How many tactical mistakes is Adkins allowed?

[hypochondriac]

I simply think its rather telling that we haven't really seen him up front in his natural position yet; as least not in the league. The Man City game was especially bizarre; dropping Rickie and moving Guly up front on his own in order to accommodate Rodriguez out wide. That, and constantly playing him out wide since, suggests to me that the management don't think he's at all ready to do a job up front yet. Which, being the case, would seem to leave us (still after a couple of years) without a true replacement for Lambert should he be injured.

 

Perhaps I'm wrong, and Rodriguez will shine if he's given the chance up top. Until that happens I'll remain entirely sceptical of his transfer though; at least for where we are as a side right now.

 

Seems slightly unfair then because he scored twice in the cup when played up top

[Matty's Caddy]

Op.... Do give it a rest

[The Kraken]

Seems slightly unfair then because he scored twice in the cup when played up top

 

Against a Championship side, yes.

 

I've got no doubt the longer term plan is for him to replace RL, and he'll be being developed for that. My "problem" per se is not with that; simply that for a side of our nature I don't see the inherent value of spending as much as we did for that, whilst also neglecting/failing in other more vital targetted areas.

[charliemiller]

Can you explain what formation he should have started with yesterday? I keep seeing it trotted out that he got it wrong yesterday, but not one poster who has criticized it has given a valid alternative.

 

Puncheon has had a knock all week, so has Mayuka, Morgan was out. What we started with was the best we could have put out in a tweaked formation.

 

If you know that the team you are playing is strongest down the wings with partnerships like Baines and Peinnar would you send out a formation that is narrow and wont offer any cover to the full backs on width ???

 

Didnt think so , so why did NA ?

[RobM]

Against a Championship side, yes.

 

I've got no doubt the longer term plan is for him to replace RL, and he'll be being developed for that. My "problem" per se is not with that; simply that for a side of our nature I don't see the inherent value of spending as much as we did for that, whilst also neglecting/failing in other more vital targetted areas.

 

If it was really at the expense of other areas, I would agree. But there is nothing to suggest the reason we didn't buy more defensive players was we had blown our budget on JRod, especially since he was bought early on and spending went up massively.

 

I think young, English forwards will get even more expensive over the next year or so, to crazy levels. If he can keep patient and be happy with the chances he will get, I think it could be a wise long-term move. But I also think he would do a decent enough job today, if given a regular starting spot up-front.

[Dig Dig]

Against a Championship side, yes.

 

I've got no doubt the longer term plan is for him to replace RL, and he'll be being developed for that. My "problem" per se is not with that; simply that for a side of our nature I don't see the inherent value of spending as much as we did for that, whilst also neglecting/failing in other more vital targetted areas.

 

The only potential point to your argument is that signing Rodriguez somehow hindered or prevented us from strengthening in other areas. I don't personally think the link is relevant.

 

If Lambert was to get injured for a period of time, the value of having someone like Jay would become very apparent.

[Dig Dig]

If you know that the team you are playing is strongest down the wings with partnerships like Baines and Peinnar would you send out a formation that is narrow and wont offer any cover to the full backs on width ???

 

Didnt think so , so why did NA ?

 

How many of the goals we conceded came from Baines and Piennar?

[charliemiller]

How many of the goals we conceded came from Baines and Piennar?

 

In the period that they were slaughtering us morieles and piennar were constantly coming forward virtually unchallenged and there were overlaps constantly available for them because they were getting 2 on one onto our full backs ...they were dominanting he dame because we were too narrow . Second half NA changed it

[redder freak]

With my best hindsight glasses on, how about this:

 

Gazza

Richardson, Fonte, Jos, Clyne

 

Davis, Yoshida,

 

Chaplow, Ramirez, Lallana,

 

Lambert

 

Bit more balance, a bit more defensive-minded, and players playing in positions they are comfortable in (Yoshida was a defensive midfielder originally).

 

I feel really sorry for Rodriguez, continually being asked to play out of position, and taking pelters when he doesn't play well.

