|
Post by stokerstayinup on Dec 19, 2015 18:53:19 GMT
We cannot break down teams who come to the Brit to defend and hit us on the break, especially with no focal point to the attack. I'm not sure what Diouf has done not to come on, let alone start, today. The false 9 worked like a dream v Man City, as they will come to play. It can work away when the onus on the home team is to come at us. When we are at home v teams who want to shut up shop and hit us hard with pace, what we are doing this season is simply not working. I say give Diouf a run up top, especially at home, and see if he can bag a few. Strangely, next home game and next away game, we can play on the counter with the false 9, so it may be just the right tactic to use. I thought we broke palace's defence dowm enough today to earn 3 points.austin wont solve that problem anyhow.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2015 18:54:57 GMT
I think that's the issue. It worked once and everyone got carried away. We can beat big sides, False 9 or not, but we struggle against mid table rivals. Let's actually address that problem.
Doesn't that work both ways though Jase ... ie, you're getting carried away because it hasn't worked for, erm ... two games?
And what is the definition of 'worked'?
We were devastating against Citeh, and we created a ton of chances against West Ham and Palace but it really is fine margins, if we'd won either or even both of those games, there wouldn't be one single pundit who would have suggested that the result had been a travesty ... (very) fine margins in both games.
Personally, I love the formation and (especially) the false number nine, I think it can work against all types of opposition in various situations and certainly needs to be given at least some time (when you consider the opportunities we have created since adopting it) before being dismissed (even against middle or lower ranking oppositon).
We struggled against Watford prior. That wasn't the False 9 but a lack of Diouf and/or Joselu starting. Let's try that.
|
|
|
Post by stokerstayinup on Dec 19, 2015 18:55:41 GMT
I think that's the issue. It worked once and everyone got carried away. We can beat big sides, False 9 or not, but we struggle against mid table rivals. Let's actually address that problem.
Doesn't that work both ways though Jase ... ie, you're getting carried away because it hasn't worked for, erm ... two games?
And what is the definition of 'worked'?
We were devastating against Citeh, and we created a ton of chances against West Ham and Palace but it really is fine margins, if we'd won either or even both of those games, there wouldn't be one single pundit who would have suggested that the result had been a travesty ... (very) fine margins in both games.
Personally, I love the formation and (especially) the false number nine, I think it can work against all types of opposition in various situations and certainly needs to be given at least some time (when you consider the opportunities we have created since adopting it) before being dismissed (even against middle or lower ranking oppositon).
I like it too but still think diuof needs to play regularly somehow!
|
|
|
Post by Fred Ferret on Dec 19, 2015 19:00:01 GMT
We missed diouf today we needed him in the box, everytime we got in a cross in today there was no one to finish it especially in the first half. Most of our crosses were wank anyway Criminal that Diouf isn't getting game time. We're shooting ourselves in the foot Sparkey - sort it!
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Dec 19, 2015 19:01:54 GMT
Doesn't that work both ways though Jase ... ie, you're getting carried away because it hasn't worked for, erm ... two games?
And what is the definition of 'worked'?
We were devastating against Citeh, and we created a ton of chances against West Ham and Palace but it really is fine margins, if we'd won either or even both of those games, there wouldn't be one single pundit who would have suggested that the result had been a travesty ... (very) fine margins in both games.
Personally, I love the formation and (especially) the false number nine, I think it can work against all types of opposition in various situations and certainly needs to be given at least some time (when you consider the opportunities we have created since adopting it) before being dismissed (even against middle or lower ranking oppositon).
We struggled against Watford prior. That wasn't the False 9 but a lack of Diouf and/or Joselu starting. Let's try that.
Not really following your line of argument here Jase ... you started by asking the question 'Can We Start Playing A Striker Again?'
Well we did play a striker against Watford. I thought you were starting a debate about our change of formation from the Citeh game onwards ...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2015 19:09:40 GMT
We struggled against Watford prior. That wasn't the False 9 but a lack of Diouf and/or Joselu starting. Let's try that.
Not really following your line of argument here Jase ... you started by asking the question 'Can We Start Playing A Striker Again?'
Well we did play a striker against Watford. I thought you were starting a debate about our change of formation from the Citeh game onwards ...
Oh I did. This is just a by-point. We played Walters in that game, when he was probably 1-2 games overdue to be dropped because of average performances. We had Joselu and Diouf to use and didn't use them. Maybe the thread title should've been "can we start playing Diouf or Joselu". Probably would've made more sense.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Dec 19, 2015 19:12:40 GMT
Not really following your line of argument here Jase ... you started by asking the question 'Can We Start Playing A Striker Again?'
