| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful 17:02 - Jan 14 with 5552 views | NeedhamChris |
Just took on more and more pressure after those changes.
Good young manager, but by no means perfect and needs to learn how to manage out a game sharpish or we're going nowhere. |  |
| |  |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:27 - Jan 15 with 1264 views | Chocorange |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 07:52 - Jan 15 by bournemouthblue |
He never seems to play Edwards down the right unless he switches him in the game
You'd expect Edwards to offer something down there
I do think Plymouth are the first side really to stop us down both wings, that's not really happened in any other game this season |
Yes they did their homework on us , both wings stopped and closed Wolfy down on goal kicks , forcing Walton to go long , we never got to grips with getting out from the back.
Do think Edmundson offers more with this than Burgess |  | | |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:33 - Jan 15 with 1231 views | Herbivore |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 08:29 - Jan 15 by sotd78 |
They were all like for like changes. Not sure what any other coach would do when 1 nil up against the top team? |
They weren't like for like though. KVY is a full back and he replaced Burns who plays a primarily attacking role in our system. Humphreys replaced Harness which led to Morsy playing as an inside forward for the last 15 minutes. We kept the same shape but the changes in personnel blunted our attacking threat and invited pressure. |  |
| |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:35 - Jan 15 with 1225 views | clive_baker |
I think the changes came too early. Yesterday at half time I would’ve been ok with it, but 15 minutes into the 2nd half we’re 1 - 0 up and starting to get on top of things. I thought there was a 2nd goal for us out there and was surprised we made the changes when we did. We certainly lost our rhythm. . |  |
| |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:37 - Jan 15 with 1209 views | Herbivore |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:35 - Jan 15 by clive_baker |
I think the changes came too early. Yesterday at half time I would’ve been ok with it, but 15 minutes into the 2nd half we’re 1 - 0 up and starting to get on top of things. I thought there was a 2nd goal for us out there and was surprised we made the changes when we did. We certainly lost our rhythm. . |
Actually thought it was an ideal game for Jackson to come on for either Harness or Burns. There was a lot of space opening up and they were leaving players one on one. The changes totally blunted us going forward without really making us more solid. | |
| |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:41 - Jan 15 with 1201 views | clive_baker |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:37 - Jan 15 by Herbivore |
Actually thought it was an ideal game for Jackson to come on for either Harness or Burns. There was a lot of space opening up and they were leaving players one on one. The changes totally blunted us going forward without really making us more solid. |
I don’t particularly rate Jackson but him on for Burns was the obvious choice to me, give them something to think about on the counter attack. They had made some very attacking changes and by bringing on KVY it felt like we were resigning ourselves to trying to see out the final 10 rather than kill the game. | |
| |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:46 - Jan 15 with 1174 views | Mach_foreignBlue |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:35 - Jan 15 by clive_baker |
I think the changes came too early. Yesterday at half time I would’ve been ok with it, but 15 minutes into the 2nd half we’re 1 - 0 up and starting to get on top of things. I thought there was a 2nd goal for us out there and was surprised we made the changes when we did. We certainly lost our rhythm. . |
Hirst on his own upfront was unfathomable and stupid as he had played very little prior to joining us.
And it showed yesterday as he wasn't a threat to their defenders.
Tactical tweaks ought to be done too but McKenna seems stubborn with only one system. |  | | |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:57 - Jan 15 with 1147 views | Rozz |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:33 - Jan 15 by Herbivore |
They weren't like for like though. KVY is a full back and he replaced Burns who plays a primarily attacking role in our system. Humphreys replaced Harness which led to Morsy playing as an inside forward for the last 15 minutes. We kept the same shape but the changes in personnel blunted our attacking threat and invited pressure. |
No problem with KVY for Burns at that stage for me, he can play wingback and will inherently be a bit more solid. IIRC that change was much later. The only one I queried like you say was Morsy moving into the left inside forward role - he was basically there to stop Mumba breakaways. He actually performed that task very well, but we lost some threat because of it.
Agree re others' sentiments on Jackson - I said it in the first half they were pressing so high and leaving huge space in behind. I didn't expect it to be, but it would have been an ideal game for him the way it played out.
Disagree entirely on others' sentiments on Hirst. Thought he had a better touch than Ladapo, more goal intent with his movement and will be a good player for us. I certainly didn't think he offered any less.
More importantly though, I think a lot of what's being said about our subs is ignoring the fact there were two teams involved. Schumacher overloaded with the Azaz / Cosgrove switch taking off Wilson, and it worked. We looked panicked in our out-balls and it advanced them further up the pitch without us being able to capitalise on any man advantage on the break. We ended up dropping deep and the gamble paid off for them.
A disappointing end but a fair result and a good battle between the 2 best young managers in the division (IMO). [Post edited 15 Jan 2023 9:59]
|  | | |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 10:01 - Jan 15 with 1132 views | mr_bean |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 23:55 - Jan 14 by DinnernotTea |
Pathetic. At 1-0 they were firmly on the ropes. But we never made any changes to make it 2-0.
