|
Post by hatchett on Sept 13, 2014 16:23:48 GMT
NP saw that his team were shit in the 1st half and introduced Cambiassa and Drinkwater to gain the control in the middle of the park, we stayed the same static and paceless apart from Moses.
Hughes should of made his changes sooner, Walters was pointless in this type of match. We needed pace to stretch them and did not make that change until 80 minutes.
Poor tactical management this time Mr Hughes in my opinion and on to the next game.
|
|
|
Post by Mint Berry Barks on Sept 13, 2014 16:29:36 GMT
Yes, I'm sure Pearson's plan this week in training was to let us have 24 efforts at goal against his side.
Don't be daft.
|
|
|
Post by liamo on Sept 13, 2014 16:29:54 GMT
The effect pace has on the game is minimal when your team is trying to break down a team that's sat on their own 18 yard box, just ask man city
What we really needed today is players that can take it past players, open up space and find a tight through ball, we just didnt have it today
|
|
|
Post by devondumpling on Sept 13, 2014 16:32:23 GMT
Bojan you mean?
|
|
|
Post by hatchett on Sept 13, 2014 16:37:38 GMT
He was off the pace also today. He does have the potential to be a David Silva type player but not sure how long that would take??
|
|
|
Post by fca47 on Sept 13, 2014 16:43:39 GMT
Should have brought Assaidi on earlier, making their subs opened the game up, they improved but we made our subs way too late. We have got to play two wingers against sides parking the bus, like Leicester and Villa. And our shooting from outside the box is lamentable , only Adam seems to have any idea,
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Sept 13, 2014 16:43:50 GMT
How it was possible to avoid scoring from all the chances we created today wasn't down to Pearson's tactics I can tell!
|
|
|
Post by chuckrocky on Sept 13, 2014 16:51:56 GMT
Said this myself after the game. Yes we had chances but it was their changes at half-time that won them the game. Pearson was pro-active, Hughes was re-active, should of changed things well before they scored.
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Sept 13, 2014 17:04:31 GMT
Said this myself after the game. Yes we had chances but it was their changes at half-time that won them the game. Pearson was pro-active, Hughes was re-active, should of changed things well before they scored. What absolute rubbish. How anyone can put today down to Hughes is beyond me - *of course* Pearson changed it, they were getting completely dominated, which is exactly the reason Hughes rightly didn't fix something that wasn't broke. This calling for early subs just seems like something people think they should say. We were dominating and creating chances, there was no need to change anything until they unexpectedly scored, and even then it wasn't critical.
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Sept 13, 2014 17:06:57 GMT
Said this myself after the game. Yes we had chances but it was their changes at half-time that won them the game. Pearson was pro-active, Hughes was re-active, should of changed things well before they scored. What absolute rubbish. How anyone can put today down to Hughes is beyond me - *of course* Pearson changed it, they were getting completely dominated, which is exactly the reason Hughes rightly didn't fix something that wasn't broke. This calling for early subs just seems like something people think they should say. We were dominating and creating chances, there was no need to change anything until they unexpectedly scored, and even then it wasn't critical. Their subs changed the game and we waited far too long to change it. To wait until after the 70th minute to make a change was utterly bewildering.
|
|
|
Post by chuckrocky on Sept 13, 2014 17:09:41 GMT
Said this myself after the game. Yes we had chances but it was their changes at half-time that won them the game. Pearson was pro-active, Hughes was re-active, should of changed things well before they scored. What absolute rubbish. How anyone can put today down to Hughes is beyond me - *of course* Pearson changed it, they were getting completely dominated, which is exactly the reason Hughes rightly didn't fix something that wasn't broke. This calling for early subs just seems like something people think they should say. We were dominating and creating chances, there was no need to change anything until they unexpectedly scored, and even then it wasn't critical. Dominating yes, creating chances no. If you count weak as piss shots being dragged wide and a few corners as creating chances then you're easily pleased. They had a 33 year old left back and he was up against Walters for 80 minutes. Of course we should call for early subs if we're struggling to break teams down, Assaidi or Arnautovic should of been on early in the second half for the ineffective Walters.