 

This looks interesting to me, especially for an away game. In his post-match interview I seem to remember that Yoshida was critical of the midfield on Saturday.

[The Kraken]

The only potential point to your argument is that signing Rodriguez somehow hindered or prevented us from strengthening in other areas. I don't personally think the link is relevant.

 

If Lambert was to get injured for a period of time, the value of having someone like Jay would become very apparent.

 

Well I disagree. You only have to look at the sums spent on Ramirez and Rodriguez and compare that with the sums spent on defenders to realise where we prioritised big money signings. Rodriguez was a capture that we'd been clearly following for some time before we got him early in the summer, so he was high up in our priorities.

 

Did it hinder other captures? I have no idea. However, one of our priority signings is a reserve striker, and (by the manager's own comments) we didn't fill other areas in defence fully, with Yoshida only coming in once the season had gotten underway. It may be hindsight, but if we could have targetted JRod for so long and snapped him up with a very large transfer fee, could we not have done the same for a brilliant centre back? Because, as decent as Yoshida looks, there are still many concerns about our strength at CB.

 

Its not about whether Rodriguez' transfer hindered other incoming players, so you're missing the point. Its whether that diversion of effort and funds could/would have been better served on other areas of the team. Its an entirely subjective viewpoint but mine is that it could.

[Dig Dig]

Well I disagree. You only have to look at the sums spent on Ramirez and Rodriguez and compare that with the sums spent on defenders to realise where we prioritised big money signings. Rodriguez was a capture that we'd been clearly following for some time before we got him early in the summer, so he was high up in our priorities.

 

Did it hinder other captures? I have no idea. However, one of our priority signings is a reserve striker, and (by the manager's own comments) we didn't fill other areas in defence fully, with Yoshida only coming in once the season had gotten underway. It may be hindsight, but if we could have targetted JRod for so long and snapped him up with a very large transfer fee, could we not have done the same for a brilliant centre back? Because, as decent as Yoshida looks, there are still many concerns about our strength at CB.

 

Its not about whether Rodriguez' transfer hindered other incoming players, so you're missing the point. Its whether that diversion of effort and funds could/would have been better served on other areas of the team. Its an entirely subjective viewpoint but mine is that it could.

 

So what would our options look like if Lambert got injured, needed a rest or lost form? You call Rodriguez a reserve striker when competition would be a better way of looking at it in my book. Lambert has never had any competion in his time here and something which was always complained about on here whenever we were without him.

 

Also, Adkins said he wanted maybe 2 CB's of which we got 1 in yoshida who looks a very good player and is a leader. I havent seen all these comments from Adkins which you always seem to use to justify your argument here. Where are they because I'm struggling to recall anything Adkins has said which would indicate he's not happy with our summer signings?

[The Kraken]

So what would our options look like if Lambert got injured, needed a rest or lost form? You call Rodriguez a reserve striker when competition would be a better way of looking at it in my book. Lambert has never had any competion in his time here and something which was always complained about on here whenever we were without him.

 

Also, Adkins said he wanted maybe 2 CB's of which we got 1 in yoshida who looks a very good player and is a leader. I havent seen all these comments from Adkins which you always seem to use to justify your argument here. Where are they because I'm struggling to recall anything Adkins has said which would indicate he's not happy with our summer signings?

 

NA consistently said one or two CBs, and we got one. We also very clearly wanted a left back and didn't get one. Simply from that.

 

If you want to call Rodriguez "competition" then I shan't argue; nevertheless it is my opinion (and do please note that's all I'm saying it is, I'm not saying I'm right or that you're wrong) that we would have been better served prioritising getting in two CBs and a quality LB rather than enhancing our attacking options with another striker. Even with Yoshida we only really have 3 likely first team CBs, and as comments on here will testify that's perhaps one short.

[saint1977]

I think he needs help from someone like Keown, Winterburn or Pallister, as Pilchards has suggested on another thread. Playing both Ramirez and Lallana away at Everton in the form they are in was foolish in the extreme, then compounded further by selecting S Davis and JWP, two more talented but lightweight players (although JWP will develop into a fine player in the Carrick mould IMO). No wonder the back 4 came under so much pressure, I know Morgan was missing and Chaplow can give the ball away but the latter should have been an automatic pick for yesterday, it's just common sense.

