| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? 07:01 - Dec 8 with 1805 views | urbanblue |
Bearing in mind that far too many draws was the undoing of Sunderland last season this current run is a little concerning. Are we too safety first?
The fact that three draws amounts to one win and two losses over three games I think I'd prefer we went for it, attacked more, and took the chance that we may well achieve more then three points over three games ... We are surely good enough.
It's so rare that we pour forward and bombard the opposition that I think I'd prefer the odds that we would win more then we lose.
Thoughts? [Post edited 8 Dec 2019 7:02]
|  | | |  |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 07:37 - Dec 8 with 1496 views | WarkTheWarkITFC |
At the moment we are doing a pretty decent impression of Sunderland last year.
Right up there and not losing games. Personally I think with Sears back it’ll likely improve our XI and we will be in good shape. |  |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 07:43 - Dec 8 with 1492 views | itfcjoe |
What happened to the Lambert of Norwich who used to chuck extra players on and always go for it to try and win games? |  |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 08:06 - Dec 8 with 1450 views | Bluefish |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 07:43 - Dec 8 by itfcjoe |
What happened to the Lambert of Norwich who used to chuck extra players on and always go for it to try and win games? |
At norwich he probably realised the crowd expected that from him. We went down with him without any fight and our lot fell over themselves to declare him a hero and say they are having the time of their lives. |  |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 08:33 - Dec 8 with 1401 views | WD19 |
In this division wins are everything.
....and as we saw early in the season....the opposition are rarely ruthless so higher risk football works better than it would elsewhere.
Regular solid draws against the better teams in this division will see see us finish in the playoffs. |  | | |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 08:35 - Dec 8 with 1400 views | pedrail |
If you are a better than average team, it is always statistically better to go for the win and risk losing. The expected points return is much higher. Even an average team would expect to win as many as they lose and therefore get a better points tally going for the win rather than the draw. |  | | |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 08:39 - Dec 8 with 1391 views | TractorWood |
We seem to have lots of early chances go 1-0 up and then waste a few more chances. Then invariably the opposition score with their first decent chance and then we draw.
In summary we need to be more clinical. Not miss loads of chances and then blame the ref. |  |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 09:26 - Dec 8 with 1320 views | Guthrum |
'Pouring forward and bombarding the opposition' requires a level of superiority which I don't think we possess. Certainly not yesterday, when Coventry defended in numbers and had the positional ability to cut out our passing.
Another problem we have is not moving quickly enough. Players are not dribbling at speed (tend to pause and look for a pass instead), nor do we have numbers racing into the box when a crossing opportunity arises. Perhaps we just don't have enough of those pacy kind of players (Jackson did introduce another level of liveliness when he came on). Maybe other teams are setting out to stop us doing it.
We certainly were not just sitting back and inviting pressure all the time, more continually being caught on the break after our attacking moves broke down. [Post edited 8 Dec 2019 9:27]
|  |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 09:38 - Dec 8 with 1300 views | StokieBlue |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 09:26 - Dec 8 by Guthrum |
'Pouring forward and bombarding the opposition' requires a level of superiority which I don't think we possess. Certainly not yesterday, when Coventry defended in numbers and had the positional ability to cut out our passing.
Another problem we have is not moving quickly enough. Players are not dribbling at speed (tend to pause and look for a pass instead), nor do we have numbers racing into the box when a crossing opportunity arises. Perhaps we just don't have enough of those pacy kind of players (Jackson did introduce another level of liveliness when he came on). Maybe other teams are setting out to stop us doing it.
We certainly were not just sitting back and inviting pressure all the time, more continually being caught on the break after our attacking moves broke down. [Post edited 8 Dec 2019 9:27]
|
I don't think that first paragraph is true. We absolutely battered them in the first half to the point where the Coventry fans said we were the best team by far they had played. Some of our passing tore them apart, we should have won it there.
I would actually say that first half was bombarding them, we often had 4 players in the box which doesn't happen often enough in my opinion.
SB |  |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 09:51 - Dec 8 with 1273 views | Guthrum |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 09:38 - Dec 8 by StokieBlue |
I don't think that first paragraph is true. We absolutely battered them in the first half to the point where the Coventry fans said we were the best team by far they had played. Some of our passing tore them apart, we should have won it there.
I would actually say that first half was bombarding them, we often had 4 players in the box which doesn't happen often enough in my opinion.
