Hull give every team a blueprint to beat us?

[Daft Kerplunk]

So, bad day at the office or have Hull just given teams a way to beat us? 

That for me was worrying because it seemed like Hull targeted our weaknesses effectively, put pressure on in the right places, and stopped us creating anything of note. They should and could’ve been more in front by half time and perhaps the lads thought they’d come out in the second and Hull would go to pieces as we passed it around them. Instead they continued what they’d been doing. 

Hopefully it was a bad day but tonight was not enjoyable bar a far too late push to try and score, by which time Hull could just sit and watch us hit a brick wall. 

[S-Clarke]

I don't think it's anything particularly new, I mentioned it int he match thread. Teams with pace on the break can do us quite easily, as long as they press right and get the transitions spot on.

Huddersfield did it against us, so did Bristol City. Back at the start of the season Sunderland and Leicester did us like that as well. 

We play an expansive game, so we do push up high. Against dross like Swansea, Blackburn, Rotherham etc you can get away with it to a point as they don't have the pace or guile to counter it. When you play that same way against teams who can field players like Mvadidi, Fatawu, Clarke, Philogene, Carvalho etc then we will always concede goals sadly. 

[ErwinK1961]

If it was that simple then we wouldn’t have just gone 25 games unbeaten. It’s one thing having a blueprint, another thing to actually implement it. Hull did it well tonight and we were poor.

 

[CanadaSaint]

The blueprint for our defensive vulnerability has been out there for most of the season. What makes it so troubling is the fact that we are so committed to playing out from the back, slowly and laboriously, with no Plan B, that opponents don’t fear our offence.

It makes me think of this:

https://youtu.be/T8XeDvKqI4E

[SotonianWill]

Hardly a blueprint - anyone can beat a team without a solid midfield. Downes desperately needed. 

[S-Clarke]

2 minutes ago, CanadaSaint said:

The blueprint for our defensive vulnerability has been out there for most of the season. What makes it so troubling is the fact that we are so committed to playing out from the back, slowly and laboriously, with no Plan B, that opponents don’t fear our offence.

It makes me think of this:

https://youtu.be/T8XeDvKqI4E

We were forced to actually try a 'Plan B' a few times in the first half particularly, just to get out of our half. A few long balls from Bazunu and our CB's, sadly we only had Mara up there who'd struggle to trap a bag of cement tonight.

[CanadaSaint]

Just now, S-Clarke said:

We were forced to actually try a 'Plan B' a few times in the first half particularly, just to get out of our half. A few long balls from Bazunu and our CB's, sadly we only had Mara up there who'd struggle to trap a bag of cement tonight.

Absolutely. But Fraser, the guy most likely to capitalize on the early out-ball, was sitting on the bench. One of their CDs was booked for taking out Fraser when we tried it in the second half. He’s perfect for that Plan B, but it seems that this kind of tactic is not encouraged.

[Harry_SFC]

The big problem today was when we tried to beat the press by going slightly longer we only had Mara to aim for and he was absolutely hopeless at keeping the ball. 

Totally different with Adams on the pitch.

Edited February 20 by Harry_SFC

[spyinthesky]

15 minutes ago, CanadaSaint said:

The blueprint for our defensive vulnerability has been out there for most of the season. What makes it so troubling is the fact that we are so committed to playing out from the back, slowly and laboriously, with no Plan B, that opponents don’t fear our offence.

It makes me think of this:

https://youtu.be/T8XeDvKqI4E

But to be fair, Hull played out from the back but they did so far better than us.

They mad a couple of mistakes one of which should have been punished by Rothwell.

Hull's forwards really but pressure on our back line and that caused the second goal and nearly one or two others.

[S-Clarke]

1 minute ago, Harry_SFC said:

The big problem today was when we tried to beat the press by going slightly longer we only had Mara to aim for and he was absolutely hopeless at keeping the ball. 

Totally different with Adams on the pitch.

I thought Mara had started to improve in recent weeks, but by christ tonight he was as bad as I've ever seen a CF play for us. And I remember watching Jordan Robertson!

[Harry_SFC]

Just now, S-Clarke said:

I thought Mara had started to improve in recent weeks, but by christ tonight he was as bad as I've ever seen a CF play for us. And I remember watching Jordan Robertson!

He was improving to be fair, but he seriously struggles against the more physical players. His game is definitely more suited to coming off the bench against tired opposition. 