 

We all love Nigel but yesterday was suicide tactically and I don't think Wilkins or Crosby have the top flight experience to help him out of the hole he's digging or are able to sufficiently challenge some of the naive decisions he's making. I think the extra know-how would help Nigel bed in to this level as he is looking as bewildered as Kelvin was at the Emirates and a fresh training ground voice might perk the concentration levels up a bit. We're in a relegation battle and more of the decision-making needs to reflect this. I think Ramirez and Lallana are too much of a luxury away from home so I'd go with Ramirez as he's a bit more robust physically. Lallana will do more damage in the home games but his tracking back was abymsal yesterday, not least on the third goal. Likewise, I'd play J Rod up front in away games and save Rickie for the home ones.

[Wade Garrett]

I think he needs help from someone like Keown, Winterburn or Pallister, as Pilchards has suggested on another thread. Playing both Ramirez and Lallana away at Everton in the form they are in was foolish in the extreme, then compounded further by selecting S Davis and JWP, two more talented but lightweight players (although JWP will develop into a fine player in the Carrick mould IMO). No wonder the back 4 came under so much pressure, I know Morgan was missing and Chaplow can give the ball away but the latter should have been an automatic pick for yesterday, it's just common sense.

 

We all love Nigel but yesterday was suicide tactically and I don't think Wilkins or Crosby have the top flight experience to help him out of the hole he's digging or are able to sufficiently challenge some of the naive decisions he's making. I think the extra know-how would help Nigel bed in to this level as he is looking as bewildered as Kelvin was at the Emirates and a fresh training ground voice might perk the concentration levels up a bit. We're in a relegation battle and more of the decision-making needs to reflect this. I think Ramirez and Lallana are too much of a luxury away from home so I'd go with Ramirez as he's a bit more robust physically. Lallana will do more damage in the home games but his tracking back was abymsal yesterday, not least on the third goal. Likewise, I'd play J Rod up front in away games and save Rickie for the home ones.

 

Anyone from that Arsenal back line back in the day would do us very nicely.

 

However, at this moment in time it could be construed as undermining the manager.

[ottery st mary]

We have some right tools on here.

 

In the end of the day, Morgan is massively important to how we play. His loss was a massive factor.

 

Gazza's potential showed with a couple of finger tip worldies but his inexperience also showed with their second and third goals.

 

So when Boruc is fit, you'ld expect those goals to be saved. Add to this the lambert header, Jrod one on one and Ramirez flick over keeper, we could easily have had another 3 goals...

 

So swings and roundabouts, it didn't fall for us this game! We are a young, inexperienced team in transition, but CRUCIALLY we are showing enough to suggest we will score goals, and even though we're conceding them, you can see the light and its obvious the corrections, that need making.

 

Adkins is too good a manager not to see where needs work, if we can I'm sure he can! The thing that gives me most confidence is, the way we are playing, we do not fit the billing for a hopeless team which will get relegated.

 

Need a good solid ten games to settle.

There is massive hope.

 

 

This for me....

Saved me the effort ..

 

Things will get better.. Gazza made some good saves but inexperience/positional allowed 2 goals.

 

Still a mid table team this year..

 

COYS:)

[Dig Dig]

NA consistently said one or two CBs, and we got one. We also very clearly wanted a left back and didn't get one. Simply from that.

 

If you want to call Rodriguez "competition" then I shan't argue; nevertheless it is my opinion (and do please note that's all I'm saying it is, I'm not saying I'm right or that you're wrong) that we would have been better served prioritising getting in two CBs and a quality LB rather than enhancing our attacking options with another striker. Even with Yoshida we only really have 3 likely first team CBs, and as comments on here will testify that's perhaps one short.

