| Attractive football 04:39 - Dec 4 with 1678 views | boncho1977 |
I keep hearing people on here say we are play attractive football, I admit we look good in spells. However majority of the time we hoof it long towards Bonne or when we counter attack we slow it down and pass it backwards. I wouldn’t be surprised if Walton or Edmundson have had the most touches in the league.
We are an attacking team with good players hence we score goals however without a decent shape and tactics we concede lots of goals
I don’t think the football we play is attractive, especially after the Crewe, Shrewsbury, Rotherham, Fleetwood and Oxford games - where we got beaten or grinder out a result
The most attractive football team i have seen at Portman Road is MK Dons
So let’s all be honest, we are a high scoring, mid table league 1 team that plays bang average football
And you all still clap the guy that’s had the biggest budget in the league and has put us in a worse position than last season.
It’s ok Rodders, this time next year will be in 9th position |  | | |  |
| Attractive football on 06:31 - Dec 4 with 1616 views | pennyfathersleg |
On top of this, we have had the least amount of shots on target in the division. Also, set aside the Doncaster, Portsmouth and Wycombe games, we’re averaging just over a goal and half per game - which is about the same as what we’re conceding…. |  | | |
| Attractive football on 07:05 - Dec 4 with 1583 views | bobbyramsey |
| Attractive football on 06:31 - Dec 4 by pennyfathersleg |
On top of this, we have had the least amount of shots on target in the division. Also, set aside the Doncaster, Portsmouth and Wycombe games, we’re averaging just over a goal and half per game - which is about the same as what we’re conceding…. |
Well done, just ignore the bits that don't fit your agenda.... |  | | |
| Attractive football on 09:09 - Dec 4 with 1480 views | BlueBadger |
We're basically playing Lambert Walk football, but with better forwards.
It's what Unstableblue thinks 'technical football' is. [Post edited 4 Dec 2021 9:58]
|  |
| |
| Attractive football on 09:48 - Dec 4 with 1432 views | DJR |
The first four paragraphs of the OP's post reflect my views entirely. Whether the system can be made to work better, perhaps after some changes in the transfer window, I do not know, but our prospects at the moment do not look good. If it does all go pear-shaped, I would want us to get a manager who plays the way MK Dons do. Indeed, I am sure we have the players to play that way at the moment, because it would certainly suit, say, Fraser, Carroll and Piggott. |  | | |
| Attractive football on 09:53 - Dec 4 with 1429 views | pennyfathersleg |
| Attractive football on 07:05 - Dec 4 by bobbyramsey |
Well done, just ignore the bits that don't fit your agenda.... |
My ITFC supporting agenda consists of one thing - ITFC winning games. Unfortunately, under the current manger, we really don’t seem to do a lot of that. And I’d like to remind you that we currently sit mid table in division 3.
Carry on happy clapping though….. | | | |
| Attractive football on 10:00 - Dec 4 with 1400 views | Churchman |
‘And you all clap the guy that’s had the biggest budget in the league’. Correct me if I’m wrong but I don’t think anyone thinks or had said he’s done a good job here. Even after thrashing Wycombe (I thought that performance was pretty ‘attractive’ btw) the view was very much ‘great performance at last against a top side; is this the turning point’? |  | | |
| Attractive football on 10:20 - Dec 4 with 1356 views | Swansea_Blue |
"So let’s all be honest, we are a high scoring, mid table league 1 team that plays bang average football"
Exactly this imo. We don't have a distinct style, we just have some very good attacking players for this division who can make things happen. |  |
| |
| Attractive football on 10:28 - Dec 4 with 1325 views | bobbyramsey |
| Attractive football on 09:53 - Dec 4 by pennyfathersleg |
My ITFC supporting agenda consists of one thing - ITFC winning games. Unfortunately, under the current manger, we really don’t seem to do a lot of that. And I’d like to remind you that we currently sit mid table in division 3.
Carry on happy clapping though….. |
Nothing to do with "happy clapping" why do you ignore the best results of the season to try to prove a point.
Lets ignore the Bolton, Sunderland and Rotherham results and see how the season looks.
You can prove anything if you want to ignore hard facts.......
[Post edited 4 Dec 2021 10:40]
| | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Attractive football on 12:51 - Dec 4 with 1203 views | pennyfathersleg |
| Attractive football on 10:28 - Dec 4 by bobbyramsey |
Nothing to do with "happy clapping" why do you ignore the best results of the season to try to prove a point.
Lets ignore the Bolton, Sunderland and Rotherham results and see how the season looks.
You can prove anything if you want to ignore hard facts.......
[Post edited 4 Dec 2021 10:40]
|
Clicked on an up by mistake 😱
I’m not ignoring them, in fact I’d go so far as saying it’s a bloody good job we did score as many goals in those games as we did, or we would be in a very sad place! The real point is that we have scored 36 goals this season and 14 of them have been in 3 games. Meaning a big chunk of our goals were in 3 games alone, and we don’t score as freely as our record shows.
I was backing up and agreeing with what the OP says. We aren’t as consistently attractive to watch as everyone says. | | | |
| Attractive football on 13:19 - Dec 4 with 1175 views | bobbyramsey |
| Attractive football on 12:51 - Dec 4 by pennyfathersleg |
Clicked on an up by mistake 😱
I’m not ignoring them, in fact I’d go so far as saying it’s a bloody good job we did score as many goals in those games as we did, or we would be in a very sad place! The real point is that we have scored 36 goals this season and 14 of them have been in 3 games. Meaning a big chunk of our goals were in 3 games alone, and we don’t score as freely as our record shows.
