Minority Report 2019-20 v Leeds United

Discussion in 'Bulletin Board' started by Red Rain, Sep 15, 2019.

  1. Red

    Red Rain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Wombwell
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I certainly did not want my criticism of Mowatt to appear overly strong, but we have to conceded fewer goals and we have to stay in games without using so much energy that we are out on our feet for the final 20 minutes of games, or we are going to concede late goals. That is a general statement because it was the first goal that killed us, and that goal came from a free kick conceded needlessly. But Leeds should have scored at the end of the first half when they missed from under 6 yards, and that chance did come from a quick break when we were caught unprepared. The biggest danger of conceding against Championship teams is when we get out of shape because we have committed too many players forward and have lost the ball with players unable to recover against a pacey counter attack. The criticism of Mowatt is not out of character in that respect because I have warned time after time about the dangers of the press, and what can happen when the press is broken. Yesterday, Leeds broke our press on a number of occasions and we were fortunate to escape. But what Mowatt was doing was not even a press because a one man crusade is not a press. It was the chasing of a lost cause, and it really is not worth getting out of shape to chase a lost cause.

    So why did I criticise Mowatt? Well it has been coming for some weeks, but I did not want to turn on last season's heroes without just cause. Whether we like it or not, we are in a relegation battle and the emphasis has to change in those circumstances. If we want to stay up, we have to start doing things more effectively. We have to become harder to beat. That all starts by conceding fewer goals, and an obvious problem in that respect is our shape immediately after conceding possession. Now you can close your eyes on the obvious problems if you want to, but that is not the purpose of Minority Report. It is basically a tactical analysis, an investigation, a search for reason, and I believe that my comments are valid within that framework.

    I am not a great Pinillos fan. There is no doubt that he is more competent with the ball at his feet than other candidates for that position, and particularly an out of position Jordan Williams, but that is not his main job as a full back. His main job is to defend, and he does that less well than he should. I was one of those who argued for a new left back before the start of the season, and for good reason. Pinillos is slow and he is soft. Stendel also wanted height all along the back line of our defense so that all the back four could cover the centre backs when they were draw of of position. The idea is that the back four simply slide across to cover each other. Sibbick was brought in for that very reason, and in our first game, Cavare played at left back because he also has height, strength and pace. The injury to McGeehan has meant that Sibbick has had to play in midfield, and he has done very well, but it has weakened our back four. Now I know that many did not rate Sibbick at right full back. I am not one of those. He played there because of the shape and system that Stendel wanted for his back four. Injury has meant that the ideas that Stendel took into the season have had to be abandoned, but do not be surprised if Stendel goes back to that idea once everyone is fit. I am not convinced that Sibbick is suddenly a permanent fix for our central midfield either, just because of two decent performances there. I am not a Pinillos fan for the reasons I have given. I believe that when Diaby and McGeehan are fit, we could revert to a tall back four. But that will not solve our centre midfield problem, and in my opinion, neither does a fit Kenny Dougall, or any of the other candidates currently at the club. We do not have enough quality going forward, but we do not have the kind of money needed to put that right. We have to rely upon the coach, and we have to hope that he can improve the players he already has. But as I say, we are in a relegation fight and the first thing to do is concede fewer goals.
     
  2. Wat

    Wathred Active Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2016
    Messages:
    151
    Likes Received:
    100
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Once again I don't think we got much out of the officials.....thought we had scored from a corner as the ball seemed clearly over the line to me.....seen the highlights and can only assume it was disallowed for either a 'foul' or offside but it was a marginal decision that didn't go our way....thought their pen was soft and looks like a dive to me after watching it several times....so can't see how the ref could be sure. We clearly tired towards the end and they brought on a pacey forward - up to that point I didn't think they would score despite their good build up play and we had some grate chances at the other end. Too many players coming back from injury, Williams, Mowatt, Brown and Woodrow and in the end we came up short. Many many positives though. We looked more of a threat with Wilks alongside Woodrow rather than Bahre and less vulnerable with a defensive minded player in midfield. Goalkeeper looks very good and agree with report on Halme and Sibbick..Play like that and I'm sure we will be fine.
     