 

I agree that a LB should have been a priority, I wasnt convinced by Fox last season. And of course, anither good CB would be better, I'm not disputing that. Originally, I was just questioning what that has to do with Rodriguez and still don't really see the connection. If later in the season Lambert was out for 5-6 games and we had no one capable of leading the line, people would be saying that we shoud have prioritised competition for Lambert. I really don't see Rodriguez as a weird or wasted signing at all.

[tttdcs]

Op.... Do give it a rest

 

 

This

[Leicestersaint]

I would suggest doing soemthing to stop us conceding so many goals! If we continue to let in 3 goals every match we are doomed.

[The Kraken]

I agree that a LB should have been a priority, I wasnt convinced by Fox last season. And of course, anither good CB would be better, I'm not disputing that. Originally, I was just questioning what that has to do with Rodriguez and still don't really see the connection. If later in the season Lambert was out for 5-6 games and we had no one capable of leading the line, people would be saying that we shoud have prioritised competition for Lambert. I really don't see Rodriguez as a weird or wasted signing at all.

 

Again, it simply comes down to priorities; we clearly prioritised signing Rodriguez and had been chasing him for some time. By the same token, it is my opinion that we had a lesser priority to bring in a centre back of equal transfer fee to Rodriguez, and certainly there were no signs of extended interest in a top drawer CB as there was in JRod, or indeed as there was in Ramirez. I'm not saying that spending £6M or £7M on Rodriguez or £12M on Ramirez precluded us from doing that with other player positions, or distracted us from other targets, because I have no idea if its the case. But I am saying that the diversion of effort and funding could potentially have been better spent elsewhere.

 

And with that I'm off to watch the golf. Come on Europe!!!

[70's Mike]

It is a game of opinions.

Should we play with so many forward thinking players away from home, or should we try and go for a nil nil.

Not convinced we have players in reserve to shut up shop.

are only hope to stay up is to win 13/14 games and we will not do that being negative and playing a different team away from at home

rather lose 3-1 than 1-0 and still create chances which will turn into victories against the lesser sides, once they start being negative hard to change

[Turkish]

We have some right tools on here.

 

In the end of the day, Morgan is massively important to how we play. His loss was a massive factor.

 

Gazza's potential showed with a couple of finger tip worldies but his inexperience also showed with their second and third goals.

 

So when Boruc is fit, you'ld expect those goals to be saved. Add to this the lambert header, Jrod one on one and Ramirez flick over keeper, we could easily have had another 3 goals...

So swings and roundabouts, it didn't fall for us this game! We are a young, inexperienced team in transition, but CRUCIALLY we are showing enough to suggest we will score goals, and even though we're conceding them, you can see the light and its obvious the corrections, that need making.

 

Adkins is too good a manager not to see where needs work, if we can I'm sure he can! The thing that gives me most confidence is, the way we are playing, we do not fit the billing for a hopeless team which will get relegated.

 

Need a good solid ten games to settle.

There is massive hope.

 

So you think moving forward once Boruc plays we'regoing to score with every opportunity we get and Boruc will keep out every chance te opposition have?

[Saint Billy]

Adkins wants to play football.

 

He fundamentally does not want to go to Goodison and park ten men behind the ball.

 

Other teams will try that and lose 3-0.

 

I'm not saying 3-1 is a good result but for the record Everton have won more games in 2012 than any team bar United and Citeh.

 

Everton have a manager with seven years Premiership experience, not six games.

 

Everton have been in the Premiership my whole life not just the past two months.

 

If you expected us to go to Everton and turn them over, I admire your optimism but you need a quick cold ice bath in the reality-ville hotel.

 

This!

 

I think our expectations are too high atm. This first season is only going to be about survival and we cannot expect much to happen away from home. Its absolutely pie in the sky to expect anymore.

 

To start calling for Adkins head every time we lose is a joke especially in this league. We need to get use to being dicked a few times especially away fom home.

 

As far as I am concerned, as long as we win most of our home games and get the odd result away, enough for us to stay up, why dont we leave Adkins get to grips with the prem and learn by his mistakes and slowly put it right, he deserves time after what has acheived with us so far.