Bottom line is, other than Derby at home we haven't done anything in this league this season. Which is why we're 5 & 7 adrift. |
I agree with you on the first point.
At 1-0, our best chance of taking all three points would have been to press for a second goal. It looked to me like we were more preoccupied with trying to defend the one-goal lead instead though, and we all know that our defence can't be fully trusted to do that. That emphasis on sitting back is most definitely on McKenna. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 10:06 - Jan 15 with 1111 views | Herbivore |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:57 - Jan 15 by Rozz |
No problem with KVY for Burns at that stage for me, he can play wingback and will inherently be a bit more solid. IIRC that change was much later. The only one I queried like you say was Morsy moving into the left inside forward role - he was basically there to stop Mumba breakaways. He actually performed that task very well, but we lost some threat because of it.
Agree re others' sentiments on Jackson - I said it in the first half they were pressing so high and leaving huge space in behind. I didn't expect it to be, but it would have been an ideal game for him the way it played out.
Disagree entirely on others' sentiments on Hirst. Thought he had a better touch than Ladapo, more goal intent with his movement and will be a good player for us. I certainly didn't think he offered any less.
More importantly though, I think a lot of what's being said about our subs is ignoring the fact there were two teams involved. Schumacher overloaded with the Azaz / Cosgrove switch taking off Wilson, and it worked. We looked panicked in our out-balls and it advanced them further up the pitch without us being able to capitalise on any man advantage on the break. We ended up dropping deep and the gamble paid off for them.
A disappointing end but a fair result and a good battle between the 2 best young managers in the division (IMO). [Post edited 15 Jan 2023 9:59]
|
Burns isn't really a wing back this season though, much more of a wide forward in our system. The lack of outlet late in the game was partly because KVY is less inclined to play high up the pitch and doesn't necessarily have the pace to threaten on the counter in the way Burns does. I'd have preferred to see Jackson on to give us more of a threat on the break, and he's shown he can do his bit defensively playing wide right as well. It felt like we tried to keep the same system but in making two defensive changes the system was no longer really functional. That said, Plymouth didn't really look like scoring up until they did and that's a bigger issue, teams don't need to especially put us under much pressure to get a goal against us. Thought a few players didn't do enough to close Mumba down for their goal. | |
| |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 10:10 - Jan 15 with 1089 views | strikalite |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 17:03 - Jan 14 by Guthrum |
I would have said the long Plymouth injury break was more damaging. We were pushing, on the front foot. Then all the momentum went.
Edit: Plus some of the changes were forced. [Post edited 14 Jan 2023 17:04]
|
Yep it came at a good time for them, whilst the player was down I was telling myself that this will come back to bite us, as soon as the board went up you could hear the crowd whisper "9 minutes".... |  | | |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 10:26 - Jan 15 with 1065 views | Rozz |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 10:06 - Jan 15 by Herbivore |
Burns isn't really a wing back this season though, much more of a wide forward in our system. The lack of outlet late in the game was partly because KVY is less inclined to play high up the pitch and doesn't necessarily have the pace to threaten on the counter in the way Burns does. I'd have preferred to see Jackson on to give us more of a threat on the break, and he's shown he can do his bit defensively playing wide right as well. It felt like we tried to keep the same system but in making two defensive changes the system was no longer really functional. That said, Plymouth didn't really look like scoring up until they did and that's a bigger issue, teams don't need to especially put us under much pressure to get a goal against us. Thought a few players didn't do enough to close Mumba down for their goal. |
I take your point, I think KVY has plenty of pace to burn though and he did get in and deliver a cut-back just away from Hirst. As I said before I would've liked Jackson on too (much earlier), but on 87 mins I don't really begrudge that decision.
Agree re your last section, it should have been absolute number 1 priority to show them into the channels and not allow them any shooting opportunities. A bit of inexperience maybe from Cam. Mumba looks some player, though.
Even after all that we did still get a block on it, and it's landed inch perfect top corner. It was always going to be fine margins! | | | |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 10:38 - Jan 15 with 1050 views | pointofblue |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 10:06 - Jan 15 by Herbivore |
Burns isn't really a wing back this season though, much more of a wide forward in our system. The lack of outlet late in the game was partly because KVY is less inclined to play high up the pitch and doesn't necessarily have the pace to threaten on the counter in the way Burns does. I'd have preferred to see Jackson on to give us more of a threat on the break, and he's shown he can do his bit defensively playing wide right as well. It felt like we tried to keep the same system but in making two defensive changes the system was no longer really functional. That said, Plymouth didn't really look like scoring up until they did and that's a bigger issue, teams don't need to especially put us under much pressure to get a goal against us. Thought a few players didn't do enough to close Mumba down for their goal. |
After KVY came on, we set up to defend a Plymouth goal kick at 1-0 and it looked like we were playing 5-2-3.