[AlexLaw76]

Leeds don't better than anyone else in the league. That is why going to theirs needing something is a big ask

[Sarisbury Saint]

6 hours ago, Harry_SFC said:

He was improving to be fair, but he seriously struggles against the more physical players. His game is definitely more suited to coming off the bench against tired opposition. 

I still can’t see how people think he’s improved. I really don’t think he’s going to be any different, he didn’t offer much against WBA either, yet the majority on here thought he had a good game.  He really needs to work on his first touch and his movement.

[Toussaint]

7 hours ago, S-Clarke said:

I don't think it's anything particularly new, I mentioned it int he match thread. Teams with pace on the break can do us quite easily, as long as they press right and get the transitions spot on.

Huddersfield did it against us, so did Bristol City. Back at the start of the season Sunderland and Leicester did us like that as well. 

We play an expansive game, so we do push up high. Against dross like Swansea, Blackburn, Rotherham etc you can get away with it to a point as they don't have the pace or guile to counter it. When you play that same way against teams who can field players like Mvadidi, Fatawu, Clarke, Philogene, Carvalho etc then we will always concede goals sadly. 

That is what scares me about Russball if we ever got promoted, (that and the virtually whole new team we’d have to buy),m. In the prem  just about every team will have players who can exploit our system and slow play, it would be carnage. As you suggest , the reason Russball enjoys a level of success in this leafy is that most teams don’t have players who can hurt you.

[Harry_SFC]

59 minutes ago, Toussaint said:

That is what scares me about Russball if we ever got promoted, (that and the virtually whole new team we’d have to buy),m. In the prem  just about every team will have players who can exploit our system and slow play, it would be carnage. As you suggest , the reason Russball enjoys a level of success in this leafy is that most teams don’t have players who can hurt you.

The majority of sides that go up who try and play like this tend to struggle. I don't see why we'd be any different sadly. 

[east-stand-nic]

We have to stop with this bad day at the office stuff. Some people say it every time we lose. No excuses. Wrong selection and tactics rumbled by Hull. Outplayed and outsmarted and why we are nailed on for the play offs. Sure Leeds and Ipswich will lose some between now and seasons end, but so will we and we have the toughest run it. We will finish 4th I suspect. From there I have no idea what will happen as play off games are like cup games, it is who plays on the day. One 'Bad Day at the Office' and out we go.

[SW11_Saint]

I’m fairly circumspect about the defeat in the cold light of day. The reality is, Hull fully deserved it. They look quality and will 100% finish top 6 if they continue to play like that. They outplayed us all over the park and Resenoir tactically outsmarted RM.

13 games to go and Leeds, Ipswich, Saints won’t win all 13, so something will give. It’s a three-horse race for second. We really don’t want Leicester getting dragged in at this point as no way they are finishing outside of the top 2 (if anyone can topple them it’ll be Leeds). More worrying is our form against top half teams - we’ve now lost to Leicester, Sunderland, Ipswich, Hull, Bristol City, Boro - and failed to beat Norwich, Preston, Watford, Coventry in at least one game (WBA the only ones we’ve managed to beat home & away). I’m also concerned about the playoffs - Ipswich, Hull, WBA would all be very dangerous opponents for us.

We must give the next 13 games out all and start playing our strongest team wherever possible. Mara is a bench option, as is Rothwell. Bree needs to come in for Manning. COYS.

Edited February 21 by SW11_Saint

[Miltonaggro]

Hull certainly had our number and the difference appeared that they had been well drilled tactically and were extremely fit, prepared to press and put bodies on the line. Carvalho also looked the best creative player on the park by a long way. Saints short passing around at the back is all well and good if you are looking to frustrate and tire poor teams but when it’s used against decent opposition it’s a deathwish. Play like that against Liverpool and we will be humiliated. What Saints don’t do in terms of starting from the back is zip it forward decisively, you need more than one footballing brain cell in midfield for that. Last night within ten minutes it was clear that Hull were attacking our left side, pulling manning apart whilst mobbing and nullifying Edozie. Similarly central midfield was targeted as a weakness, with smallbone obliging. In that sense the rotated team selection was disrespectful to the opposition and consequently negligent, and we were punished for it. We are now in the business end of the season and it needs to be strongest 11 starting, barring injury. Downes is the key it seems along with playing a full back rather than a frustrated half-baked forward in manning - clearly not the player he or RM, thinks he is.  The lack of natural goalscorer in the middle is also going to haunt us, and yesterday five or six times that kind of player would likely have had a clear chance with crosses coming over and passing players by or going over their heads. Frustrating as hell, but an obvious area to strengthen back in January. 
We have to go all out and auto promotion is clearly still very open but we’ve now been exposed and choked twice in a fortnight. I don’t fancy us at all for the play offs for the reasons we saw last night so we need to play our game in the remaining matches and hope that Leeds and Ipswich blip. Final point that dawned on me last night was that all of our decent players are loanees, we’ve tried to be clever in preserving funds this year, but only clever if we go up, otherwise will look like a form of disaster capitalism. Fail in promotion and another full rebuild will be necessary come May, so no solid guarantee that we will be immediately challenging again next year. 

