|
|
Post by rabbigan on Mar 16, 2009 9:46:43 GMT
You may think this sad but for one I had some time and I wanted to see whether my reactions during the game and after were factual or not. This is what I found.
1.I thought in this game and as at Villa and Bolton the game bypassed Salif. I thought he was off the pace and simply could not get back into position when we lost the ball and attacks broke down. This was proved true beyond even how badly I thought he had performed and the absence of your key holding midfielder
puts a lot of strain on others both defenders and midfielders. It took TP far too long to see the error of selecting Cresswell and I hope he gets Faye into the central role soonest.
2. I have always thought playing Rory away from our mini pitch was a mistake. Saturday he contributed nothing.
I dont think that necessarily playing one striker is a negative . Many top teams do it and I think Beattie with Liam and Etherington wide might work. It means you can get more into midfield when needed. It has certainly worked with Villa this season and their season has only startd to fall apart since they brought in Heskey. For most of the season they only had Agbonlahor (the reason I am informed about Villa is that my 4 stepsons are all Villa season ticket holders)
Per haps it is too late for us to try this.
3. Sorenson for him had a really bad game and was at fault for the first two goals , but the more important factor was that Lescotts goal was so offside it was untrue and if you consider 5 minutes after half time we could have been level if they had got that decsion right we may well have been looking at a different result.
4. Mama for whatever reason is a shadow of his former self and if fit assuming we keep the same formation we must start with Fuller.
5. Everton supported the player with the ball far better than we did by getting players up to the man more quickly and had much better movement by the off the ball players to give options mfor the guy with the ball.
6. Wilkinson might just develop into a sensational full back. He is now staying on his feet and in addition to his excellent work against Pienaar made some excellent covering tackles in other areas. His speed is a real advantage.
There was sufficient from us in this game to ensure we avoid the drop but TP needs to get real about Salifs limitations and the pointlessness of employing Rory particularly away from home.
Sorenson has been excellent for most of the season and must assume this was a blip.
Beattie had a poor game
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Mar 16, 2009 9:49:37 GMT
Everton supported the player with the ball far better than we did by getting players up to the man more quickly and had much better movement by the off the ball players to give options mfor the guy with the ball.
Yes spot on. That was the main factor in their 1st half domination...which decided the game for them. There was three of them everywhere. Chelsea do that well too. Hunt in packs and earn the right to play.
|
|
|
|
Post by wembley4372 on Mar 16, 2009 9:52:08 GMT
No mention of Shawcross being easily turned and caught out of position?
|
|
|
|
Post by Onneravineet on Mar 16, 2009 10:19:18 GMT
Rabbi I agree with most of what you say. Although what I'd like to add is that Salif does do some good work and has been solid this season in some games. However I believe he is having a severe dip in form and he has been missing now for a number of games. He needs far too much time than what he gets and he's not a good pairing with Whelan.
I think Faye has been good and has definitely improved the more game time he's had.
However Tongue deserves a chance in the middle with Whelan and when chasing the game away from home I'd like to see two mobile forward thinking midfielders to make the most out of a very dangerous pairing in Fuller and Beattie!
Having Fuller on the bench does give an injection and TP seems to like that but it wastes a sub! Fuller and Beattie as an out and out pairing will work!
Another thing I've noticed though is Lawrence. He plays more back passes than forward passes and is very reluctant to take anyone on. Not something you need from a wideman. I'd like to see more of Henri's pace down the right!
|
|
|
|
Post by delilahblue on Mar 16, 2009 10:25:10 GMT
Just watched the Lescott goal on 'Everton TV' (and you can freeze it for critical moments) when the ball was headed Lescott's left foot was on the 6 yd line and at least one Stoke player (there may have been a second behind him but it's not clear) has one foot a good 2 feet in the 6 yd box. So not offside.
Perhaps more relevant is that we had a lot of possession and chances in the box and by the law of averages you will eventually get a dodgy decision (and I don't think it was) or an unlucky bounce, deflection etc. and that happened with the third.
I don't think you'll go down and I think some of your fans live in cloud cuckoo land looking at other threads. In the first half we played really well and you were awful. The surprising thing for me was that the chasing to win the ball and the passion came from us and I expected that from Stoke from the off!
Second half we were not good, partly due to Cahill getting injured but also due to the way you played - you didn't let us play, you got at us and although your chances may have dried up after your player failed to get his foot to that cross by inches we never looked comfortable.
Back to what some of your fans say in other threads - you were playing a team that is full of confidence, 1 defeat (Man Unt penalty) in 17 games and a squad that has been built over much more time than you have had. We may have a massive injury list but those other things carry you through. Mind you I think the cracks were showing at times!
You've had 29 games in the Prem. The weaknesses are obvious but without loads of money you can't just build a team in that time. You play to your strengths, which you did after h/t, go for survival and build gradually. Your need for an improvement in midfield to give you more variety and creativeness has to be priority plus a faster and more efficient defence.