Well we did play a striker against Watford. I thought you were starting a debate about our change of formation from the Citeh game onwards ...
Oh I did. This is just a by-point. We played Walters in that game, when he was probably 1-2 games overdue to be dropped because of average performances. We had Joselu and Diouf to use and didn't use them. Maybe the thread title should've been "can we start playing Diouf or Joselu". Probably would've made more sense. Indeed mate, a completely different discussion.
|
|
|
Post by milky on Dec 19, 2015 19:13:39 GMT
I thought we looked threatening today to be honest.Their keeper made three decent saves and MVG was a few inches from giving us the lead.
Also they threw bodies in the way and blocked a few decent efforts that looked like they were on target. Their lad hits one and it flies through everyone and arrows into the corner..
In games like this we really do need that first goal to bring out the opposition and give us space when we break.
Very frustrating day..but 26 efforts on goal suggests we are heading in the right direction. I just don't think it's as black and white as just signing a prolific goalscorer and we will start scoring shit loads.In Bojan ,Shaq and Mame we have three players more than capable of finding the net anyway
Even our corners looked a bit more threatening today.
|
|
|
Post by jezzascfc on Dec 19, 2015 19:15:30 GMT
There were reasons for Diouf being away from the team for a while - he is now back in the fold and raring to go, so I cannot see why he should not get more game time. Sitting him all game today made no sense to me, from before the start, not only with hindsight.
|
|
|
Post by MilanStokie on Dec 19, 2015 20:12:39 GMT
Well we weren't banging them in when we used one so when we changed to this setup, we looked a 100 times more threatening and scored 2 vs Man City. The problem with this setup is it doesn't break down defensive teams very well but works better vs the teams who come to take us on. We created enough today to have won. We had enough space on the edge of the box and got behind them a few times. I don't think the system is the real problem...shot execution is. Really? I think we dominated more in their final 3rd than them in ours but I can only really recall 3 decent chances, the post, Bojans long ranger and the late 6 yard box scramble. Plenty of build up but I always strangely felt Palace were very comfortable.
|
|
|
Post by steve66 on Dec 19, 2015 20:42:55 GMT
We created enough today to have won. We had enough space on the edge of the box and got behind them a few times. I don't think the system is the real problem...shot execution is. Really? I think we dominated more in their final 3rd than them in ours but I can only really recall 3 decent chances, the post, Bojans long ranger and the late 6 yard box scramble. Plenty of build up but I always strangely felt Palace were very comfortable. Bojan chance when ball came out to him on the angle of six yard box, from Glen Johnson shot, there's another two opportunities!
|
|
|
Post by bolly_premprem on Dec 19, 2015 20:46:48 GMT
wow, 2 games after battering manchester city, scoring 2, and Arnie alone could have had 5, and after dominating today both in possesion and chances created, and people calling to change the system.
its not like we were banging in the goals before the change to this MUCH MORE CREATIVE formation, were we?
|
|
|
Post by mrteddysalad on Dec 19, 2015 21:34:24 GMT
Joselu is wank Crouch is done Walters is crap up front Diouf is the only option and he's a mediocre option at best. January can't come soon enough. You're full of shit
|
|
|
Post by swampySCFC on Dec 19, 2015 22:25:11 GMT
I understand the Mame issue but don't get what Joselu is all about
|
|
|
Post by trentvale68 on Dec 19, 2015 22:43:09 GMT
Only 4 players have scored a league goal this season . That's an awful statistic It is!!! God help us if the defence wasn't so good!
We have the best midfield and attacking midfielders in years but the poorest options up front in a while. Once we had forwards who could score and got fuck all chances their way, now we have chances, crosses and through balls galore and no one to finish.
Don't want to be hard on Diouf with his recent tragedy but anyway he's only going to get headers mostly. The Man City worldie was a one off.
Joselu is one of the biggest wastes of money ever, could well end up another Palacios.
Peter Crouch is on the slide now with that injury. Looks like Odemwingie is out of the picture
Walters.well thank god at least he's still here; He's a better finisher than Diouf, at least with feet. He's still not an out & out striker though.
Let's be honest, we have a trio in midfield the envy of bigger clubs than us BUT we have a set of strikers that no other PL club would take a look at. A striker is a must have in January.
