West Brom - Post match

[HarryDee8]

I watched the whole game. Honestly we played poor, not direct enough and there are now better teams in the final 1/3 in this league then us.

 

We were lucky today. Another poor performance today. Minus vesty and winks who had another good game

 

 

 

 

[Lillehamring]

19 minutes ago, SixtiesFox said:

Most important win of the season so far. Huge and much needed momentum shift. Players and coaches went just as mental as us fans! Thanks WBA for that kamikazi gift. Reminiscent of the breakaway goal to clinch a plafoff place at Forest!

The other side of the coin to being 'negative' after scoring...

[LCFCJohn]

1 minute ago, The Doctor said:

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

You are correct. But as I said in another post, when winning, there will be times when sides are throwing everything at us. You can’t prevent that. 
 

When that happens, it’s good we can use that other side of the game to circumvent it and break forward to get the winner. On Wednesday we just let the pressure on to us and threw away 2 points.

 

The first goal is a much better example of moving the ball quickly in the final third. That was an excellent goal as well. I think it’s just positive to see two such different goals but perfectly executed in the circumstances in that moment.

[Beachyboy]

18 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

I find this point of view totally bizarre, its a very black and white point of view where people think you can only play one style for an entire game.

 

Yes you can play possession whilst also mixing in some counter attacks when the opportunity is there.  The top teams do it routinely.

 

So trying to spell it out, we played possession for majority of game, but we did a counter attack for the goal, is that possible to understand?

If you are failing to understand my point, I will say there is only 39% of the game where we didn't have the ball, so far less opportunities to counter attack. I do take your point that we could be far better in transition and need to be, some games we only get 20% opportunity to counter attack, even if Plan A wasn't possession from Enzo we would have far more of the ball than the opposition due to the quality of our players, 2 areas to work on certainly are what we do with it when we have it, and how we better use the counter attacking options that we do get.

[Cadno'r Cymoedd]

1 hour ago, Lillehamring said:

Ironic that, like most games this season, our possession game sets us up to win games late?

 

Not today. No sign that West Brom were tired like some of the lesser teams. It was simply them pushing fir a winner and us punishing them with that lightning attack. 

[coolhandfox]

5 minutes 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 

So West Brom were on the attack over committed and we counter and score.

 

That's 100% counter attacking.

 

Good teams possession base team can also counter attack. You don't have to be one or the other.

[Chrysalis]

9 minutes ago, MPH said:

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.

I expect their players and manager like that, makes it easier when not in the limelight.

[whoareyaaa]

Just now, coolhandfox said:

So West Brom were on the attack over committed and we counter and score.

 

That's 100% counter attacking.

 

Good teams possession base team can also counter attack. You don't have to be one or the other.

 yea it is counter attacking but we had no other choice

[Tielemans63]

 

 

 

[Beachyboy]

Just now, coolhandfox said:

So West Brom were on the attack over committed and we counter and score.

 

That's 100% counter attacking.

 

Good teams possession base team can also counter attack. You don't have to be one or the other.

Exactly we countered Southampton affectively, most teams will just allow us to have the ball and sit deep so the counter chances are far far less.

[sbfox]

1 minute ago, coolhandfox said:

So West Brom were on the attack over committed and we counter and score.

 

That's 100% counter attacking.

 

Good teams possession base team can also counter attack. You don't have to be one or the other.

No one is saying that it wasn't a counter attacking goal. By definition it is. Most of us are saying that we're not going to be a counter attacking team because we don't have the players for that system (or a manger that wants or needs to play that way). 

[David Hankey]

Well, I didn't expect that. Given recent results of both sides I thought a point would be good.

[Chrysalis]

7 minutes ago, Lillehamring said:

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. 

I accept that of course, and its why I say you can setup to play possession, but you can also play with pace mixed in with that when the chances arise, we didnt do it mid week, but thankfully we did it today to get this second goal.

[ARM1968]

Good result. Lucky to be honest. Just not creating enough and that will catch up with us. 

[The Doctor]

1 minute ago, coolhandfox said:

So West Brom were on the attack over committed and we counter and score.

 

That's 100% counter attacking.

 

Good teams possession base team can also counter attack. You don't have to be one or the other.