[VectisSaint]

10 hours ago, Daft Kerplunk said:

So, bad day at the office or have Hull just given teams a way to beat us? 

That for me was worrying because it seemed like Hull targeted our weaknesses effectively, put pressure on in the right places, and stopped us creating anything of note. They should and could’ve been more in front by half time and perhaps the lads thought they’d come out in the second and Hull would go to pieces as we passed it around them. Instead they continued what they’d been doing. 

Hopefully it was a bad day but tonight was not enjoyable bar a far too late push to try and score, by which time Hull could just sit and watch us hit a brick wall. 

The same was said after the Huddersfield game, someone even said that's how all teams will play us now, or words to that effect. For some reason the Throstles didn't learn.

[Rebel]

Hull certainly had the right plan and tactics to beat us last night. But Martin should have seen that coming and started with a different team and set-up.  I was expecting a hard game against Hull, just like the West Brom game and was expecting the same team or at least the same set up as that game.

Similarly we should have had a proper plan B in place if plan A was to play out from the back with the 'pinch pass'.  Plan B seemed to be to kick it long to Mara or one of the wingers and hope for the best. But when that didn't work  - and it obviously wasn't going to - we should have had a plan C.   It could have been as simple as moving the full backs out wide and using them to carry the ball forward to get out from the back. 

Ignoring the lack of a plan B or C, it was big mistake to play two attacking full backs in KWP and Manning - neither of whom are good enough defensively - against a team as good or as attacking as Hull who had just come from a 4-0 win.  This mistake was made even worse by playing Smallbone as the sole defensive midfielder which meant the defence was not getting any real protection.

If we had started the game with Stephens at left back and Charles and Smallbone as a 2 in defensive midfield and Adams up front - effectively playing 3-2-4-1  we probably would have won.

That's ignoring the fact the players didn't run enough or fight hard enough for the ball last night to earn the right to play pretty football.

 

Edited February 21 by Rebel

[Oldandtired]

I think it’s been coming tbh…the unbeaten run did paper over a few cracks, draws when we should have won easily etc. However I thought Hull were one of the best teams I’ve seen at SMS this season, some very skilful players, well drilled and a willingness to commit to everything. Sometimes you have to say the better team on the night won.

Being I old I can remember exactly what we needed last night (others have mentioned it)…the long ball over the top to a forward like we used to have, a Channon or a Lambert. I wonder if the reason people like Mara doesn’t do well with these is that that style of football isn’t part of the manager’s thinking, therefore it doesn’t get worked on enough…who knows?

 

[Whitey Grandad]

38 minutes ago, Rebel said:

Hull certainly had the right plan and tactics to beat us last night. But Martin should have seen that coming and started with a different team and set-up.  I was expecting a hard game against Hull, just like the West Brom game and was expecting the same team or at least the same set up as that game.

Similarly we should have had a proper plan B in place if plan A was to play out from the back with the 'pinch pass'.  Plan B seemed to be to kick it long to Mara or one of the wingers and hope for the best. But when that didn't work  - and it obviously wasn't going to - we should have had a plan C.   It could have been as simple as moving the full backs out wide and using them to carry the ball forward to get out from the back. 

Ignoring the lack of a plan B or C, it was big mistake to play two attacking full backs in KWP and Manning - neither of whom are good enough defensively - against a team as good or as attacking as Hull who had just come from a 4-0 win.  This mistake was made even worse by playing Smallbone as the sole defensive midfielder which meant the defence was not getting any real protection.

If we had started the game with Stephens at left back and Charles and Smallbone as a 2 in defensive midfield and Adams up front - effectively playing 3-2-4-1  we probably would have won.

That's ignoring the fact the players didn't run enough or fight hard enough for the ball last night to earn the right to play pretty football.

 

There was an instance towards the end of the first half when KWP made a lung-bursting run down the right wing almost to their goal line. Our only other player up in there half was Mara in the middle being marked by their entire defence. All the rest of our players were gently strolling upfield. 
 