|
|
|
Post by stokemanusa on Sept 13, 2014 17:16:06 GMT
How to beat stoke. Load the middle of the park with a drinkwater type then just park the bus. Force us wide and counter when you can, but otherwise hold on for dear life and hope we resort to hoofball. 24 chances but 4 were on target. Meh.
|
|
|
Post by hooftastic on Sept 13, 2014 17:20:03 GMT
I don't agree. We missed two absolute sitters. One where Moses hits it straight at the keeper and another where Walters decides to try and take a touch instead of hitting it. On top of that we've had countless half-chances and the ref denied one clear penalty and another half shout.
Play that game 10 times and we'd win 9.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Sept 13, 2014 17:23:08 GMT
Said this myself after the game. Yes we had chances but it was their changes at half-time that won them the game. Pearson was pro-active, Hughes was re-active, should of changed things well before they scored. What absolute rubbish. How anyone can put today down to Hughes is beyond me - *of course* Pearson changed it, they were getting completely dominated, which is exactly the reason Hughes rightly didn't fix something that wasn't broke. This calling for early subs just seems like something people think they should say. We were dominating and creating chances, there was no need to change anything until they unexpectedly scored, and even then it wasn't critical. Cambiasso changed the game and we didn't do anything to stop him, simple really.
|
|
|
Post by NottsMatt on Sept 13, 2014 17:23:30 GMT
MH cocked it up, wrong team, wrong set up. Just the same as the Villa game. Wank.
|
|
|
Post by jonnybravo on Sept 13, 2014 17:25:00 GMT
I really feel now we will struggle to score without odemwinge in the team
|
|
|
Post by hatchett on Sept 13, 2014 17:28:19 GMT
It was blatantly obvious that we needed to stretch the game at 55-60 minutes they had gained some sort of control in the middle and we had nothing to offer with Walters out wide. I was really impressed with Moses and his work rate however Boyan I was not so much
|
|
|
Post by sufolkstokie on Sept 13, 2014 17:40:28 GMT
Hughes got it wrong today
Leicester were always going to come and set up like Villa. Should not start with Walters at home
Our set pieces are woeful. The only plan is to hit and hope. No movement
Subs were way too late and wrong Games was crying out for Adam. Arnie needed to come in, not a half fit Assaidi
Very predictable
|
|
|
Post by pottersrule on Sept 13, 2014 17:51:44 GMT
Hughes got it wrong today Leicester were always going to come and set up like Villa. Should not start with Walters at home Our set pieces are woeful. The only plan is to hit and hope. No movement Subs were way too late and wrong Games was crying out for Adam. Arnie needed to come in, not a half fit Assaidi Very predictable Hughes was going to bring Arnie and Assaidi on but Pieters injury stopped him.Ossie was good when he came on and Arnie has been poor in the two games he has played,so i think he got that right.Agree about Adam,he needs to be started at home.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Sept 13, 2014 17:54:11 GMT
Hughes got it wrong today Leicester were always going to come and set up like Villa. Should not start with Walters at home Our set pieces are woeful. The only plan is to hit and hope. No movement Subs were way too late and wrong Games was crying out for Adam. Arnie needed to come in, not a half fit Assaidi Very predictable Hughes was going to bring Arnie and Assaidi on but Pieters injury stopped him.Ossie was good when he came on and Arnie has been poor in the two games he has played,so i think he got that right.Agree about Adam,he needs to be started at home. Still loves a cut back for no reason does Assaidi.
|
|
|
Post by pottersrule on Sept 13, 2014 17:57:11 GMT
Hughes was going to bring Arnie and Assaidi on but Pieters injury stopped him.Ossie was good when he came on and Arnie has been poor in the two games he has played,so i think he got that right.Agree about Adam,he needs to be started at home. Still loves a cut back for no reason does Assaidi. Still looks like the only player to get a shot on target to.
|
|
|
Post by j3st3r on Sept 13, 2014 17:59:14 GMT
I'm struggling to see what Charlie Adam has to do to get a run out... we're clearly lacking goals.. and he chipped in with a fair few last season.... Ireland is out.. yet still Glenn Whelan is picking up his 200th appearance.. nothing against Glen, but at home against the lower clubs we should be attacking more... and Adam has proved he can change a game...