Yes, Arnautovic, Bojan & shaqiri can play more as strikers but then there is less creativity in midfield.
The less attacking playerse even defenders still have a responsibility to weigh in with at least one a piece over the season. Having said that we look so half arsed on setpieces that looks unlikely. Would be nice to see Glenn thunder one in sometime. when did he last score????
Sometimes you miss the brutal simplicity of those throwins
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2015 8:24:12 GMT
False 9 requires goalscoring midfielders.
Take out Arnautovic and we have very little goal threat from other area's.
It's that simple.
|
|
|
Post by milky on Dec 20, 2015 9:21:07 GMT
False 9 requires goalscoring midfielders. Take out Arnautovic and we have very little goal threat from other area's. It's that simple. Bojan can score goals,Shaq is more than capable..Glen Johnson often gets himself in decent goal scoring positions.MVG could have had three in the last two games. I don't think we lost yesterday because of tactics or systems. We have created far more opportunities since the false number 9 system has been in place.The players have the attributes to make it work imo. .. I saw nothing yesterday to suggest it should be binned.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Dec 20, 2015 9:22:42 GMT
The very phrase 'false number 9' make me want to vomit my liver out.
|
|
|
Post by The Drunken Communist on Dec 20, 2015 9:28:57 GMT
I think that's the issue. It worked once and everyone got carried away. We can beat big sides, False 9 or not, but we struggle against mid table rivals. Let's actually address that problem.
Doesn't that work both ways though Jase ... ie, you're getting carried away because it hasn't worked for, erm ... two games?
And what is the definition of 'worked'?
We were devastating against Citeh, and we created a ton of chances against West Ham and Palace but it really is fine margins, if we'd won either or even both of those games, there wouldn't be one single pundit who would have suggested that the result had been a travesty ... (very) fine margins in both games.
Personally, I love the formation and (especially) the false number nine, I think it can work against all types of opposition in various situations and certainly needs to be given at least some time (when you consider the opportunities we have created since adopting it) before being dismissed (even against middle or lower ranking oppositon).
Thank fuck you've posted on here, Paul 'cos I was begining to think I'd watched the wrong match yesterday! Our last three matches have been our best of the season, we tore Man City a new arsehole, should have come away from West Ham with the 3pts if we'd taken any of the numerous clear cut chances we had, and yesterday we again would have taken the 3pts on another day as we battered Palace... It was like watching some plucky underdog in the FA Cup the way their defenders were throwing their bodies left, right & centre to get lucky blocks & what not, add in their 'keeper playing a blinder too. The word for me is 'luck'. It wasn't with us yesterday but on another day it will be (For example - Play that game again & there's a good chance Arnie's deflected shot goes just inside the post rather than just wide of it, and their fellas goal late on goes sailing into the South Stand. 2-1 victory & no-one is moaning about the system not working)
|
|
|
Post by hchpotter on Dec 20, 2015 13:58:27 GMT
This system works against teams who believe they will beat us at the Brit and come to attack. To beat Chelsea twice and Man City was a great achievement and we were rightly lauded for great performances. Against an astute manager who knows how to close us down we struggle. Hence the dropped home points against Liverpool, West Brom, Leicester, Watford and now Palace.
Our goal scoring record for a so called attacking, entertaining style is simply a contradiction in terms. To be the lowest scorers in the league with Bojan, Arnie, Shaqiri, Diouf, Walers, Crouch, Adam , Joselu in the squad is not quite right is it?
To average less than a goal a game is poor. We're on a goal scoring par with Aston Villa but we put the ball in the net less often than Bolton Wanderers, Blackpool, and Dagenham & Redbridge. Not one of the 92 clubs in the football league has scored fewer goals.
Shaqiri has already been hailed as a Stoke legend by many on here and he scores less than Dean Whitehead. Then again, those who go down to the Brit week in week out will only have seen 4 players score a league goal this season. Bojan, Arnie, Walters and Diouf. Something is fundamentally wrong when we are so reliant on so few to convert chances.
We clicked against Man City and looked wonderful. We will click again but this team has a long way to go before it achieves any level of consistency. The goal scoring issue has to be addressed urgently. It is not average, mediocre or disappointing; its's the worst in the whole of the football league. Just 8 goals in home league fixtures from August to Christmas.
I raised similar issues after 5 games and was told to come back after 10 matches. I've waited until Christmas and we're still the most goal shy team in English football. Permission to be concerned?