No desire. No passion.

[S-Clarke]

4 hours ago, Toussaint said:

That is what scares me about Russball if we ever got promoted, (that and the virtually whole new team we’d have to buy),m. In the prem  just about every team will have players who can exploit our system and slow play, it would be carnage. As you suggest , the reason Russball enjoys a level of success in this leafy is that most teams don’t have players who can hurt you.

We would have to change on promotion, but I don't think we'd will - so yes, I follow your same fear! 

Imagine doing what we did last night in the first half at Man City, or Spurs - 9-0 drumming's could becoming multiple season occurrences.

[Miltonaggro]

19 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

There was an instance towards the end of the first half when KWP made a lung-bursting run down the right wing almost to their goal line. Our only other player up in there half was Mara in the middle being marked by their entire defence. All the rest of our players were gently strolling upfield. 
 

No desire. No passion.

Yes, I saw that too. Right from get go Saints were far too casual and second best to every lose ball and gap. Unconcerned and it appeared arrogant that we had a second gear a la Huddersfield. No urgency until the triple sub at half time and even then you didn’t get the necessary reaction. If Fraser and Adams are the best we’ve got in those roles they need to start. 

[Dman]

Its been pretty obvious how to beat us all season - the 'blue print' was set in september. 

The difference is, we're now playing sides who have the players set up man for man, energy to press us and quality to hurt us on the counter. 

Last night wasn't a bad day at the office, it'll happen again, especially with the likes of Leicester, Ipswich, Middlesbrough and Leeds still to play. 

Huddersfield exploited it but just didn't have the quality to maintain it. Bristol City had the energy to exploit it. Hull had the energy and quality to essentially embarrass us. 

[thesaint sfc]

I think we expect some teams to unpick us like that at times of the season but the expectation is that they can't continue to play like that for the full 90 minutes which is exactly what happened last night - in the second half Hull were struggling. In the first half our defence was sloppy - KWP didn't mark his man properly for the first goal. Second was just a complete mess. Then we took too long in the second half to get going. Fraser looked off pace. Armstrong's both looked pretty knackered too. Its tricky as we seem to have a lot of squad depth but the reality is that when we don't play our best starting 11 we don't seem to click. The fact that Downes being injured has had such a huge impact is concerning. If one of our other vital players gets injured then we're going to have a really tough time unless more work is done so we can have people slot in more easily. I'd like to see Aribo and Brooks get a start in the next game.

[Fitzhugh Fella]

12 hours ago, S-Clarke said:

I thought Mara had started to improve in recent weeks, but by christ tonight he was as bad as I've ever seen a CF play for us. And I remember watching Jordan Robertson!

He does his damage in the area

[Rebel]

1 hour ago, Whitey Grandad said:

There was an instance towards the end of the first half when KWP made a lung-bursting run down the right wing almost to their goal line. Our only other player up in there half was Mara in the middle being marked by their entire defence. All the rest of our players were gently strolling upfield. 
 

No desire. No passion.

Both Edozie and Mara showed a lack of desire last night. To be honest at times they were both plain lazy.  There were several times that neither could be bothered to make the run - or drop deep in to space to receive the ball.

But KWP was not innocent last night - his defensive positioning was terrible - and on more than one occasion he couldn't be bothered to track back when Hull were on the counter attack.

[The Cat]

It's not essentially hard to play against our tactics as long as the team doing it stick to their jobs correctly.

Hull did that. Other teams have but only for a portion of the game which is why we have come out of those ones with a positive result.

The main problem yesterday was the lack of midfield and the sheer inability of them to put in a challenge. It's actually quite funny watching Smallbone and Stu Armstrong try to tackle, I wouldn't even describe their effort as half hearted some of the time.

That and the lack of out ball over the press. If Adams had started we'd have at least had a chance that the ball would stick up top.

May well have been a lot different if Rothwell hadn't missed that glaring opportunity at 0-0 but we'll never know.

[Saint86]

Hull didn't win that game. Martin lost in in the first half with the wrong team selection and balance.

Sadly, i think Leeds are likely to win (or at least draw) with Leicester, at which point it really is advantage to them and its fairly irrelevant whether teams have a blueprint to beat us as we'll be pretty much assured playoffs anyway.

Edited February 21 by Saint86

[S-Clarke]

21 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Hull didn't win that game. Martin lost in in the first half with the wrong team selection and balance.

