| It just looks a bit naive 17:05 - Oct 2 with 2033 views | gordon |
The idea that you can go away to a team like Accrington with three players - Fraser, Celina and Evans - providing very little physical presence and not doing much dirty work and offering limited work-rate, and you'll just win by virtue of having better quality players isn't really much good for me.
To me, a lot of the players we've signed in midfield and attack (except probably Morsy, Bonne and Burns, maybe Harper and Aluko) just don't look like they've got the work-rate and physical presence for games like that.
|  | | |  |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:07 - Oct 2 with 1989 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
If you have a defined way of playing, you should be able to go to Accrington Stanley and win without altering your approach. |  |
| |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:09 - Oct 2 with 1961 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:07 - Oct 2 by Marshalls_Mullet |
If you have a defined way of playing, you should be able to go to Accrington Stanley and win without altering your approach. |
That's Cook's philosophy.
I am not convinced by it. The evidence doesn't stack up at the moment. |  |
| |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:12 - Oct 2 with 1910 views | urbanblue |
The game bypassed them though. The ball was in the air all the time against a team of giants. That plus a whistle happy referee who blew up continually for any physicality.
The players were working hard enough but we had no alternative game plan and played right into Accrington's hands. [Post edited 2 Oct 2021 17:20]
|  | | |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:13 - Oct 2 with 1856 views | gordon |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:07 - Oct 2 by Marshalls_Mullet |
If you have a defined way of playing, you should be able to go to Accrington Stanley and win without altering your approach. |
My point is just that that we're going to struggle a lot with that approach against fit, physical, big teams away from home. [Post edited 2 Oct 2021 17:14]
| | | |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:18 - Oct 2 with 1797 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:12 - Oct 2 by urbanblue |
The game bypassed them though. The ball was in the air all the time against a team of giants. That plus a whistle happy referee who blew up continually for any physicality.
The players were working hard enough but we had no alternative game plan and played right into Accrington's hands. [Post edited 2 Oct 2021 17:20]
|
If the referee is blowing up for any physicality, doesn't that play into the hands of the less physical side? | |
| |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:20 - Oct 2 with 1768 views | Garv |
You can't help but feel we need to change our approach away from home somewhat. Sounded similar to Cheltenham, where we sleep walked into a defeat.
I'd have been quite happy to see Bonne and Norwood up top today in a 4-4-2 and see us going more direct. |  |
| |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:21 - Oct 2 with 1753 views | Herbivore |
We've got carried away building a side that could potentially compete in the Championship and have forgotten that to get there we need a team capable of getting out of League 1 first. The way Cheltenham muscled us out of the game and the way Accrington seem to have done similar today is really concerning. We have to pick up results from many of these types of games and we look to have no clue how to do so. |  |
| |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:27 - Oct 2 with 1689 views | urbanblue |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:18 - Oct 2 by Nthsuffolkblue |
If the referee is blowing up for any physicality, doesn't that play into the hands of the less physical side? |
The side that is the most physical isn't the one necessarily committing the most fouls. That referee was appalling. Blew up for every little nudge and nip. Result was the game was continually stop start and played right into their hands as we never got going.
On saying that we were once again bullied into losing. A story we gave seen so many times. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:28 - Oct 2 with 1669 views | urbanblue |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:21 - Oct 2 by Herbivore |
We've got carried away building a side that could potentially compete in the Championship and have forgotten that to get there we need a team capable of getting out of League 1 first. The way Cheltenham muscled us out of the game and the way Accrington seem to have done similar today is really concerning. We have to pick up results from many of these types of games and we look to have no clue how to do so. |
Spot on. | | | |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:29 - Oct 2 with 1667 views | Meadowlark |
I think that has been the case in most of our matches. We "might" have tightened up defensively ie along the back, but defence starts up front and continues through midfield. It's simple really. Don't give the ball away and if you do close down the opposition and stop them playing. We don't do this at all. |  | | |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:35 - Oct 2 with 1584 views | chicoazul |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:21 - Oct 2 by Herbivore |
We've got carried away building a side that could potentially compete in the Championship and have forgotten that to get there we need a team capable of getting out of League 1 first. The way Cheltenham muscled us out of the game and the way Accrington seem to have done similar today is really concerning. We have to pick up results from many of these types of games and we look to have no clue how to do so. |
I think there’s a lot in this. |  |
| |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:53 - Oct 2 with 1519 views | gordon |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:35 - Oct 2 by chicoazul |
I think there’s a lot in this. |
Definitely agree with this too - we've got an awful lot of luxury players in that squad, and not enough players that do the boring bits. | | | |
| It just looks a bit naive on 18:05 - Oct 2 with 1472 views | mr_bean |
What you're saying makes sense.
The trouble is, having won 6-0 on Tuesday night, he was never going to change the line-up today. |  | | |
| It just looks a bit naive on 18:55 - Oct 2 with 1361 views | rfretwell |
| It just looks a bit naive on 18:05 - Oct 2 by mr_bean |
What you're saying makes sense.