The point is we weren't set up explicitly to play on the counter as a tactic which is what people who decry us as being tedious and negative want, it was a natural result of the stretched state of play

[An Away Move]

You’ve really got to be a special kind of fan after winning away at one of the top form sides in the division to be still criticising the manager - whilst being top of the league. If this describes you then have a good look in the mirror and sort yourself out. 

[Lillehamring]

12 minutes ago, cityfanlee23 said:

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.

Then it must just come down to context - i didn't have the same commentary as you - but if it did happen as described, which i never discounted, then it must have been a. an isolated incident, or b. when we were simply trying to wear down the clock.

 

Without knowing exactly what the situation was it's hard to really understand why maresca might have applauded it - but given that it's his system, i'm sure he had his reasons - sometimes, the obvious explanation isn't always the correct one - he must have felt the action was the right one, who are we to dispute this.

[LCFCJohn]

5 minutes ago, whoareyaaa said:

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

It’s really not hard what I’m saying 

 

Literally, I am saying, so often, we check back and let the opposition reset, when if we played with a bit more instinct to get forwards, we could have them on the back foot. What is refreshing is that when Kelechi got the ball, KDH and Winks went forward and the ball from Kelechi was a peach. When he got it, instinctively I thought he was going to check back and play it to a Faes/Vestergard etc. That is what I am saying is refreshing.

[filbertway]

56 minutes ago, sbfox said:

You are. Absolutely fantasy land. 

I must be haha. The game I watched we had 2 shots on goal and one was because the opposition decided to let 2 of our players run clean through.

 

I'd have much rather watched the game you and Enzo watched  

 

 

 

[martyn]

3 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

Good result. Lucky to be honest. Just not creating enough and that will catch up with us. 

We aren't creating enough at the moment, that's true and the handbrake seems on  when we have the chance to spring, which is frustrating, but the thing we've got is a really solid base, which will always give us a chance.

 

I don't think anyone has carved us open in open play since about the first 3 or 4 games of the season. All of our defensive wounds are self inflicted. It's what will see us over the line imo.

Edited 2 December 2023 by martyn

[sbfox]

2 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

It’s really not hard what I’m saying 

 

Literally, I am saying, so often, we check back and let the opposition reset, when if we played with a bit more instinct to get forwards, we could have them on the back foot. What is refreshing is that when Kelechi got the ball, KDH and Winks went forward and the ball from Kelechi was a peach. When he got it, instinctively I thought he was going to check back and play it to a Faes/Vestergard etc. That is what I am saying is refreshing.

For the final time, the circumstances of the second goal are SO specific, that any other outcome was impossible. No professional footballer, no Sunday league player, is going to 'reset' in a 3 on 1 scenario. The ball luckily broke into his stride and then it was a case of running forwards. 

 

A good, well taken goal, but it doesn't have any deeper significance about how we play. 

[Lillehamring]

7 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

You are correct. But as I said in another post, when winning, there will be times when sides are throwing everything at us. You can’t prevent that. 
 

When that happens, it’s good we can use that other side of the game to circumvent it and break forward to get the winner. On Wednesday we just let the pressure on to us and threw away 2 points.

 

The first goal is a much better example of moving the ball quickly in the final third. That was an excellent goal as well. I think it’s just positive to see two such different goals but perfectly executed in the circumstances in that moment.

I think the mistake you're making with your comments is that, at least this is the impression you're giving, you don't see counter attacking as part of our normal game - which is completely untrue.  yes this was a very obvious counter but a huge part of our game is to be able to transition from defending to attack with quick progressive passing, or counter attacking.

 

Using this goal as a dig at the system we play is flawed, because this is exactly what the system is all about.

[sbfox]

5 minutes ago, filbertway said:

I must be haha. The game I watched we had 2 shots on goal and one was because the opposition decided to let 2 of our players run clean through.

 

I'd have much rather watched the game you and Enzo watched  

 

 

 

We had 9 shots, 3 on target. 

[Gazza M]

I'm glad the players have more nerve than some so called supporters calling for the managers head after 89 mins on here today. A draw would have been by no means a disaster at WBA but a bit of magic got us the win.

 

For goodness sake look at the bigger picture at times. 

 

 

Edited 2 December 2023 by Gazza M

[Ric Flair]

Ndidi, Winks and KDH were phenomenal that 2nd half. 

 

I've done mesen a mischief when that winner went in.