Walton
KVY - Donacien - Woolfenden - Burgess - Davis
Evans - Humphreys
Chaplin - Hirst - Morsy
It was utterly bizarre and lacked any logic whatsoever. I didn’t necessarily mind Humphreys coming on at the time as I thought we were going to try and flood the middle. I didn’t necessarily mind KVY coming on as I thought he was going to play a wing back role. Neither happened. | |
| |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 11:22 - Jan 15 with 1015 views | wrightsrightglove |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 09:37 - Jan 15 by Herbivore |
Actually thought it was an ideal game for Jackson to come on for either Harness or Burns. There was a lot of space opening up and they were leaving players one on one. The changes totally blunted us going forward without really making us more solid. |
Agree with this. Jackson or Edwards on for Burns and we win that game. Two players who would force their wing backs to have to be far more cautious going forwards. Mumba doesn’t get into that scoring position if we’re set up to actually attack them rather than just sitting back and trying to defend the lead. | | | |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 11:25 - Jan 15 with 1004 views | pointofblue |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 11:22 - Jan 15 by wrightsrightglove |
Agree with this. Jackson or Edwards on for Burns and we win that game. Two players who would force their wing backs to have to be far more cautious going forwards. Mumba doesn’t get into that scoring position if we’re set up to actually attack them rather than just sitting back and trying to defend the lead. |
I wouldn’t have any issue with shoring up either. As excellently put further up, the issue is the changes blunted or attack and weakened us defensively. It was a shambles which we almost got away with. But, even if we had, I wouldn’t be sitting here thinking McKenna was a tactical genius for those decisions. | |
| |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 11:31 - Jan 15 with 990 views | wrightsrightglove |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 11:25 - Jan 15 by pointofblue |
I wouldn’t have any issue with shoring up either. As excellently put further up, the issue is the changes blunted or attack and weakened us defensively. It was a shambles which we almost got away with. But, even if we had, I wouldn’t be sitting here thinking McKenna was a tactical genius for those decisions. |
As is so often the case, attack is the best form of defence. There’s teams in this league who can sit back and defend for their lives for hours on end and are incredibly difficult to break down, we’re not one of those teams, we’re not set up for it and don’t have the players to do it. What we do have is speed and quality on our bench to make them think twice about bombing forwards, to hold back their attacking play a bit. It’s a mistake that seems to be being made time and time again and it never gets us anywhere. When KVY came on a few people around me shared the glances knowing exactly what was going to happen. And then people wonder why the crowd is edgy during games! | | | |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 11:40 - Jan 15 with 953 views | Rozz |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 11:31 - Jan 15 by wrightsrightglove |
As is so often the case, attack is the best form of defence. There’s teams in this league who can sit back and defend for their lives for hours on end and are incredibly difficult to break down, we’re not one of those teams, we’re not set up for it and don’t have the players to do it. What we do have is speed and quality on our bench to make them think twice about bombing forwards, to hold back their attacking play a bit. It’s a mistake that seems to be being made time and time again and it never gets us anywhere. When KVY came on a few people around me shared the glances knowing exactly what was going to happen. And then people wonder why the crowd is edgy during games! |
Plymouth had taken off a centre back and added a striker. This was a must not lose game for them, so while I agree in principle I'm not sure it would have stopped them pressing forward.
Same argument with Morsy - he was never going to offer any threat on the break against Mumba in the closing stages. [Post edited 15 Jan 2023 11:41]
| | | |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 11:49 - Jan 15 with 933 views | cressi |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 23:22 - Jan 14 by Ely_Blue |
He did more in 30 minutes than Ladapo did in 67? He won more headers and got himself into better positions, chased back, he jumped for a header which is something Ladapo NEVER does |
Personally thought Hirst looked what he is unfit through lack of game time , he needs games maybe a couple behind closed doors can't play him to get it or we will lag further behind im no Jackson fan but would have put on for Burns not KVY don't think the subs had a positive effect on the game. | | | |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 11:50 - Jan 15 with 930 views | pointofblue |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 11:40 - Jan 15 by Rozz |
Plymouth had taken off a centre back and added a striker. This was a must not lose game for them, so while I agree in principle I'm not sure it would have stopped them pressing forward.
Same argument with Morsy - he was never going to offer any threat on the break against Mumba in the closing stages. [Post edited 15 Jan 2023 11:41]
|
Exactly. So why move Morsy to an attacking position on the left and introduce Humphreys? Why not Edwards or Jackson to try and push him back? | |
| |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 19:18 - Jan 15 with 815 views | billlm |
When harness went off there was no outlet wide left and they then over ran us down that side,
That wasn't a great substitution, |  | | |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 19:49 - Jan 15 with 788 views | braveblue |
| That is all on McKenna - tactically those changes were awful on 17:06 - Jan 14 by coote |
Agree.
Ladapo should never have been withdrawn. |
Ladapo was really poor. Hirst showed some good touches. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
