Minority Report V Nottingham Forest

God,you must have had one shitty paper round

 

Havent you considered that the reason their keeper was kicking the ball long was Houghtons attempt to combat our pressing style ...unfortunately for him it failed hence the score line....plus I'd further add the reason Forest had more possession was due to the lads pressing and closing down Forests outlets/ channels distribution...thus making it difficult for them to hold on to possession when attempting to go forward ...
Personally I thought it was a good open game of football....credit to both Barnsley and Forest....Forest for changing their style to counteract our style whilst still going forward for 3 points rather than playing for a point and credit to us for sticking to the game plan and stifling Forests threat.....
Why try to complicate and over think situations when the simplicity of the game lies within the grasp of normality and thus becomes beauty in the eye of the beholder when done correctly ....Yesterday we saw the shoots of success emerging from the seeds already sown by big Val and his system....long may it continue if it brings that type of football.....first time for ages I wasnt worried about us conceding .....we played as a unit and it worked......onwards and upwards. Respect from other teams is slowly but surely happening long may it continue

 

3-4-3 is when we are attacking. When we are defending it becomes 5-4-1 with the wing backs dropping into a back 5 and Chaplin and Frieser dropping into their positions. Even Woodrow pops back to help out. It requires energetic, fit players to do that and we have them in abundance, especially with 5 subs on the bench. The advantage is that when we are attacking we have plenty of men in the box to take advantage. How often in the past have we had players crossing the ball and no one's in the box. Look for the positives rather than the negatives. We've won 4 out of 5 yet you give no praise for that but concentrate on the one we lost where we had mitigating circumstances with key players missing.

 

And therein lies the problem. You devote a whole paragraph warning people it may not be for them? Good god I thought I was verbose but you win that trophy every time.

I shall waste no more time responding to your tedious ramblings and I suggest that you waste none of yours replying to me. I shall be on my bike shortly and at my local beach in ten minutes. It’s only 25 deg C today but it will have to do

 

Both of our goals came from passages of possession and from using width. On the left wing then the right.

Forest spent lots of the game - like Derby and Watford before them - passing the ball side to side between defenders and goalkeeper. But yes, they were often forced to go long. Like Watford did hitting diagonal balls to Sarr (for him in our last home game see Knockaert yesterday).

I always appreciate your reports RR, and enjoy your own take on the game. But I can’t help but feeling you’ve made your mind up about this brand of football, the system and players within it and are therefore unable to appreciate its benefits.

We’ve gone from playing seven games without winning, and barely scoring... to winning four of five, scoring plenty - worldies too - and keeping clean sheets.

I’m not saying that determines anything over any length of time. But these five games, five results and performances have been markedly better than prior. And we are currently enjoying the best run of results at this level since 2016.

 

I thought we pretty much matched a good team for the most part. It was a high quality match which could’ve gone either way in my opinion where as against Derby I didn’t feel there was much quality on display & we were just slightly better organised than them.

I think your comments about our chances compared to there’s are pretty harsh. The Woodrow & Chaplin efforts that hit the bar were hardly long distance shots. Woodrow’s was just outside the box & Chaplin’s may have even been in the box. They weren’t just punts from distance, they were well crafted team moves before they got the shot off. If you had free kicks from where they took the shots you’d be on the edge of your seat thinking we’ve a chance of scoring here.

We got in good positions ourselves on numerous occasions. The 2nd crossbar effort from Woodrow was a lovely move, great pass by Styles & a good first touch by Woodrow & he should’ve finished it really. Frieser got the ball in good positions on a few occasions in the first half as well but was wasteful with his final ball.

Yes we relied on Walton a couple of times but you’re up against quality like Knockaert & Lolley, they’re going to create chances.

Styles gave the ball away needlessly a couple of times in the first half but he also defended better than he has previously in my opinion. He made several great interceptions & saved us with the block all in the first half so even at the half way stage I thought he’d played well & then topped it off with a stunning goal & what should’ve been a fantastic assist as well.

It’s a joy to watch 4 players as good as Brittain, James, Mowatt & Styles across the middle. Its been a long time since we’ve had that kind of quality playing for us.

 

It was a game that looked like it would be a 0-0 that could’ve been a 3-3, means that both sides would find reason for praise or criticism depending on what you’re looking for.

Whilst watching the second half, I thought we were second best, and it was just a matter of time before forest scored, but looking back, both Frieser and Woodrow should’ve scored while they only had that header to show for all their possession. How much of that was us deliberately soaking up pressure, I’ll never know.

As for the 3-4-3, unsurprisingly four wins out of five wins has helped win me over, but it does seem to be the best option given the players we have. Williams is the only orthodox full back we have, while Brittain and odour would be very attacking options in a back four. Up front, Woodrow and Chaplin are our biggest goal threats, but it never seems to work with them as a two, so makes sense to have a third forward. I hope we don’t see simoes and schmidt start in a front three again though, after the debacle at Cardiff.

 

I'd give them another chance.

 

I’d give them each another chance, but I wouldn’t want to start them both at the same game again. If injuries mean it’s that or an extra midfielder, I’d go with the extra midfielder

 

Is Simoes out of favour? Not on the bench yesterday. Didn’t he react badly when taken off against Cardiff?

 

very good analysis there.

 

inverting the pyramid is wonderfully written.

 

I've just bought it, looking forward to reading it.

 

My report on games is called Minority Report for a number of reasons. First of all, it is usually a discussion about tactics, which I know is not everyone's cup of tea. It is written before I have read any of the other comments on the BBS, but I know that those comments will usually be an emotional response to the game, and whilst I am an emotional watcher, I believe that emotion destroys logic and reasoning, so Minority Report avoids emotion. I know that this is an unpopular way to review a game, and I know that I will be in a minority when I write that way. Most of the comments that I receive about what I have written convince me that I am in the minority with my views about the game, and those comment tend to reinforce my view that the title is accurate.

 

It lost me when it was stated the report was a cut and paste from the Watford game That in itself suggested the OP's mind was made up.

 

I think I said that the Watford game would be my comparative, not that I would be using it as the basis. Forest played a very different system, and in a very different way to Watford.

 

Are you a Wednesday fan?if so,then the above makes complete sense.

 

No. I have been a proud Barnsley fan for the last 55 years.