SB |
I didn't think the first half was that dominant. Not like at MK, when we really did rampage for 45 minutes. | |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 09:58 - Dec 8 with 1269 views | StokieBlue |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 09:51 - Dec 8 by Guthrum |
I didn't think the first half was that dominant. Not like at MK, when we really did rampage for 45 minutes. |
MK are nowhere near the quality of team that Coventry are, in fact that are rather poor.
I think you need to weight the performance taking into account the opposition.
I think my main point is that we need to routinely have 4+ players in the box like we did in the first half yesterday if we want to put teams away early.
SB | |
| Avatar - IC410 - Tadpoles Nebula |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:02 - Dec 8 with 1252 views | hampstead_blue |
A good draw is a point won.
Happy for us to develop and still be up there.
Edit.
If this is us developing, if it clicks and we go on a run we could win with pomp.
Keane is rusty but coming good. Many others the same. [Post edited 8 Dec 2019 10:03]
|  |
| Assumption is to make an ass out of you and me.
Those who assume they know you, when they don't are just guessing.
Those who assume and insist they know are daft and in denial.
Those who assume, insist, and deny the truth are plain stupid.
Those who assume, insist, deny the truth and tell YOU they know you (when they don't) have an IQ in the range of 35-49.
| | Poll: | Best Blackpool goal |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:29 - Dec 8 with 1203 views | strikalite |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 09:58 - Dec 8 by StokieBlue |
MK are nowhere near the quality of team that Coventry are, in fact that are rather poor.
I think you need to weight the performance taking into account the opposition.
I think my main point is that we need to routinely have 4+ players in the box like we did in the first half yesterday if we want to put teams away early.
SB |
Two quick wing backs either side who are good on the ball makes a massive difference, missing KVY obviously on the right to give us another outlet..
Biggest worry if you work your way through our squad is goalscorers, composure in front of goal, for all the nice moments in possession you just know that nobody has the ability to do something incredible special, like to see more of Dobra from the bench without a doubt especially as opposition tire at which point they absolutely hate pace.. |  | | |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:35 - Dec 8 with 1192 views | Guthrum |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 09:58 - Dec 8 by StokieBlue |
MK are nowhere near the quality of team that Coventry are, in fact that are rather poor.
I think you need to weight the performance taking into account the opposition.
I think my main point is that we need to routinely have 4+ players in the box like we did in the first half yesterday if we want to put teams away early.
SB |
Indeed. But that means we cannot simply pour forward and bombard them, as suggested in the OP. We don't have the same quality/workrate advantage, so have to fight for every chance.
Agree absolutely that we need to pack the box. We did much less of that in the second half and had less joy as a result.
But we also need teammates to come to the help of our players quicker. When they're surrounded by three or four opponents, losing the ball is nearly inevitable without a reasonably quick outlet. Particularly an issue when we're putting long balls in behind for our wide-men to chase. The supporting pack needs to get up faster. | |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:35 - Dec 8 with 1192 views | eireblue |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 07:43 - Dec 8 by itfcjoe |
What happened to the Lambert of Norwich who used to chuck extra players on and always go for it to try and win games? |
Well, even the refs in League One finally spotted Lambert’s 4-4-4 tactics and have started to clamp down on it. |  | | |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:36 - Dec 8 with 1191 views | Dyland |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 09:26 - Dec 8 by Guthrum |
'Pouring forward and bombarding the opposition' requires a level of superiority which I don't think we possess. Certainly not yesterday, when Coventry defended in numbers and had the positional ability to cut out our passing.
Another problem we have is not moving quickly enough. Players are not dribbling at speed (tend to pause and look for a pass instead), nor do we have numbers racing into the box when a crossing opportunity arises. Perhaps we just don't have enough of those pacy kind of players (Jackson did introduce another level of liveliness when he came on). Maybe other teams are setting out to stop us doing it.
We certainly were not just sitting back and inviting pressure all the time, more continually being caught on the break after our attacking moves broke down. [Post edited 8 Dec 2019 9:27]
|
Pace is one thing we definitely lack as a team. Proper pace, I mean. Jackson and Edwards are both quick but the former doesn't link up play and the latter makes poor choices with the ball far too often. |  |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:38 - Dec 8 with 1185 views | Guthrum |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:29 - Dec 8 by strikalite |
Two quick wing backs either side who are good on the ball makes a massive difference, missing KVY obviously on the right to give us another outlet..
Biggest worry if you work your way through our squad is goalscorers, composure in front of goal, for all the nice moments in possession you just know that nobody has the ability to do something incredible special, like to see more of Dobra from the bench without a doubt especially as opposition tire at which point they absolutely hate pace.. |
Not sure composure in front of goal is so much of a problem as getting it from "promising attack" to "shot". Too often, our moves break down before a striker can get boot on ball in a viable position.
