Pompeyowl Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 So we have proved that we can not defend one goal leads. If we were then we would be flirting with the play offs right now. It seems that every time we take the lead we sit back and invite the pressure on us. I don't know if that is Jones telling the players to sit back or what, but it's not working. Jones then pulls off attacking players for more defensive players which then takes away any goal threats we had and yet, almost innevitably, we concede and drop points. It is obvious that this is not working, so why not, instead of taking a goal lead and defending it, carry on as before and still try to extend the lead? We seem to be good enough to go in front with the system implemented at the time of the goal, but then change things around and end up drawing or even losing the match. If this trend continues we are almost certain for relegation. Keep the attack minded on the pitch in order to extend leads or regain leads that we have lost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1963owl Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 flip me,thats it!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dukeries Owl Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 That is a sound argument if we had a settled squad of "MATCH FIT" players, sadly we don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ozzieowl Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 theres an idea!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marshy Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) I agree with DJ's substitutes last night, Mcphail has hardly played any football, so to play 2 games in a short period of time was a big ask, although he did a decent job. In fairness most managers in that situation last night would have done the same, to try & see the game out. I don't blame DJ for last night. We simply switched of at the last moment. Damned if he did & damned if he didn't. Edited October 2, 2013 by marshy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pompeyowl Posted October 2, 2013 Author Share Posted October 2, 2013 I agree with DJ's substitutes last night, Mcphail has hardly played any football, so to play 2 games in a short period of time was a big ask, although he did a decent job. In fairness most managers in that situation last night would have done the same, to try & see the game out. I don't blame DJ for last night. We simply switched of at the last moment. Damned if he did & damned if he didn't. I absolutely agree with that tactic in normal circumstamces, but we have tried it for most games so far this season and are now still looking for our first win of the season. It just seems to me that DJ hasn't learnt the lesson handed to him 6 or 7 times this season and maybe it's time to try something different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee A Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Does seem to be a problem, I used to go mental at Megson for this too, we'd be comfortable and in control of a game ( not saying we were last night ) but then sit back and make it difficult for ourselves, occasionally even costing points, why do they do it? Sitting back and trying to defend only invites pressure, doesnt matter who you are and who you're playing, invite a team to throw ball after ball into your box and you will inevitably concede. The game has moved on from the days when that used to work, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueblood Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Last night wasn't really a case of we got in front and sat back. We were under the cosh for most of the game Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trevdi9 Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 spot on Lee mate make them defend In their half we are a much stronger side going forward , yet persist in this sitting back after going 1 up ,can't see the sense in it tbh we can't do it ,or results make it seem that way , Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pompeyowl Posted October 2, 2013 Author Share Posted October 2, 2013 Last night wasn't really a case of we got in front and sat back. We were under the cosh for most of the game Often in football when a team is being bombarded with attack after attack they shock everyone by counter attacking and acoring against the run of play. It happens every week in numerous matches around the country. If you take off your attacking players and replace them with defensive players you have then admtted that you have no ontentions of attacking and are just praying that your opposition don't get an equaliser. We've rolled the dice on many occassions so far this season and have lost many points because of it. It's not working. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamthesun Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 I remember an interview with Howard Wilkinson back in the 80s. He was talking about his football philosophy. He said something like "if you score one goal they have to score two to beat you. If you score two they have to score three." Didn't see his teams sitting back on a one goal lead. Good times! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pompeyowl Posted October 2, 2013 Author Share Posted October 2, 2013 I remember an interview with Howard Wilkinson back in the 80s. He was talking about his football philosophy. He said something like "if you score one goal they have to score two to beat you. If you score two they have to score three." Didn't see his teams sitting back on a one goal lead. Good times! Spot on. Who was is that said along the lines of: "Football is a game won by the team that scores more goals, not by who's conceded less"? Was it Brian Clough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sweet&TenderOwl Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) Does seem to be a problem, I used to go mental at Megson for this too, we'd be comfortable and in control of a game ( not saying we were last night ) but then sit back and make it difficult for ourselves, occasionally even costing points, why do they do it? Sitting back and trying to defend only invites pressure, doesnt matter who you are and who you're playing, invite a team to throw ball after ball into your box and you will inevitably concede. The game has moved on from the days when that used to work, I felt Brighton's equaliser was inevitable. It's happened so many times this season, last season and even under Megson like you said. Time and time again, we sit back on a lead or try to hold on to it by going even more defensive or taking a forward off, etc Numerous times already this season we've lost points by trying to sit back on leads. I don't expect us to go all out attack against teams away from home or have the majority of possession, the counter-attacking style is more suited to playing away to be fair but at home we should go for it more, with two strikers, pressurise the opposition if they have the ball more than us, push