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Sept 13, 2014 18:00:17 GMT
Said this myself after the game. Yes we had chances but it was their changes at half-time that won them the game. Pearson was pro-active, Hughes was re-active, should of changed things well before they scored. What absolute rubbish. How anyone can put today down to Hughes is beyond me - *of course* Pearson changed it, they were getting completely dominated, which is exactly the reason Hughes rightly didn't fix something that wasn't broke. This calling for early subs just seems like something people think they should say. We were dominating and creating chances, there was no need to change anything until they unexpectedly scored, and even then it wasn't critical. Creating chances, when did this happen?.
|
|
|
Post by liamo on Sept 13, 2014 18:04:36 GMT
Stoke today didn't need pace or work horses, we needed creativity, we can hit teams on the counter when need be but it's worrying how little we're able to break teams down, Villa and Leicester have now set the template for how to beat stoke away
We didn't need both whelan and zonzi today, we needed Adam
I'd have liked to have seen Arnie instead of Walters and Bojan up front instead of Crouch
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on Sept 13, 2014 18:15:32 GMT
I'm struggling to see what Charlie Adam has to do to get a run out... we're clearly lacking goals.. and he chipped in with a fair few last season.... Ireland is out.. yet still Glenn Whelan is picking up his 200th appearance.. nothing against Glen, but at home against the lower clubs we should be attacking more... and Adam has proved he can change a game... Whelan played well today, he's the holding midfielder, if its not him whoever it is shouldn't be attacking very often.
|
|
|
Post by keasie1863 on Sept 13, 2014 18:27:56 GMT
MH cocked it up, wrong team, wrong set up. Just the same as the Villa game. Wank. Like he cocked it up at man city, i suppose. Wank!!
|
|
|
Post by Sergeant Muttley on Sept 13, 2014 18:30:35 GMT
Pearson changes at half time certainly improved them although that wasn't hard because they were dreadful 1st half but imo our substitutes we're FAR too late.
|
|
|
Post by fca47 on Sept 13, 2014 18:31:05 GMT
I'm struggling to see what Charlie Adam has to do to get a run out... we're clearly lacking goals.. and he chipped in with a fair few last season.... Ireland is out.. yet still Glenn Whelan is picking up his 200th appearance.. nothing against Glen, but at home against the lower clubs we should be attacking more... and Adam has proved he can change a game... Whelan played well today, he's the holding midfielder, if its not him whoever it is shouldn't be attacking very often. Exactly, Whelan did his job well, no penetration from Nzonzi, he had one great run in the first half, but had a crap shot. So he is capable. Hughes should be kicking his arse to move the ball forward.
|
|
|
Post by j3st3r on Sept 13, 2014 19:01:26 GMT
Whelan played well today, he's the holding midfielder, if its not him whoever it is shouldn't be attacking very often. Exactly, Whelan did his job well, no penetration from Nzonzi, he had one great run in the first half, but had a crap shot. So he is capable. Hughes should be kicking his arse to move the ball forward. Was never saying that Whelan didnt do his job.. was just questioning if a more attacking line up would have served us better... before they made the change.. we were all over them, but lacked that cutting edge to score... I'd have started Zonz and Adam.. With the lower teams who are going to park the bus.. I think we need a more offensive starting 11...
|
|
|
Post by benjaminbiscuit on Sept 13, 2014 20:06:06 GMT
very uneasy when i saw the half time changes then the fact we didn't respond when the game had clearly changed very very disappointing management today
|
|