[Kingsland Red]

A Norwich supporting mate said the biggest difference for their supporters last season was that to succeed in the premiership they were aiming for 40 points, ie. dropping 74 points.

In their two previous two seasons, like us, they had a 90 point target, ie dropping 48 points.

Welcome to the Premiership Saints supporters of a nervous / impatient disposition !!

Or alternatively enjoy the ride as at worst we become the 18th best club in the country and become the new boing boing club.

[Dangermouth]

4-3-3/4-5-1 looks a good way to go for a footballing team.

 

Here's the Manc's midfield from yesterday. Yes, they lost, but from what I saw they had a hell of a lot of pressure and were a bit unlucky another effort didn't go in. Notice the absence of a hard-man in midfield.

 

 

Giggs

Carrick

Nani

Scholes

Kagawa

 

Will leave you to look at other teams and see quite how many of them have that too. What they do have is better positional sense in the midfield, a bit more bite (so Fellani can't walk through the midfield at will, bit like Podolski did) and as someone said elsewhere they work as a unit both offensively and defensively.

 

Think the work that needs to be done is in m/f so like the suggestion of putting in Yosh there and would like to see Lee get a few games when he's fit.

[Windmill Arm 2]

So far it seems that nearly every game has seen tactical mistakes by Adkins.

 

City - Not starting Lambert

United - Taking off our best 3 players

Wigan - Starting with wrong formation

Arsenal - Just the whole game in general!

Villa - None

Everton - Starting with wrong formation

 

How many tactical mistakes is he allowed? Is he allowed carte blanche to make mistakes due to him getting us promoted 2 seasons running, or at what point do we decide he doesn't have the tactical nous for the Premiership? This season is starting to remind me of Poortvliets due to the fact that we are giving a good account of ourselves early in the season but with no cigar. I hope I am wrong.

 

JCL, go away and support United from your armchair.

[VectisSaint]

I think Ramirez and Lallana are too much of a luxury away from home so I'd go with Ramirez as he's a bit more robust physically. Lallana will do more damage in the home games but his tracking back was abymsal yesterday, not least on the third goal. Likewise, I'd play J Rod up front in away games and save Rickie for the home ones.

So, let me get this straight your suggestion for making us better away from home is to drop Lambert and Lallana. Interesting point of view.

 

 

 

 

 

But completely bonkers.

[Horton Heath Saint]

Brilliant article, glad someone is on same wavelength as me.

We all knew it was going to be tough, it is such a different Premiership from the one we last played in, the levels are so much higher.

[saint1977]

So, let me get this straight your suggestion for making us better away from home is to drop Lambert and Lallana. Interesting point of view.

 

 

 

 

 

But completely bonkers.

 

Different perhaps re: Lallana but at places like Everton you have to be able to track back. In the 90s, MLT didn't track back all the time but we had 9 other outfield players that could do that. I'm not saying drop Lallana but yesterday it didn't work having him and Ramirez in that formation and the full backs got exposed so can we justify both away from home at this stage of our PL evolution? With regard to Lambert, he isn't going to get the same level of service away from home so unless we play Mayuka with him we aren't going to get in behind teams. J Rod might be better to lead the line for an hour to stretch defences more and then Lambert gets more space later on. It worked well at City.

 

The back 4 need more screening and the midfield is too lightweight. Someone is going to have to drop out to include Morgan when fit again and also we need more faces like Chaplow away from home. Norwich rotated Holt and Morison when they were both in form last season.

[Horton Heath Saint]

Well said.

We've got to believe.

It's not just NA, the whole coaching and backroom staff know where we are at, bet they are working as hard as ever to address the situation.

They want it, we want it. The Club wants it.

[david in sweden]

So you think moving forward once Boruc plays we'regoing to score with every opportunity we get and Boruc will keep out every chance te opposition have?

 

I don't know where you got that idea Turkish !

 

.I think you've drawn some strange conclusions...(?)...I've read his post three times and I don't see that he's said that ...