Sadly, i think Leeds are likely to win (or at least draw) with Leicester, at which point it really is advantage to them and its fairly irrelevant whether teams have a blueprint to beat us as we'll be pretty much assured playoffs anyway.

I'd take a draw in that game right now if offered tbh, as it stands I cannot see beyond a pretty comprehensive Leeds win.

Leicester can absorb 2 defeats given their gap, so they can get back on the trail against QPR the following week. I think Leeds will just want this one too much for Leicester to handle. The two best teams in the league IMO, best this league has probably seen in many years standard wise.

[Alanh]

I think you have got to give credit to Hull for their effort last night.  They implemented the tactics that we are vulnerable to absolutely perfectly during the first half.  They essentially man marked when we had the ball and their discipline was good.  Our midlfield could not shake their markers to have any time to turn on the ball, hence so many wall passes back to the defence and why Mara was being followed by their CB into our half when he dropped deep for the ball.

It looked like their discipline broke just before half time so their manager switched their tactics for the second half to sitting deep and attacking on the break.  We had loads more of the ball but just struggled to find many clear openings. I was really surprised when they took off Seri as he was running the midfield and things did open up for us after he went off.

Assuming they played as effectviely again, the only changes in the starting formation which I think would have made a difference would have been Adams for Mara as he may have held the all up better, and Sulemanna for one of the wingers as his pace might have made them stand off a bit more rather than man mark.  

[Lord Duckhunter]

I’m a game of fine margins against decent opposition, there will be a blue print to beat us. We’re too predicable, you don’t need to be a football genius to work out how we’ll play. That’s the easy bit, the hard bit is stopping us from doing so, and there aren’t many teams good enough to do that. Unfortunately, there’s 3 or 4 that are and that doesn’t bode well. Unless we have a bit more unpredictability in our game we ain’t going up. 

Edited February 21 by Lord Duckhunter

[AlexLaw76]

we have generally enjoyed a very easy fixture list for a while...now it gets more tasty and Russ-Ball is back to what it was....

[ErwinK1961]

3 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

we have generally enjoyed a very easy fixture list for a while...now it gets more tasty and Russ-Ball is back to what it was....

Do you think we’ve had easy fixtures? I reckon you should have mentioned it before now.

[saintant]

7 hours ago, Alanh said:

I think you have got to give credit to Hull for their effort last night.  They implemented the tactics that we are vulnerable to absolutely perfectly during the first half.  They essentially man marked when we had the ball and their discipline was good.  Our midlfield could not shake their markers to have any time to turn on the ball, hence so many wall passes back to the defence and why Mara was being followed by their CB into our half when he dropped deep for the ball.

It looked like their discipline broke just before half time so their manager switched their tactics for the second half to sitting deep and attacking on the break.  We had loads more of the ball but just struggled to find many clear openings. I was really surprised when they took off Seri as he was running the midfield and things did open up for us after he went off.

Assuming they played as effectviely again, the only changes in the starting formation which I think would have made a difference would have been Adams for Mara as he may have held the all up better, and Sulemanna for one of the wingers as his pace might have made them stand off a bit more rather than man mark.  

So presumably you don't think RM could have started with a better midfield 3 than Smallbone, Rothwell and Stu Armstrong? I doubt many would agree with you and probably not even RM in hindsight.

[Alanh]

14 hours ago, saintant said:

So presumably you don't think RM could have started with a better midfield 3 than Smallbone, Rothwell and Stu Armstrong? I doubt many would agree with you and probably not even RM in hindsight.

Given the options available - Charles and Aribo - I don't think putting them in in place of the starting three would have made much difference (assuming Hull played as effectively as they did in the first half). I'm pretty sure they would also have been man marked out of the game and wouldn't have been able to do much more that the starting three did on the night.

[Turkish]

On 21/02/2024 at 13:17, The Cat said:

It's not essentially hard to play against our tactics as long as the team doing it stick to their jobs correctly.

Hull did that. Other teams have but only for a portion of the game which is why we have come out of those ones with a positive result.

The main problem yesterday was the lack of midfield and the sheer inability of them to put in a challenge. It's actually quite funny watching Smallbone and Stu Armstrong try to tackle, I wouldn't even describe their effort as half hearted some of the time.

That and the lack of out ball over the press. If Adams had started we'd have at least had a chance that the ball would stick up top.

May well have been a lot different if Rothwell hadn't missed that glaring opportunity at 0-0 but we'll never know.

and not give the ball away on the edge of his own area. Two key moments in game and the same player at fault.