9 games left and it's in your own hands, that's pretty good if you ask me. WBA, Middlesbrough and Hull going down.
|
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Mar 16, 2009 10:30:14 GMT
It amazes me that everyone knows how good Cahill is at headers and he gets a free one at goal.  |
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Mar 16, 2009 10:37:22 GMT
I think that is a testament to actually how good Cahill is at losing his markers and his ability to getting into goal scoring positions from crosses and set plays.
He's done it against alot better teams than us aswell.
I have always rated him. At Millwall him and Ifill were always the two players that stood out.
H
|
|
|
|
Post by Onneravineet on Mar 16, 2009 10:45:13 GMT
Cahill is very good and I agree it's more to do with his ability. You can't teach that but Cort has a similar knack, not as good but his positioning on set pieces is/was very good.
|
|
|
|
Post by monsoonmoon on Mar 16, 2009 10:51:51 GMT
That second goal was just shocking.
The ball came in too easily. Lescott lost his marker too easily (who was it meant to be?). Wilko should've stepped up with everyone else. Sorensen's flap was pretty much the only thing not to do with it.
I agree with pretty much everything aside from Lescott's goal being offside. The 4-5-1 idea is interesting and something I've advodacted trying. I think it might have suited Kitson, but definitely will suit Beats.
The only thing I worry about with that is the balance you'd need from the three central-midfielders. You need one goal threat who'll get in the box and generally support the lone striker; the ball player who'll get from box-to-box and bring the wingers into the game and then the ball-winner who is, essentially, a Makelele type player and passes simple short passes.
I can see Rory and Whelan filling the box-to-box void, Amdy and Salif as the ball-winners but for the attacking-support midfielder is the one where I think we'd be lacking. That would mean Beats would be isolated and pretty ineffectual, as the centre-halves can just double up on him. Maybe putting Liam there, then Henri on the right would work. Olofinjana is totally suited to this position, but he'd take some games to get back into the swing of things and thats something we can ill-afford to give right now - having passengers in the side.
We need to get at Boro, so I'd be tempted to go for:
Ethers - Whelan - Amdy - Lennie.
Sometimes playing that solid defensive midfielder can make you more attacking, in a perverse sort of way, as it relieves the defence and allows the midfield more creative freedom and licence to attack.
|
|
|
|
Post by sutekh on Mar 16, 2009 11:01:03 GMT
Thanks for he words of encouragement delilahblue,they are most appreciated.
|
|
|
|
Post by Onneravineet on Mar 16, 2009 11:33:58 GMT
Delilahblue...
Great comments, hopefully you'll knick 4th of Aston and Arsenal... Good luck for the rest of the year
|
|
|
|
Post by Beardy200 on Mar 16, 2009 11:44:37 GMT
Just watched the Lescott goal on 'Everton TV' (and you can freeze it for critical moments) when the ball was headed Lescott's left foot was on the 6 yd line and at least one Stoke player (there may have been a second behind him but it's not clear) has one foot a good 2 feet in the 6 yd box. So not offside. Perhaps more relevant is that we had a lot of possession and chances in the box and by the law of averages you will eventually get a dodgy decision (and I don't think it was) or an unlucky bounce, deflection etc. and that happened with the third. I don't think you'll go down and I think some of your fans live in cloud cuckoo land looking at other threads. In the first half we played really well and you were awful. The surprising thing for me was that the chasing to win the ball and the passion came from us and I expected that from Stoke from the off! Second half we were not good, partly due to Cahill getting injured but also due to the way you played - you didn't let us play, you got at us and although your chances may have dried up after your player failed to get his foot to that cross by inches we never looked comfortable. Back to what some of your fans say in other threads - you were playing a team that is full of confidence, 1 defeat (Man Unt penalty) in 17 games and a squad that has been built over much more time than you have had. We may have a massive injury list but those other things carry you through. Mind you I think the cracks were showing at times! You've had 29 games in the Prem. The weaknesses are obvious but without loads of money you can't just build a team in that time. You play to your strengths, which you did after h/t, go for survival and build gradually. Your need for an improvement in midfield to give you more variety and creativeness has to be priority plus a faster and more efficient defence. 9 games left and it's in your own hands, that's pretty good if you ask me. WBA, Middlesbrough and Hull going down. Agree with practically all of that fella. We were shite in the 1st half while you played really well. Second half was the opposite but i still think Lescott's goal was offside (even if he wasn't it was the sort that 9 out of 10 are given). Having said that whatever decisions went the wrong way the best team on the day won and that's all that matters really. Good luck to you boys - went to Uni in Liverpool and i always fell down on the blue side ;D |
|
|
|
Post by JoeinOz on Mar 16, 2009 11:54:59 GMT
Yes good luck DelilahBlue. Hope you win the cup mate.