 

I agree with (others) comments about Gazzaniga. YES he's a great prospect. I'm pleased to say - (certainly better than Butland on current showing )....however, two Cup games against lower league opponents .and a couple of good saves in the Villa game isn't good preparation for a game at Goodison Park against a strong side 2nd in the table.

 

I don't know who wants to blame for him which goals, but his positional sense for the 2nd and 3rd goals was very poor.....even though he did make a couple of good saves...I'd have liked Boruc to have been there instead.

[Turkish]

I don't know where you got that idea Turkish !

 

.I think you've drawn some strange conclusions...(?)...I've read his post three times and I don't see that he's said that ...

 

I agree with (others) comments about Gazzaniga. YES he's a great prospect. I'm pleased to say - (certainly better than Butland on current showing )....however, two Cup games against lower league opponents .and a couple of good saves in the Villa game isn't good preparation for a game at Goodison Park against a strong side 2nd in the table.

 

I don't know who wants to blame for him which goals, but his positional sense for the 2nd and 3rd goals was very poor.....even though he did make a couple of good saves...I'd have liked Boruc to have been there instead.

 

Because he says if other players were playing then Everton would not have scored and if we might have had another 3 goals we'd taken all of our chances. We'll this is true but its all hypothetical nonsense because we won't score with every chance we have and who knows if Boruc would have saved those attempts at goal or not saved ones Gazzingia did? It's easy to spout of all hypothetical arguments about what could, might and would have happened in other circumstances, like if Van Persie hadn't joined Man U would be have beaten them 2-0 instead of losing 2-3? Of course we f*cking wouldn't have. The fact of the matter is its ignoring th fundamentals flaws in our team and using the 'on another day' arguement. Totally ignoring the bungled transfer window and spending huge amounts on players like Maykua that we don't need and failed to sign premier league standard wide midfield players, centre backs and left back and had a panic signing of a goalkeeper when it became Apparant quite quickly that Davis wasn't good enough.

Edited 1 October, 2012 by Turkish

[david in sweden]

I still don't see the criticism you've given Avenue Saint, Turkish ?

 

At the end of every game ....every team manager engages in some conjecture about... what might have happened if ......

Atkins did on Saturday......IF? ....IF?.....IF?... and I think that Avenue Saints (and probably I too,) have written something similar.... since 5pm on Saturday.

 

If you tell us that you will never again put down your hypothetical ideas / thoughts in a thread, then say so ....and I'll make a note of the date and time because we all write such things from time to time.

 

I read you a lot ...(it's difficult not to when someone has over 12,000 posts to his name)....and agree with a lot that you write...., but IMO IF fit (another hypothetical).. I would have played Boruc at Goodison ..........if for no other reason than common sense says - in such a fixture ...an international goalie, with several hundred league games behind him is a better choice than a kid whose played half a season in L1 and had a handful of relatively easy games where he didn't have to break sweat........I think Gazzaniga is a v.g. prospect, but keeping a clean sheet against a lowly-placed Championship side doesn't automatically qualify you to play away against a side second in the Prem. with one of the best home record in the year.

 

Who can say that Everton wouldn't have scored if we'd had another goalie there.......or that IF Rodriguez and Ramirez had scored ....the result might have been different.....but Nigel Adkins did after the game. Avenue Saints (and I... for that matter) most likely had the same thought....didn't you?

Edited 1 October, 2012 by david in sweden

[Turkish]

I still don't see the criticism you've given Avenue Saint, Turkish ?

 

At the end of every game ....every team manager engages in some conjecture about... what might have happened if ......

Atkins did on Saturday......IF? ....IF?.....IF?... and I think that Avenue Saints (and probably I too,) have written something similar.... since 5pm on Saturday.

 

If you tell us that you will never again put down your hypothetical ideas / thoughts in a thread, then say so ....and I'll make a note of the date and time because we all write such things from time to time.