  3. Dar

    Darfield138 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2018
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    364
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Agree with halme, had bamford in his pocket by the time bielsa subbed him. Resorted to leading with his elbow at halme who showed a cool head I couldn't have matched
     
  4. Jak

    Jake The Red Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2019
    Messages:
    546
    Likes Received:
    560
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Gender:
    Male
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
  5. 55&counting

    55&counting Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2015
    Messages:
    1,297
    Likes Received:
    505
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Avid Vic & Bob fan.
    Location:
    Ardsley
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I disagree with your assessment of Alex's contribution. Along with the other posters on this thread I thought he had a good game. Whilst I agree with you that he lacks pace, to call him a loose canon who shows no discipline in going about his job is a tad OTT. He played a real captains game on Saturday. His passing was sharp. his close control was good. He was very much at the heart of our best moves. He tackled well and through his commitment he was an inspiration for his colleagues. Acknowledged he's not a Kelvin Phillips but he's a different kind of player. Oh and for sure he's not a Hignett ....or a Redfearn or a Glavin. He's a different type of midfielder to all those guys.
    Like you I do feel sibbick has real potential and yes I would like to see him in a central defensive role.
    it would mean Daniel would need to change from his preferred 4231 to a 41221.
    Sibbick in that holding role with mowatt and Mcgeehan pushed slightly further fwd. This would free Mcgeehan and Mowatt up from coming back and collecting the ball from the centre backs and allow them to be slightly more expansive. in particular Cameron contributes more when he is pushed further fwd driving at the opposition.
    Had a good old natter with a Leeds supporting friend today and in his opinion we are the best opposition team he's seen this season. We played well and showed the requisite hunger and desire. if i were Stendel I'd be sending down a spy to see how bielsa gets his players so fit. they were outstanding in terms of fitness. in my opinion that's why they won. we got tired after 70 minutes. physically and mentally.
    But as they say wisberate.
     
  6. Cun

    Cunning Stunt Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2011
    Messages:
    5,720
    Likes Received:
    280
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Well summed up.

    3x 80th+ minute goals in last few weeks cost us 3 points which would put us mid table. We all know DS wants experience to shut games out when we're in a position to grab points. He said that in various interviews and the ST meeting couple of weeks ago. Hope it doesn't eventually cost us. Imagine a Kevin Richardson now............. nuff said.

    Saying that I came away disappointed with the result~outcome but not the performance.
     
    Julian Broddle's Perm likes this.
  7. Red

    Red Rain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Wombwell
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    It is easy to be magnanimous when you have won the game. The Leeds fans thought we played well because we were open, and they are more used to watching the opposition play cautiously, and not committing players too far forward. They know as well as I do that in order for pace to be an advantage, there must also be space, and there was space, particularly late on when the game was very open. An open game plays right into their hands because it plays to their strength, and my view is that we contributed to our own downfall by allowing the game to be so open, and Mowatt was one of the culprits.

    You do not need to ask Bielsa how he gets his players so fit, because that is not why they had more left in their legs in the final 20 minutes than we had. I have already given you the answer. We had wasted energy in pointless pressing, especially during that first half, and we had nothing left for the final 20 minutes. It was the same against Fulham, but we managed to hold on. We played both games as cup ties, but we cannot play that way every week. We must have more control.
     
  8. Plankton Pete

    Plankton Pete Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2005
    Messages:
    7,472
    Likes Received:
    1,102
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    In hiding from the lynch mob
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Williams was spent.
     
  9. 55&counting

    55&counting Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2015
    Messages:
    1,297
    Likes Received:
    505
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Avid Vic & Bob fan.
    Location:
    Ardsley
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    ....or maybe that Leeds fan is much like you in that his assessment of the game was given as objectively as possible. Given that he's also coached at a high level I would tend more to respecting his opinion than not.
    ....and of course the press is tiring, especially when not used 100% effectively. I recognise this. However what I also recognise and what I saw on Sunday were two teams who employed that same tactic. Two teams who pressed high and hard. One team tired earlier. Mebbe partly because they didn't press as effectively, but also because they weren't as fit. Given what I've seen of Bielsa and his approach to football and it's tactics I think Daniel would probably agree that a good couple of hours talking with him would be beneficial.
    Having not commented on my thoughts on Sibbick I would be interested in your views. They will no doubt be contrary!
     
    Loko the Tyke likes this.
  10. Red

    Red Rain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Wombwell
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I did comment earlier about Sibbick. He was my MotM, but that was partly because he held his position better than most and consequently was better placed to make a telling contribution defensively. He also delivered a pass to Wilks that was my pass of the match. Nevertheless, I have reservations about what you suggest. Those reservations are not just about Sibbick. My first concern is about Woodrow as our lone front player. It is not a new concern. In my opinion, Woodrow prefers to find space in the gaps between the lines. In order for him to do that, he needs another player to draw the defensive line back towards their own goal. For me, he is never at his best when he is expected to carry the whole weight of our attack on his shoulders. Such a role needs either a tall/physical player who will attract attention because of his physical presence, or a quick player who will force the defensive line deeper because of the threat of his pace. The role of the lone front player is just as much to create the space for others, as it is to score goals. Woodrow has neither of the attributes to do that.