|
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Mar 16, 2009 13:33:59 GMT
Just watched the Lescott goal on 'Everton TV' (and you can freeze it for critical moments) when the ball was headed Lescott's left foot was on the 6 yd line and at least one Stoke player (there may have been a second behind him but it's not clear) has one foot a good 2 feet in the 6 yd box. So not offside. Perhaps more relevant is that we had a lot of possession and chances in the box and by the law of averages you will eventually get a dodgy decision (and I don't think it was) or an unlucky bounce, deflection etc. and that happened with the third. I don't think you'll go down and I think some of your fans live in cloud cuckoo land looking at other threads. In the first half we played really well and you were awful. The surprising thing for me was that the chasing to win the ball and the passion came from us and I expected that from Stoke from the off! Second half we were not good, partly due to Cahill getting injured but also due to the way you played - you didn't let us play, you got at us and although your chances may have dried up after your player failed to get his foot to that cross by inches we never looked comfortable. Back to what some of your fans say in other threads - you were playing a team that is full of confidence, 1 defeat (Man Unt penalty) in 17 games and a squad that has been built over much more time than you have had. We may have a massive injury list but those other things carry you through. Mind you I think the cracks were showing at times! You've had 29 games in the Prem. The weaknesses are obvious but without loads of money you can't just build a team in that time. You play to your strengths, which you did after h/t, go for survival and build gradually. Your need for an improvement in midfield to give you more variety and creativeness has to be priority plus a faster and more efficient defence. 9 games left and it's in your own hands, that's pretty good if you ask me. WBA, Middlesbrough and Hull going down. Great summing up Delilahblue, you're bang on throughout. "You play to your strengths, which you did after h/t"For some inexplicable reason our manager doesn't seem to believe in playing to our strengths in the first half of away games. |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Mar 16, 2009 13:43:33 GMT
Tongue would fit well into a 451 imho.
1 of Camara,Mama or Fuller fit,on form & motivated would otherwise guarantee a 442 right now though
|
|
|
|
Post by haslegrave on Mar 16, 2009 14:14:06 GMT
Not had the benefit of seeing the game myself but the
statistics seem to be at odds with your observations on Salif's performance:
Tackles: 9 (8 successful 1 unsuccessful - more successful tackles than any other player on the pitch)
Passes: 22 (20 successful, 2 unsuccessful - more successful passes than any other Stoke player)
plus 3 interceptions, 2 blocks, 2 shots - doesn't sound like he had such a bad game ?
|
|
|
|
Post by dexter97 on Mar 16, 2009 14:18:30 GMT
He definitely put more than two passes astray.
Good long-range attempt on goal though.
|
|
|
|
Post by rabbigan on Mar 16, 2009 14:32:34 GMT
Haslegrave,
Regret your stats mean nothing. If the average pass is a distance of 6 ft you would expect most of them to find the intended player.
Unfortunately TP and the gang rely on pass and tackle counting like you have just shown. What the stats dont show you is the number of times he was out of position and struggling well off the pace and never got in position to make a tackle. You would also expect your holding midfielder to be pretty high on the tackle account.
I am a big fan of Salif but the time has come where he is not making a sufficient contribution.
I can also think of four missed passes that were really bad , so have some considerable doubt about the accuracy of your statistics.
The other thing these dont show is what the receiver had to do to get on the end of passes.
|
|
|
|
Post by haslegrave on Mar 16, 2009 15:46:42 GMT
Rabbigan, Fair enough - as I say I haven't seen the video evidence myself so I'm not really in a postion to comment further. I too am a fan of salif, when he's on his game I think he looks quality, plays it simple and has time on the ball, however his laid back style makes him look awful when he's caught in possession on a bad day. The stats are from The Guardian chalkboards www.guardian.co.uk/football/chalkboards/create - don't know about the accuracy but I assume it's based on prozone data which shouldn't be that bad. Still if you watch the game just once more perhaps you could check ?  |
|
|
|
Post by trebor63 on Mar 16, 2009 17:28:34 GMT
RE
5. Everton supported the player with the ball far better than we did by getting players up to the man more quickly and had much better movement by the off the ball players to give options mfor the guy with the ball.
At the match I certainly made the same point on several occasions. In the first half it was incredible how many times one of our players had the ball at his feet with time and space and absolutely noboddy available to pass to!
and Most of what Delilah blue said I agree with too
|
|
|
|
Post by henry on Mar 16, 2009 17:32:14 GMT
Rabbigan, Fair enough - as I say I haven't seen the video evidence myself so I'm not really in a postion to comment further. I too am a fan of salif, when he's on his game I think he looks quality, plays it simple and has time on the ball, however his laid back style makes him look awful when he's caught in possession on a bad day. The stats are from The Guardian chalkboards www.guardian.co.uk/football/chalkboards/create - don't know about the accuracy but I assume it's based on prozone data which shouldn't be that bad. Still if you watch the game just once more perhaps you could check ? very interesting website, the pass stats on delap show just how wank he was. |
|