 

I read you a lot ...(it's difficult not to when someone has over 12,000 posts to his name)....and agree with a lot that you write...., but IMO IF fit (another hypothetical).. I would have played Boruc at Goodison ..........if for no other reason than common sense says - in such a fixture ...an international goalie, with several hundred league games behind him is a better choice than a kid whose played half a season in L1 and had a handful of relatively easy games where he didn't have to break sweat........I think Gazzaniga is a v.g. prospect, but keeping a clean sheet against a lowly-placed Championship side doesn't automatically qualify you to play away against a side second in the Prem. with one of the best home record in the year.

 

Who can say that Everton wouldn't have scored if we'd had another goalie there.......or that IF Rodriguez and Ramirez had scored ....the result might have been different.....but Nigel Adkins did after the game. Avenue Saints (and I... for that matter) most likely had the same thought....didn't you?

 

I certainly won't be glossing over fundemental errors in tactics and players by saying 'what if?' 'if only he'd played' and 'on another day' that's the midset of idiots.

[Chez]

spending huge amounts on players like Maykua that we don't need .

we didn't need a bit of pace and trickery up front?

[Chez]

I certainly won't be glossing over fundemental errors in tactics and players by saying 'what if?' 'if only he'd played' and 'on another day' that's the midset of idiots.

what tactics had you in mind and tell me,`what if' we had used them, would the outcome have been different?

[The Kraken]

we didn't need a bit of pace and trickery up front?

 

I guess the question to ask is: based on Saturday, did we need a £6M striker playing wide midfield and a striker with some pace and trickery for the last 10 minutes more than we needed a decent left back, another decent centre back and an actual genuine wide player?

[Bearsy]

I dunno if Rodriguez was playing wide midfield. The Adkins Tactical Masterplan^TM as I understand it was playing like a 4-Diamond-2, except when we is defending the 2 being Ricky and Rodriguez split out wide to discourage their full-backs from bombing forward or at least to take advantage of the space Baines and Whoever leave behind when they is bombing forward. They weren't required to track back or whatever, it's like for counter attacking. It's a pretty smart tactic when you think about it. I mean, it didn't work or nothing but I like the idea of it.

[The Kraken]

Good point Bearface. This little image shows our players' average positions (we're the ones on the right).

 

[Saint Garrett]

As Ii mentioned drunkily in the 'back from the game thread'. we were almost playing with a 'false 9' formation as both the forwards were playing wide. Also Rickie was required to track back a lot more than what has happened previously.

[Bearsy]

Hmm. Adam looks a bit lost if anything. Dunno what he's doing out there, he should of been more central and more deeper, helping out little JWP from getting monstered by Fellaini.

[Turkish]

what tactics had you in mind and tell me,`what if' we had used them, would the outcome have been different?

 

Square pegs in round holes, persisting with a formation we don't have the players to play it with for two. But I was referring to the logic that if xxxxx had played we'd have conceded less goals and if we'd have taken every chance we got we'd have scored more, so really we could have won 6-0 on another day. Mental logic.

Edited 1 October, 2012 by Turkish

[Turkish]

we didn't need a bit of pace and trickery up front?

 

Except he's not played up front yet, unless you count 20 minutes of running around and not touching the ball against Man U. Clearly he's a decent player but whilst we spent fortune on players including £10m on two that arent first choice and are yet to play in their proper positions in the premier league we fsiled to adequately strengthen the areas that needed it.

[Dig Dig]

Square pegs in round holes, persisting with a formation we don't have the players to play it with for two. But I was referring to the logic that if xxxxx had played we'd have conceded less goals and if we'd have taken every chance we got we'd have scored more, so really we could have won 6-0 on another day. Mental logic.

 

 

Almost has mental as saying that had we signed Scott Dann or whoever instead of Ramirez we wouldn't have conceded so many goals.

[Turkish]

Almost has mental as saying that had we signed Scott Dann or whoever instead of Ramirez we wouldn't have conceded so many goals.

 

Not really, its one thing to say if we'd have strengthened the areas that needed strengthening with players that we're good enough we'd do better. Quite another to say that in a game which we were dominated and outclassed by a better team and made basic errors individually, tactically and in player selection that if we'd had a different goalkeeper he'd definitely have saved at leat two chances and if we'd scored everyone of ours, then on another day we could have won 6-0 so everything is fine. It's idiotic.