Then the opposition punts long and we're left chasing back. | |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:39 - Dec 8 with 1179 views | pointofblue |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:36 - Dec 8 by Dyland |
Pace is one thing we definitely lack as a team. Proper pace, I mean. Jackson and Edwards are both quick but the former doesn't link up play and the latter makes poor choices with the ball far too often. |
We’re seriously missing a fully fit Kane Vincent-Young. | |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:39 - Dec 8 with 1180 views | Dyland |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:29 - Dec 8 by strikalite |
Two quick wing backs either side who are good on the ball makes a massive difference, missing KVY obviously on the right to give us another outlet..
Biggest worry if you work your way through our squad is goalscorers, composure in front of goal, for all the nice moments in possession you just know that nobody has the ability to do something incredible special, like to see more of Dobra from the bench without a doubt especially as opposition tire at which point they absolutely hate pace.. |
Keane is looking ten times sharper than a few weeks ago. Judge is getting back into the groove too. Both should be getting on the scoresheet if they start playing regularly now. | |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:40 - Dec 8 with 1172 views | Dyland |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:39 - Dec 8 by pointofblue |
We’re seriously missing a fully fit Kane Vincent-Young. |
Indeed. But still capable of putting in a first half like yesterday. Quite positive really. | |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:41 - Dec 8 with 1166 views | Guthrum |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:39 - Dec 8 by Dyland |
Keane is looking ten times sharper than a few weeks ago. Judge is getting back into the groove too. Both should be getting on the scoresheet if they start playing regularly now. |
As Keane did yesterday, could have had three (header off the post, lunge at a dangerous cross). | |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:49 - Dec 8 with 1152 views | BlueBadger |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 07:43 - Dec 8 by itfcjoe |
What happened to the Lambert of Norwich who used to chuck extra players on and always go for it to try and win games? |
He failed at very other job he had, that's what happened. [Post edited 8 Dec 2019 12:39]
|  |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 11:03 - Dec 8 with 1134 views | strikalite |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:39 - Dec 8 by Dyland |
Keane is looking ten times sharper than a few weeks ago. Judge is getting back into the groove too. Both should be getting on the scoresheet if they start playing regularly now. |
That's good to hear, Keane has such a good touch and composure, we know Judge does have a shot in his locker, proved that many times at Brentford... | | | |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 11:10 - Dec 8 with 1124 views | longtimefan |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 10:35 - Dec 8 by Guthrum |
Indeed. But that means we cannot simply pour forward and bombard them, as suggested in the OP. We don't have the same quality/workrate advantage, so have to fight for every chance.
Agree absolutely that we need to pack the box. We did much less of that in the second half and had less joy as a result.
But we also need teammates to come to the help of our players quicker. When they're surrounded by three or four opponents, losing the ball is nearly inevitable without a reasonably quick outlet. Particularly an issue when we're putting long balls in behind for our wide-men to chase. The supporting pack needs to get up faster. |
One aspect I found frustrating in the second half was that every time we delivered a ball into their box and it was won by defenders, there was rarely a town player just outside the box to pick up the ball. There seemed to always be a void of town players from the edge of the box to the midway in the Coventry half which meant we were unable to sustain any attacks, as the clearance always fell to an Coventry player under no pressure. | | | |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 11:15 - Dec 8 with 1085 views | Guthrum |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 11:10 - Dec 8 by longtimefan |
One aspect I found frustrating in the second half was that every time we delivered a ball into their box and it was won by defenders, there was rarely a town player just outside the box to pick up the ball. There seemed to always be a void of town players from the edge of the box to the midway in the Coventry half which meant we were unable to sustain any attacks, as the clearance always fell to an Coventry player under no pressure. |
Indeed. | |
| |
| Would you prefer we went for it and risked losing? on 12:49 - Dec 8 with 1015 views | peterleeblue |
Sunderland's undoing wasn't so much the draws but basically having a team that wasn't good enough. Once Josh Maja was sold and replaced with the ineffective Grigg they were basically relying on a 30+ Aiden McGeady to weave Magic.
Ipswich seem so much better equipped to last the season. Keane, Norwood, Jackson and Sears to come back. Young exciting talent in midfield and big strong defenders.
I wouldn't be surprised to see Lambert settle on a constant line up come February once we have put the cups to bed. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
