what did you guys think of kelly in goal last night
He is confident with the ball at his feet, far better than Lumley in this regard.
He didn't have a real save to make and could do absolutely nothing with any of the goals. The first 2 were a shambles in front of him and put in from a yard out, the 3rd hit the ground and could have gone anywhere, no keeper in the world could have reacted to that. He will definitely need another few games where he is tested in open play before we can really judge him.
I think it’s a big statement from warburton That he will drop you if you underperform McClaren didn’t have the bottle to do it and stuck with lynch and co
I disagree with this. We aren't really wide open at the back, we are just defending pathetically at times. Last night the first 2 goals were set pieces, on Saturday the first was a goalkeeping error, the second a free kick. Against Luton the first was Lumley passing the ball to the striker. We were wide open for the 3rd last night as we chased the game but overall 6 of the last 8 goals conceded were completely avoidable and not due to the way we are set up.
We aren't wide open, we are just incredibly naive at times and making a lot of individual errors.
Yes it is more to do with naivety than being wide open, although it does not matter in some ways which as we still lost! I have to consider whether we have the right people involved in coaching the defending, especially from set pieces and corners as these are mistakes repeating themselves. You do get the impression at times that nobody knows who should be picking up extra players appearing in the box or near the corner-kicker. Kelly's game was OK last night and, in all honesty, Scowen did well when he came in too; but the worrying element is we could not convert over 70% possession into goals. Is it the 4-2-3-1 formation that makes it more difficult? Again, Chair was great and so was Ball; and Eze had a better game than Saturday - but we still could not convert half-chances into goals. I always reckon 5 crosses or threaded passes equals one goal, so perhaps we were a little unlucky but we should make our own luck! I would also add that, unlike Saturday's game against WBA, the opposition last night was one that our passing game should have been suited towards beating. That we could not is worrying!
There has been stick in the media today of Hugill, but I would mention that he was the one heading out from our goal area when defending and that he got poor service once again.
We’ve let in 17 goals in 10 games That is not good enough and teams now know we have fragile handle with care written on our defence Set pieces we seem clueless at the moment You can go on time and time again but will it get sorted soon Probably not
We’ve let in 17 goals in 10 games That is not good enough and teams now know we have fragile handle with care written on our defence Set pieces we seem clueless at the moment You can go on time and time again but will it get sorted soon Probably not
Agree it is not good enough and I really hope they sort it out too! Having Hall, Masterson & Wallace fit will give us options, although the lack of pace of the CBs who have played this season is always going to be a concern....
Possession counts for nothing when you can't defend and are not clinical.
Warburton should take a lot of the critiscm for last night's defeat because he chose a central defender who cant defend for toffee and continues to include a striker who would make a better rugby player. Why does he also continue to play a 4 man defence that just does not work.
If Warburton dropped Lumley for 2.5 mistakes how does Hugill still get in the team. Yes, he had his purple patch at the start of the season and scored 5 goals but I suspect it even surprised him because he has never been a regular goalscorer. Not sure why Warburton thinks he can turn Hugill into a goalscorer when so many other managers have tried and failed.
After seeing Cameron get the run around against WBA on Saturday when playing a 4 man defence why does Warburton then play the same formation and play him in the same position again? Part of the reason Stoke sent him out on loan was because he isnt a central defender and they had enough central midfielders. Surely if you are going to pick Cameron as a CD then you have to play him alongside Leistner and Wallace. If a now fit Wallace couldn't get picked for this game then he has no chance of ever getting in the team.
Eze, Chair and BOS stood out in a mediocre team and they must despair that the chances they create are wasted.
Mr. Warburton please tell me why you persist with these things,
Playing a 4 man defence
Choosing Jordon Hugill
Choosing Geoff Cameron as a Central Defender
They do not work and I refer you yet again to Albert Einstein who said, the definition of insanity is,
"doing something over and over again and expecting a different result"
I take it hugill is not on your Xmas card list then But agree with everything you’ve said to be fair
There are scenarios and if we lose on Saturday which is possible with our fragile defence do we start to question our players or warburton Could this be a start of losing run now which I hope it isn’t but last night we were beaten easily in the end,we were roughed up by the billy boys a few times and then they sat back and watched us run around like headless chickens Even Warnock probably couldn’t believe his luck
I'm not disagreeing with your critique of the players stoatey but on Saturday he played a back 3 and last night reverted to 4-2-3-1. Cameron was on the right of a back 3 on Saturday and then playing left side of a central 2 last night.
Cameron is definitely better in midfield and Hugill is very much a confidence player and when he slips out of the goals it seems to have a big impact on his game
I'm not disagreeing with your critique of the players stoatey but on Saturday he played a back 3 and last night reverted to 4-2-3-1. Cameron was on the right of a back 3 on Saturday and then playing left side of a central 2 last night.
Cameron is definitely better in midfield and Hugill is very much a confidence player and when he slips out of the goals it seems to have a big impact on his game
I would also add that Hugill, like most number nines operates best with a second striker. I am not excusing his poor finishing (I mentioned this when I saw the warm-up at the Luton game), but I do feel he works best confusing CBs and close interaction with other attackers; and I would suggest (no proof) that having a second striker allows more space for the likes of Eze & Chair to become more dangerous? Having Hugill and Wells up front works best for the current set-up.
I'm not disagreeing with your critique of the players stoatey but on Saturday he played a back 3
Yep, I agree that he started with 5-3-2 but he saw how poor Cameron was as a central defender and switched to 4-4-2 which allowed him to bring on BOS and amove Cameron into a central midfield pairing with Dom Ball before changing to 4-2-3-1 when bringing on Pugh.
IMO moving to the 4 man defence was asking for trouble. In previous games when playing just 2 central defenders we have seen Barbet give away penalties because he gets exposed. Against WBA we might have been 1 -0 down but changing to a 4 man defence and having just 2 central defenders was suicidal. We didnt pass the ball to BOS and invited even more pressure and as a result Barbet gets sent off.
Having seen how poor Cameron was as a CD against WBA he then compounds the error by playing him there again against Cardiff only this time on the left in a back 4. Surely Wallace was the right man to play in that left sided role.
I have to consider whether we have the right people involved in coaching the defending, especially from set pieces and corners as these are mistakes repeating themselves. You do get the impression at times that nobody knows who should be picking up extra players appearing in the box or near the corner-kicker. Kelly's game was OK last night and, in all honesty, Scowen did well when he came in too; but the worrying element is we could not convert over 70% possession into goals. Is it the 4-2-3-1 formation that makes it more difficult? Again, Chair was great and so was Ball; and Eze had a better game than Saturday - but we still could not convert half-chances into goals. I always reckon 5 crosses or threaded passes equals one goal, so perhaps we were a little unlucky but we should make our own luck! I would also add that, unlike Saturday's game against WBA, the opposition last night was one that our passing game should have been suited towards beating. That we could not is worrying!