[Dig Dig]

Not really, its one thing to say if we'd have strengthened the areas that needed strengthening with players that we're good enough we'd do better. Quite another to say that in a game which we were dominated and outclassed by a better team and made basic errors individually, tactically and in player selection that if we'd had a different goalkeeper he'd definitely have saved at leat two chances and if we'd scored everyone of ours, then on another day we could have won 6-0 so everything is fine. It's idiotic.

 

How much better though? How many more points would we have and how many less goals would we have conceded? It's the same philosophy, just on a different scale.

 

The most encouraging point for me is that we are creating and scoring in every match and controlling large parts of games as well. We're on a learning curve in terms of the quality we're up against every week but I'm confident the defensive side to our game will improve even before we have a chance to bring in more bodies.

 

If were losing games but only marginally whilst not creating much people would be bemoaning the lack of quality attacking players we have instead.

 

We're getting beat by better teams but I've seen enough to think that we will win the games which we'll need to win to at least survive.

 

Harping on about the summer transfers all season doesn't achieve much now.

[Wade Garrett]

I've just seen Adkins interviewed on SouthToday.

 

Apparently we're good at home, and away we're going to attack in the hope that we win 4 games.

 

Absolute madness in my opinion. Very simplistic and not good enough. It looks like we're going to continue making the same mistakes through the whole season.

 

To be honest, I couldn't really believe what I was hearing.

[The Kraken]

I've just seen Adkins interviewed on SouthToday.

 

Apparently we're good at home, and away we're going to attack in the hope that we win 4 games.

 

Absolute madness in my opinion. Very simplistic and not good enough. It looks like we're going to continue making the same mistakes through the whole season.

 

To be honest, I couldn't really believe what I was hearing.

 

His full interview with the BBC is here.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19684126

 

He admits we're leaking too many goals but doesn't think its a factor that we're being too adventurous.

[John B]

I've just seen Adkins interviewed on SouthToday.

 

Apparently we're good at home, and away we're going to attack in the hope that we win 4 games.

 

Absolute madness in my opinion. Very simplistic and not good enough. It looks like we're going to continue making the same mistakes through the whole season.

 

To be honest, I couldn't really believe what I was hearing.

 

You may not agreewith his tactics but if we did win four games against the weaker teams away that would be great

[Dig Dig]

I've just seen Adkins interviewed on SouthToday.

 

Apparently we're good at home, and away we're going to attack in the hope that we win 4 games.

 

Absolute madness in my opinion. Very simplistic and not good enough. It looks like we're going to continue making the same mistakes through the whole season.

 

 

To be honest, I couldn't really believe what I was hearing.

 

 

If we win 4 away and get the job done at home what would be the problem with that? Would you rather we went away from home looking for a draw? We'd need 12 of those to get the same points tally.

[Turkish]

How much better though? How many more points would we have and how many less goals would we have conceded? It's the same philosophy, just on a different scale.

 

The most encouraging point for me is that we are creating and scoring in every match and controlling large parts of games as well. We're on a learning curve in terms of the quality we're up against every week but I'm confident the defensive side to our game will improve even before we have a chance to bring in more bodies.

 

If were losing games but only marginally whilst not creating much people would be bemoaning the lack of quality attacking players we have instead.

 

We're getting beat by better teams but I've seen enough to think that we will win the games which we'll need to win to at least survive.

 

Harping on about the summer transfers all season doesn't achieve much now.

 

Going by your logic that it's fantastic that we're creating chances it and really encouraging, which to be fair it is, but it also means at the moment we are going to need to score an average of 4 goals a game to win, given were averaging conceeding 3 a game. How many teams win things or even stay up with crap defences and trying to out score teams? Its fine to attack at home but away from one against good sides you need to be solid and set up not to concede. And using th logic that avenue did that Everyting is fine because a goalkeeper most of us have ever seen play would definitely have prevented to of the goals and of we'd taken all of our chances we'd have scored another three is crazy.

Edited 1 October, 2012 by Turkish