I was backing up and agreeing with what the OP says. We aren’t as consistently attractive to watch as everyone says. |
I know the point you're trying to prove but you can't just wipe out 14 goals ffs lol. | | | |
| Attractive football on 13:30 - Dec 4 with 1135 views | unstableblue |
| Attractive football on 09:09 - Dec 4 by BlueBadger |
We're basically playing Lambert Walk football, but with better forwards.
It's what Unstableblue thinks 'technical football' is. [Post edited 4 Dec 2021 9:58]
|
Stalker
You call it ‘progressive’ which is equally as w@nk |  |
| |
| Attractive football on 13:43 - Dec 4 with 1105 views | chrismakin |
| Attractive football on 13:19 - Dec 4 by bobbyramsey |
I know the point you're trying to prove but you can't just wipe out 14 goals ffs lol. |
Of course you can. It's bizarre why people think it's not important.
If you won a game 10-0 but drew 9 games 0-0 would you still ne saying its we've scored 10 goals in 10 games or acknowledge we failed to score in 9?
That's the point people make regarding those 3 games. People are using them as foundation to say how much more attacking we are in every game and how.we more exciting etc.. when there's been plenty of games around those that show otherwise. |  |
| |
| Attractive football on 13:59 - Dec 4 with 1065 views | AlanG296 |
| Attractive football on 13:19 - Dec 4 by bobbyramsey |
I know the point you're trying to prove but you can't just wipe out 14 goals ffs lol. |
Our most frequent score is 2. We have only scored more than 2 goals in 3 games out of 20, which was in 2 freak away games and 1 at home when the fact that Evans scored 3 tells you how abysmal Doncaster were that night. | | | |
| Attractive football on 14:02 - Dec 4 with 1061 views | blueislander |
I would take issue with your comment on hoofing long balls in the direction of Bonne. A lot of these are long ball hit reasonably accurately into the channels. Bonne is very good at running those lines and gets on to them to create decent situations.Robson’s teams played similarly until the Dutchmen arrived, with Whymark and Mariner upfront.
In my opinion the football being played by Town now is the most attractive since Royce was Manager. | | | |
| Attractive football on 14:10 - Dec 4 with 1044 views | Vic |
I really don’t see a lot of ‘hoofing it towards Bonne’, but I do see a lot of long passes being played into the channels. Nothing wrong with that - sir Bobby built his first team around it and did OK. |  |
| |
| Attractive football on 14:19 - Dec 4 with 1029 views | AlanG296 |
| Attractive football on 14:10 - Dec 4 by Vic |
I really don’t see a lot of ‘hoofing it towards Bonne’, but I do see a lot of long passes being played into the channels. Nothing wrong with that - sir Bobby built his first team around it and did OK. |
The big difference there is Sir Bobby played 2 up front. Defending long balls/hoofs is easier when there's only 1 to mark. | | | |
| Attractive football on 14:33 - Dec 4 with 1013 views | blueislander |
| Attractive football on 14:19 - Dec 4 by AlanG296 |
The big difference there is Sir Bobby played 2 up front. Defending long balls/hoofs is easier when there's only 1 to mark. |
The key is not one or two upfront, it is how quickly supporting runners can get to the target man. | | | |
| Attractive football on 14:39 - Dec 4 with 999 views | Vic |
| Attractive football on 14:19 - Dec 4 by AlanG296 |
The big difference there is Sir Bobby played 2 up front. Defending long balls/hoofs is easier when there's only 1 to mark. |
My point was that we are not ‘hoofing’ which implies pretty aimless long kick from the back, we are playing long passes. No problem with that. | |
| |
| Attractive football on 14:46 - Dec 4 with 986 views | AlanG296 |
| Attractive football on 14:39 - Dec 4 by Vic |
My point was that we are not ‘hoofing’ which implies pretty aimless long kick from the back, we are playing long passes. No problem with that. |
It's only counts as a pass if we retain possession. More often that not we don't. | | | |
| Attractive football on 14:49 - Dec 4 with 981 views | Vic |
| Attractive football on 14:46 - Dec 4 by AlanG296 |
It's only counts as a pass if we retain possession. More often that not we don't. |
I don’t think that’s quite true is it. An incomplete pass maybe?
Was KVY pass to Bonne be MK Dons a hoof? Or the pass to Celina last week? | |
| |
| Attractive football on 14:57 - Dec 4 with 967 views | AlanG296 |
| Attractive football on 14:49 - Dec 4 by Vic |
I don’t think that’s quite true is it. An incomplete pass maybe?
Was KVY pass to Bonne be MK Dons a hoof? Or the pass to Celina last week? |
I think the passing stats only count it as a pass if it's received. Certainly not saying every long ball forward is a hoof and certainly we do play long passes. Not credible to claim we never hoof though. | | | |
| Attractive football on 14:58 - Dec 4 with 966 views | Keaneish |
| Attractive football on 09:09 - Dec 4 by BlueBadger |
We're basically playing Lambert Walk football, but with better forwards.
It's what Unstableblue thinks 'technical football' is. [Post edited 4 Dec 2021 9:58]
|
So the football isn’t better? I’m so confused. Good job you’re here with telling insight to redress the balance. |  |
| |
| Attractive football on 15:05 - Dec 4 with 952 views | AlanG296 |
| Attractive football on 14:33 - Dec 4 by blueislander |
The key is not one or two upfront, it is how quickly supporting runners can get to the target man. |
Thar would work if we had a genuine number 9 target man, which Bonne isn't (no criticism of Macauley who has other strengths) and hard working supporting runners, which we don't either. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
