Jump to content

Fessi


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

Still our main man.

 

There's just no spark without him.

 

Very evident tonight, he's needed on the pitch.

 

As you said in another thread, his desire to cut inside creates a big vacuum for reach to exploit.

 

Could be a winning formula, but leaves reach vulnerable on the counter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, zzmdu said:

 

Very evident tonight, he's needed on the pitch.

 

As you said in another thread, his desire to cut inside creates a big vacuum for reach to exploit.

 

Could be a winning formula, but leaves reach vulnerable on the counter.

It does, but I think if we had a bit more conviction in our attacking player (we sort of don't know whether to stick or twist a lot of the time), then I think at home we'd hopefully overwhelm most teams. 

 

Admittedly, you are always vulnerable to a counter attack, but we have the quality in our side to pin most teams back. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, asteener1867 said:

Aye, shocker that, 

I don't understand why Reach seemed to play better up front from further back in the second half, than he did from up front further up first half.

I actually put it down to Fessi coming on, Fessi turns either way at rapid pace, and takes defenders with him, he also has the bottle to hold the ball until there is an option on, giving Reach time to join in play and at times create that option...

Fessi cutting in gave Reach a massive wide green space to run into, and one of Adam's best cards is his leggy speed and engine. Worked really well.

 

As a winger who lacks a trick, he struggles to get crosses in. But marauding forward into space left by FF he has the legs on any FB at this level so got crosses in for fun second half.

 

Needs to work on those flipping crosses though. Marwood do you want a part-time coaching job?

Edited by Holmowl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SiJ said:

It does, but I think if we had a bit more conviction in our attacking player (we sort of don't know whether to stick or twist a lot of the time), then I think at home we'd hopefully overwhelm most teams. 

 

Admittedly, you are always vulnerable to a counter attack, but we have the quality in our side to pin most teams back. 

 

Playing ff in left Mid, but allowing him to be undisciplined & roam,  is a risk worth taking IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, zzmdu said:

 

Very evident tonight, he's needed on the pitch.

 

As you said in another thread, his desire to cut inside creates a big vacuum for reach to exploit.

 

Could be a winning formula, but leaves reach vulnerable on the counter.

 

Absolutely.

 

I think it just shows how much better we'd be if we changed to a 433 with FF left. The problem with the current set up is only having 2 midfielders. 

 

We're losing the midfield battle against poor teams. And it means we're on the back foot way too often. It's ridiculous how many 2nd balls both Brum and Blackburn picked up in midfield. 

 

Sacrifice a striker and bolster midfield. We'd have a much better platform to start from. At the moment the gap between our deep lying midfielders and our strikers, is just too big. The only service they had tonight were hopeful long balls and the occasional cross when we managed to get our full backs into attacking areas.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

 

Absolutely.

 

I think it just shows how much better we'd be if we changed to a 433 with FF left. The problem with the current set up is only having 2 midfielders. 

 

We're losing the midfield battle against poor teams. And it means we're on the back foot way too often. It's ridiculous how many 2nd balls both Brum and Blackburn picked up in midfield. 

 

Sacrifice a striker and bolster midfield. We'd have a much better platform to start from. At the moment the gap between our deep lying midfielders and our strikers, is just too big. The only service they had tonight were hopeful long balls and the occasional cross when we managed to get our full backs into attacking areas.

 

 

 

The end season analysis will IMO be that we've invested far too much is forwards (for a 442) at the expense of a ball carrying centre half and sorting the a 5 man midfield

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Copthorneowl
2 minutes ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

 

Absolutely.

 

I think it just shows how much better we'd be if we changed to a 433 with FF left. The problem with the current set up is only having 2 midfielders. 

 

We're losing the midfield battle against poor teams. And it means we're on the back foot way too often. It's ridiculous how many 2nd balls both Brum and Blackburn picked up in midfield. 

 

Sacrifice a striker and bolster midfield. We'd have a much better platform to start from. At the moment the gap between our deep lying midfielders and our strikers, is just too big. The only service they had tonight were hopeful long balls and the occasional cross when we managed to get our full backs into attacking areas.

 

 

 

Good  football appreciation, what you suggest is very much the point Imo. Unfortunately with the personnel we have I think Carlos is shoe horned in to playing at least two of his 5 out and out strikers plus FF wider or just in behind. Think it will cause him problems down the line no way he can keep them all happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, IstillhateSteveBould said:

 

Absolutely.

 

I think it just shows how much better we'd be if we changed to a 433 with FF left. The problem with the current set up is only having 2 midfielders. 

 

We're losing the midfield battle against poor teams. And it means we're on the back foot way too often. It's ridiculous how many 2nd balls both Brum and Blackburn picked up in midfield. 

 

Sacrifice a striker and bolster midfield. We'd have a much better platform to start from. At the moment the gap between our deep lying midfielders and our strikers, is just too big. The only service they had tonight were hopeful long balls and the occasional cross when we managed to get our full backs into attacking areas.

 

 

Unfortunately I agree. Maybe with Lee fit and performing as he can we'd be OK with the other talent in the team to keep the opposites busy. As it is we look overrun too often in midfield and it impacts on the whole of the team. That said we do keep winning even though it's painful and nervy to watch.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, zzmdu said:

 

Playing ff in left Mid, but allowing him to be undisciplined & roam,  is a risk worth taking IMO.

 

He wasn't undisciplined tonight.

 

But he roamed beautifully and the FF-Bannan-Reach triangle was really threatening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Holmowl said:

 

He wasn't undisciplined tonight.

 

But he roamed beautifully and the FF-Bannan-Reach triangle was really threatening.

 

Semantics really, if your manager had allowed you (or eveninstructed) to play a perceived undisciplined role, then it's not undisciplined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Holmes said:

 

 

Hang on to a man nearly OT wanted FF out of the club all of a sudden hes the main man again.

 

 

 

Never from me!!! Love the guy...feel for him been played out of position on the left. 

 

Football is a simole game made complicated...you get the best out of good players when they are played in their correct positions!! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

It's about how you take being subbed that counts.

Really can't see what all the fuss was about re Fessi on Friday. He was subbed, he was pis sed off and didn't look pleased. Why would he? He didn't go down the tunnel, he didn't throw his boots or shirt anywhere. Carlos didn't shake his hand or even look at him. Think some of you should follow Bowls!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GMOwl72 said:

Really can't see what all the fuss was about re Fessi on Friday. He was subbed, he was pis sed off and didn't look pleased. Why would he? He didn't go down the tunnel, he didn't throw his boots or shirt anywhere. Carlos didn't shake his hand or even look at him. Think some of you should follow Bowls!

 

 

Ground been covered already, and it's old ground as Forestieri was rightly benched and responded exactly how I (and I'm sure Carlos) would have wanted him to last night.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...