The trouble is, having won 6-0 on Tuesday night, he was never going to change the line-up today. |
Chief culprit for giving he ball away was Burgess. Time and time again his long balls forward failed to find a blue shirt. The AS were away again. | | | |
| It just looks a bit naive on 19:03 - Oct 2 with 1326 views | jayessess |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:21 - Oct 2 by Herbivore |
We've got carried away building a side that could potentially compete in the Championship and have forgotten that to get there we need a team capable of getting out of League 1 first. The way Cheltenham muscled us out of the game and the way Accrington seem to have done similar today is really concerning. We have to pick up results from many of these types of games and we look to have no clue how to do so. |
Not convinced by that. The Championship is just as physically punishing as League One is, if not more so. If we are physically a pushover at this level, we're certainly going to be physically a pushover at the level above.
FWIW I think we've got a lot of physically strong players along the spine of our team - Donacien, Edmundson, Burgess, Morsy, Bonne, are all strong enough. Accrington have dominated us by pressing very high and preventing us from playing through them. We've not found a way to play in spite of that and that's been an ongoing problem for us. But that's a tactical problem not a strength one for me. |  |
| |
| It just looks a bit naive on 19:16 - Oct 2 with 1289 views | gordon |
| It just looks a bit naive on 19:03 - Oct 2 by jayessess |
Not convinced by that. The Championship is just as physically punishing as League One is, if not more so. If we are physically a pushover at this level, we're certainly going to be physically a pushover at the level above.
FWIW I think we've got a lot of physically strong players along the spine of our team - Donacien, Edmundson, Burgess, Morsy, Bonne, are all strong enough. Accrington have dominated us by pressing very high and preventing us from playing through them. We've not found a way to play in spite of that and that's been an ongoing problem for us. But that's a tactical problem not a strength one for me. |
Think it's a bit of both - we're really lacking in drive, energy and work-rate in the middle of the pitch aside from Morsy, but we're also lopsided tactically - there's no point in having Celina and Fraser both drifting around in pockets of space between defenders etc. if we're not able to get on the ball facing forwards in the middle of the pitch.
If we had gone into that game with a (hypothetical) midfield 3 of Morsy, Downes and Nolan (at his best) we'd have plenty of bite, energy and composure, and we'd stand more of a chance of getting our attacking players on the ball (albeit there'd be one less of them). [Post edited 2 Oct 2021 19:17]
| | | |
| It just looks a bit naive on 19:44 - Oct 2 with 1199 views | Sharkey |
When you play against Harry Pell, you have to make sure he gets booked in the first half. He’ll usually oblige.
If he doesn’t get that yellow, he’ll make sure you suffer later . |  | | |
| It just looks a bit naive on 20:06 - Oct 2 with 1131 views | chrismakin |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:07 - Oct 2 by Marshalls_Mullet |
If you have a defined way of playing, you should be able to go to Accrington Stanley and win without altering your approach. |
Not true
Go back to Burley years and we saw various forms of individual players chosen depending on fixture. Someones uptop we saw Johno with naylor, sometimes with scowy,
We sometimes had a more physical midfield, sometimes a bit more agile.
We had 5 in midfied some games, sometimes 3
we had 4, 5 or even 3 at the back
It changed to be the best we could be for that game |  |
| |
| It just looks a bit naive on 20:11 - Oct 2 with 1101 views | Beckets |
| It just looks a bit naive on 20:06 - Oct 2 by chrismakin |
Not true
Go back to Burley years and we saw various forms of individual players chosen depending on fixture. Someones uptop we saw Johno with naylor, sometimes with scowy,
We sometimes had a more physical midfield, sometimes a bit more agile.
We had 5 in midfied some games, sometimes 3
we had 4, 5 or even 3 at the back
It changed to be the best we could be for that game |
Spot on. And that’s why Burley managed in the Premier League and Cook never will I’m afraid. |  | | |
| It just looks a bit naive on 20:18 - Oct 2 with 1053 views | pennblue |
| It just looks a bit naive on 17:20 - Oct 2 by Garv |
You can't help but feel we need to change our approach away from home somewhat. Sounded similar to Cheltenham, where we sleep walked into a defeat.
I'd have been quite happy to see Bonne and Norwood up top today in a 4-4-2 and see us going more direct. |
When it is not working for us (like today), I would like to see us switch to a counter attacking style of play, or, as you suggest, switching to a 442.
We need a Plan B and C. | |
| |
| It just looks a bit naive on 23:42 - Oct 2 with 841 views | quad |
| It just looks a bit naive on 19:44 - Oct 2 by Sharkey |
When you play against Harry Pell, you have to make sure he gets booked in the first half. He’ll usually oblige.
If he doesn’t get that yellow, he’ll make sure you suffer later . |
If Harry Pell is a major threat then we've got serious problems. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