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Dec 20, 2015 14:01:51 GMT
This system works against teams who believe they will beat us at the Brit and come to attack. To beat Chelsea twice and Man City was a great achievement and we were rightly lauded for great performances. Against an astute manager who knows how to close us down we struggle. Hence the dropped home points against Liverpool, West Brom, Leicester, Watford and now Palace. Our goal scoring record for a so called attacking, entertaining style is simply a contradiction in terms. To be the lowest scorers in the league with Bojan, Arnie, Shaqiri, Diouf, Walers, Crouch, Adam , Joselu in the squad is not quite right is it? To average less than a goal a game is poor. We're on a goal scoring par with Aston Villa but we put the ball in the net less often than Bolton Wanderers, Blackpool, and Dagenham & Redbridge. Not one of the 92 clubs in the football league has scored fewer goals. Shaqiri has already been hailed as a Stoke legend by many on here and he scores less than Dean Whitehead. Then again, those who go down to the Brit week in week out will only have seen 4 players score a league goal this season. Bojan, Arnie, Walters and Diouf. Something is fundamentally wrong when we are so reliant on so few to convert chances. We clicked against Man City and looked wonderful. We will click again but this team has a long way to go before it achieves any level of consistency. The goal scoring issue has to be addressed urgently. It is not average, mediocre or disappointing; its's the worst in the whole of the football league. Just 8 goals in home league fixtures from August to Christmas. I raised similar issues after 5 games and was told to come back after 10 matches. I've waited until Christmas and we're still the most goal shy team in English football. Permission to be concerned? Not really no. We look a much better side than we did after five games and we're creating chances now, which we weren't before. It'd be concerning if we'd been playing rubbish every week and looking set for a relegation fight. We're not though. We look on course as it stands for another top half finish.
|
|
|
Post by hchpotter on Dec 20, 2015 14:15:23 GMT
Chief, we're on course to finish 11th with a negative goal difference which is not top half.
This is due to a very strong defensive record. Our attacking play has been pretty but utterly ineffective. Less effective than any team in the fotball league. Playing pretty football is not the same as playing well. Our attacking players need to score more, especially Shaqiri. Other players need to chip in. Adam, Affelay and Whelan should all be expected to have contributed by now. I thought Johnson might have scored a league goal before now.
If ever we did a little work on free kicks and corners during the week surely set piece experts like Bojan, Arnie or Shaqiri could help Ryan, Wollscheid or Van Ginkel notch an occasional goal?
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Dec 20, 2015 14:17:41 GMT
Chief, we're on course to finish 11th with a negative goal difference which is not top half. This is due to a very strong defensive record. Our attacking play has been pretty but utterly ineffective. Less effective than any team in the fotball league. Playing pretty football is not the same as playing well. Our attacking players need to score more, especially Shaqiri. Other players need to chip in. Adam, Affelay and Whelan should all be expected to have contributed by now. I thought Johnson might have scored a league goal before now. If ever we did a little work on free kicks and corners during the week surely set piece experts like Bojan, Arnie or Shaqiri could help Ryan, Wollscheid or Van Ginkel notch an occasional goal? We're easily in the hunt to finish top half. Are you really 'worried' about finishing 11th? Wouldn't be a catastrophe would it? Again, you're acting as if our attacking play has been the same all season. It hasn't. We've gone from creating nothing to creating a fair bit, which is a positive development, and we now need to be more clinical.
|
|
|
Post by milky on Dec 20, 2015 14:31:56 GMT
Chief, we're on course to finish 11th with a negative goal difference which is not top half. This is due to a very strong defensive record. Our attacking play has been pretty but utterly ineffective. Less effective than any team in the fotball league. Playing pretty football is not the same as playing well. Our attacking players need to score more, especially Shaqiri. Other players need to chip in. Adam, Affelay and Whelan should all be expected to have contributed by now. I thought Johnson might have scored a league goal before now. If ever we did a little work on free kicks and corners during the week surely set piece experts like Bojan, Arnie or Shaqiri could help Ryan, Wollscheid or Van Ginkel notch an occasional goal? Why are we on course to finish 11 th?Isn't there 21 games still to play ? Yes our goalscoring is a big issue..but things are going in the right direction I'm as much as we are now making the opposition keeper earn his wages at least !
|
|
|
Post by hchpotter on Dec 20, 2015 14:36:59 GMT
I'm not the least bit worried about finishing 11th and that would be far from catastrophic.