up a bit and try and put the opposition on the back foot. Sitting back on a lead, whether be at home or away and regardless of the quality of the opposition, usually leads to what happened last night and as happened in numerous other games already this season when we've been leading games. Edited October 2, 2013 by Sweet&TenderOwl Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee A Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) I felt Brighton's equaliser was inevitable. It's happened so many times this season, last season and even under Megson like you said. It is inevitable, some managers seem to favour it, others prefer just to carry on doing what has got them in to a leading position in the first place, yesterday was probably a bad example as they seemed to on top for most of the game anyway. The one game that stood out for me as a bad example of this was actually a game we won, ( not GM bashing by the way because this is still a problem now ) but against Tranmere at home during promotion season, we came out all guns blazing and were 2-0 up within 7 minutes, carried on and dominated the first half, could have gone in 5-0 up and they hardly kicked the ball, then in the 2nd half from the first whistle we just camped on our own 18 yard line for some reason, Tranmere eventually got one back in the last 10 minutes and then I think they hit the post and very nearly snatched something, I remember thinking why are we stood here biting our nails and begging for the whistle, we should have walked this. Crazy idea, got to be more ruthless when in control. Edited October 2, 2013 by Lee A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradowl Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 I've worked out what the answer is and it's not rocket science. We need a settled back four playing at least half a dozen games together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sweet&TenderOwl Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 It is inevitable, some managers seem to favour it, others prefer just to carry on doing what has got them in to a leading position in the first place, yesterday was probably a bad example as they seemed to on top for most of the game anyway. The one game that stood out for me as a bad example of this was actually a game we won, ( not GM bashing by the way because this is still a problem now ) but against Tranmere at home during promotion season, we came out all guns blazing and were 2-0 up within 7 minutes, carried on and dominated the first half, could have gone in 5-0 up and they hardly kicked the ball, then in the 2nd half from the first whistle we just camped on our own 18 yard line for some reason, Tranmere eventually got one back in the last 10 minutes and then I think they hit the post and very nearly snatched something, I remember thinking why are we stood here biting our nails and begging for the whistle, we should have walked this. Crazy idea, got to be more ruthless when in control. Aye, I ain't that bothered how we play really as long as we pick up points and wins. Not every team as to play the same way and keep the ball all game like some teams do nowadays. As long as we play effective football and get results then I don't mind how we play. Most of the teams who did well last season and went up played effective football which was rarely pleasing on the eye. Although we threw many points away last season we were more effective last season to be fair, especially during our good run towards the end of the season. Last night was a good point an a unlikely one at that but if we don't take a chance away from home when we're leading or more importantly at home, then we're going to drop many more points in a similar fashion to how we have already this season, which could hurt us in the long run. There are some positives as we're getting almost back to how we were last season when we were effective and grinding out points, finally getting that first win would help but at the end of the day we're still winless and level on points with the bottom of the League atm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latemodelchild Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Did anyone actually believe that 1 goal would be enough to secure a win last night? I was so convinced it wouldn't be I didn't even get nervous or excited at the end. It seemed inevitable. Obviously the answer is to score so many goals that you can't be caught. If it was that simple though then everyone would be able to do it. We sit back on leads. We throw leads away. We always have and always will. Its crazy how often it seems to happen, especially lately. Under GM was the first time in years that I felt confident during games that we would more than likely win, often with late goals. I'm back to accepting that unless we are 5 up with injury time left to play then we will probably chuck it away at the death. It's the Wednesday way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronio Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 The thing is, when we go a goal up, as soon as we score we really need to put the pressure on them and try and get that second goal. The fact we sit back encourages them to attack us and no doubt they will score and even go on to win the game. After scoring the first, we should go on the attack and get that 2nd or even 3rd goal to kill the game off. We can't seem to be able to defend a 1 goal margin therefore, it makes sense trying to go all out for that second goal. That's how winning is done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pompeyowl Posted October 2, 2013 Author Share Posted October 2, 2013 The thing is, when we go a goal up, as soon as we score we really need to put the pressure on them and try and get that second goal. The fact we sit back encourages them to attack us and no doubt they will score and even go on to win the game. After scoring the first, we should go on the attack and get that 2nd or even 3rd goal to kill the game off. We can't seem to be able to defend a 1 goal margin therefore, it makes sense trying to go all out for that second goal. That's how winning is done. Exactly. Hit them when they're hurting. No mercy. Everyone else does it to us, why not return it? At this rate should we ever win a match it'll be only 1-0 or 2-1. What's wrong with pressuring and coming out of the game winning by two or mpre goals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronio Posted October 2, 2013 Share Posted October 2, 2013 Exactly. Hit them when they're hurting. No mercy. Everyone else does it to us, why not return it? At this rate should we ever win a match it'll be only 1-0 or 2-1. What's wrong with pressuring and coming out of the game winning by two or mpre goals? I agree. If we managed to score 2-3 goals in the first half, that would effectively kill the game off there and then. Similar to the birmingham game, as soon as Lingaard knocked in the 3rd goal it was virtually game over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now