until Casadei came on and the winks goal did save that little threat of a bottle job, but the guy has managed less than a whole championship season in his entire career, it'll take time for him to learn the adjustments and some were right to create the first goal. 

Who are the weirdos suggesting he should go? 

 

He did inexplicably take off MOTM N’didi for the largely ineffective Casadei when defending a lead. It cost us.

 

Questioning decisions has happened every game in our past 139 years 

 

Agree he is learning 

[The Doctor]

8 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

You are bang on in your posts but are wasting your time with some posters on here. It is clear some on here are almost embarrassed by us scoring a goal like that….weird! 

No-ones embarrassed by scoring a goal, but you've got to recognise that the situation for the winner is not one we want to make a habit of being in. West Brom went forward and committed so heavily to the overload that we were 2v1 against the keeper 10 yards into their half, but defending against a huge overload is gonna result in you conceding far more than getting the counter goal. The point of this system is to draw teams onto you a bit to create space to play through, and we need to be quicker in transition but that's better implementation of the primary tactic, to have the runs by the 8s and to have the false 9 to link better than Kelechis 23 touches today, not compromising the style

[LCFCJohn]

1 minute ago, whoareyaaa said:

but West Brom had all there players in our box, its hardly counter attacking football.. we got a break with the ball and managed to get through 

Not another…

 

Yes the chance was presented to us but it’s taking the opportunity when presented. It was refreshing to see rather than us just keeping the ball and allowing West Brom to regroup. 

[An Away Move]

1 hour ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

I absolutely ****ing LOVE that the winner was scored in a style completely against the “philosophy” 

 

just play ****ing football!

 

love it.

Wrong. The goal was scored completely in keeping with the ‘philosophy’. 

[The Doctor]

Just now, Bob Hazels shorts said:

Who are the weirdos suggesting he should go? 

 

He did inexplicably take off MOTM N’didi for the largely ineffective Casadei when defending a lead. It cost us.

 

Questioning decisions has happened every game in our past 139 years 

 

Agree he is learning 

There were 3 in the match thread when the equaliser went in, 2 saying he needs to go and one actively celebrating the goal and wanting it to happen more frequently to get him out

[Lillehamring]

26 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

Loved it! Best of both worlds, winning the game but with the type of goal the know it alls on here sneer and turn their noses up at 

I'd love you to find one single post of anyone on here, this season, who has even remotely hinted that they disapprove of us scoring goals on the counter.

[sbfox]

Just now, LCFCJohn said:

As I say, reluctant to but sometimes when banging your hand explaining the obvious over again it’s hard to not! 
 

You are not answering direct questions but repeating the same thing about pace. Literally, that was the difference between turning 1 point into 3 compared to 3 into 1

on Wednesday. That’s all you need to know but you’re embarrassed by it somehow?

What's your question? You seem to keep insulting me, but not actually said anything of substance. 

 

Remind me, when did Wednesday have all of the outfield players in our 18 yard box, leading to an insanely stupid 3 on 1? Oh, no, they didn't. "Pace" had no impact on the result today. 

 

Probably best to stop imagining what people are saying. You wouldn't want to look silly. 

[coolhandfox]

Two really nice goals.

[whoareyaaa]

1 minute ago, LCFCJohn said:

Not another…

 

Yes the chance was presented to us but it’s taking the opportunity when presented. It was refreshing to see rather than us just keeping the ball and allowing West Brom to regroup. 

there was no where else to go, we wanted to win the game, it wasn't refreshing we got a lucky brake and made the most of it