However, I'm astonished and frustrated that we are now perceived as an attacking and entertaining team when we score as often as basket case Aston Villa. our lack of goals was more understandable earlier in the season as Bojan was out and Shaqiri was settling in. Bojan is back and looks fit. Shaqiri has half a season under his belt and needs to start contributing in terms of goals.
Ugly goals from set pieces are still allowed and are worth just as much as beautifully crafted goals from skilful individuals. Fergie was never averse to Steve Bruce appearing on the same score sheet as Cantona, Scholes or Giggs. Even Wenger would allow gorilla Keown or Tony Adams to score alongside Bergkamp. WithWalters, Shawcross and Wolscheid we should be more productive at set plays but we rarely look like scoring from a ball into the box. This is just one of the reasons why our goals for column is so poor.
|
|
|
Post by hchpotter on Dec 20, 2015 14:44:29 GMT
Milky we're "on course" to finish 11th because after virtually half a season we are, ahem, 11th.
Leicester are "on course" to finish top. I don't think they will finish top. Neither do I think the team with the worst goal scoring record in the entire football league will finish in the top half of the Premier League. Therefore, in my opinion we need to start scoring if we want to finish in the top half.
If we are to score more goals we need to switch our style of play mid match if our preferred tactics are not working. We don't seem capable of implementing plan B during the course of a game. Playing Ryan at centre forward with Diouf and Joselu on the bench is not a viable plan B.
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Dec 20, 2015 14:46:27 GMT
I'm not the least bit worried about finishing 11th and that would be far from catastrophic. However, I'm astonished and frustrated that we are now perceived as an attacking and entertaining team when we score as often as basket case Adton Villa. our lack of goals was more understandable earlier in the season as Bojan was out and Shaqiri was settling in. Bojan is back and looks fit. Shaqiri has half a season under his belt and needs to start contributing in terms of goals. Ugly goals from set pieces are still allowed and are worth just as much as beautifully crafted goals from skilful individuals. Fergie was never averse to Steve Bruce appearing on the same score sheet as Cantona, Scholes or Giggs. Even Wenger would allow gorilla Keown or Tony Adams to score alongside Bergkamp. WithWalters, Shawcross and Wolscheid we should be more productive at set plays but we rarely look like scoring from a ball into the box. This is just one of the reasons why our goals for column is so poor. We're perceived as such because that's the mindset compared to the old days. We actually have a go in most games these days. We need to score more goals and our set pieces are atrocious and there's plenty we can put right but I don't understand what you're 'worried' about. Things are looking up.
|
|
|
Post by chiefdelilah on Dec 20, 2015 14:47:28 GMT
Milky we're "on course" to finish 11th because after virtually half a season we are, ahem, 11th. Leicester are "on course" to finish top. I don't think they will finish top. Neither do I think the team with the worst goal scoring record in the entire football league will finish in the top half of the Premier League. Therefore, in my opinion we need to start scoring if we want to finish in the top half. If we are to score more goals we need to switch our style of play mid match if our preferred tactics are not working. We don't seem capable of implementing plan B during the course of a game. Playing Ryan at centre forward with Diouf and Joselu on the bench is not a viable plan B. I thought we implemented Plan B yesterday. Plan A wasn't working, so we went to Plan B, created more chances.
|
|
|
Post by hchpotter on Dec 20, 2015 14:54:10 GMT
Given that we found ourselves 1-0 down at half time perhaps a more viable plan B would have been to put Diouf on at the start of the second half and play with a true striker rather than a false 9?
I would have had Diouf on before SJW given yesterday's circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by milky on Dec 20, 2015 14:56:33 GMT
Milky we're "on course" to finish 11th because after virtually half a season we are, ahem, 11th. Leicester are "on course" to finish top. I don't think they will finish top. Neither do I think the team with the worst goal scoring record in the entire football league will finish in the top half of the Premier League. Therefore, in my opinion we need to start scoring if we want to finish in the top half. If we are to score more goals we need to switch our style of play mid match if our preferred tactics are not working. We don't seem capable of implementing plan B during the course of a game. Playing Ryan at centre forward with Diouf and Joselu on the bench is not a viable plan B. My point being we aren't even half way so we've plenty of games to put things right in the goal scoring department. If we carry on creating chances at the rate we have been since Man City I'd be amazed if we didn't start to convert a few with the talent we have. If we were huffing and puffing and not creating then I'd share your concern.
|
|