    My current focus is on conceding fewer goals and in my opinion, Sibbick is one of our 4 best defenders. Unlike many others, I was quite happy with Sibbick as a right full back. All right, he perhaps does not get forward as well as say Cavare, but he is a better defender. Your suggestion to put Sibbick at the defensive tip of a central midfield triangle could work, but equally, it sacrifices one of our best 4 defenders, and at the moment my full focus is on conceding fewer goals.

    Football is not about doing what the opposition want you to do. That was the point of my last posting about the way that we played against Leeds. Football is about doing what your opposition least wants you to do. In Leeds case, that would have been defending deeply, denying them space in our final third, and playing on the break, and in fairness, that is basically what we did in the second half. But we were already tired from all that pressing in the first half, so we could not hang on. Leeds on the other hand, are set up to play the way that they did, and we played the way that they wanted us to do. The Leeds fans are full of praise for our style, but I would much rather they hated every minute of the game because we frustrated them, denied them space in the final third and generally got on their nerves. Frankly, I do not know what will be the right thing to do against Forest because I do not know how Forest play, but I can tell you this, it would not involve us playing in exactly the way that Forest want us to play.

    Just at the moment, we have to recognise that we are in a relegation scrape, and that our players are very young and inexperienced. We have to think about the best way to play each game, not to be entertaining, but to get a result. The best way to put points on the board. I am not interested in how entertaining we have been when we lose the game. I am interested only in what is the best way to win. We can argue about systems until both of us are blue in the face, but in the end systems are about the denial of space to the opposition at our end, and the creation of space for our attackers at their end. The way to do that will vary with every game, and selecting the right system and tactics for the way that our opposition is expected to play is how our coach earns his money each week. Logically, it has to vary from game to game. There are no stock answers. It is why Minority Report exists, in order to describe the constantly changing environment of strengths and weaknesses and how we coped with our weaknesses and took advantage of our strengths. There are no stock answers, partly because what worked/did not work one week will be analysed by our next opponents, who will devise a plan to defeat our strengths and expose our weaknesses, just as our coach work hard all this week on exactly the same mission in regard to our next opponents.

    Minority Report does not claim to do anything but analyse what happened. It does not claim to have the answers. It does not claim to know more about the game than the qualified coaches. It does not pick the team, suggest a formation or tactic in advance of a game. Minority Report knows its limitations and those limitations only allow it to comment upon what the pros have done. It does not pretend to have the depth of knowledge needed to issue advice.
     
  11. Men

    Menai Tyke Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2011
    Messages:
    3,746
    Likes Received:
    789
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Llandudno
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    The only reason is that they are comfortable playing with the ball even under pressure. We aren’t. Many times they got out of situations where we just hoofed it forward when Leeds didn’t.
     
  12. Wilmersdorfer Winky

    Wilmersdorfer Winky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    1,418
    Likes Received:
    629
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Previously Rotherham_Tyke
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I disagree here. I don't think you necessarily need an especially tall, physical or even particularly pacey player to play the lone front player these days. Granted you can't be soft or slow, but Woodrow is neither of those things. I know it's inviting ridicule to compare Barnsley with top teams like Liverpool and Man City, but I think Woodrow's role and that of Firmino's for Liverpool are comparable. Both players are being told to drop, press, and create space for others. Their job (aside from getting involved in attacks and getting in the box) is to unsettle defenders, not the in the physical way of old but with his movement. It's important that they're competent physically to play this role, but more important is that they're mobile, intelligent, good technically and hardworking. I think, up until this season, Woodrow had all but the last of those attributes. This season he's worked his bollocks off in every game I've seen, but a lot of it can go unnoticed.

    He looks like a work in progress to me at the moment, but he's got a lot better at it over the summer and certainly seems a lot more at home playing that role now than he did when asked last season. If he masters it, and I think he might, he'll be a hell of an asset for us on the pitch and off it when we inevitably sell him. He's easily our most influential and important player, we look lost without him. It saddens me a little maybe that he's being moulded into a bit of a different player, but I genuinely don't think there's much room for your typical fox in the box striker at this level and above anymore. From what I've heard, he wants to add as much to his game as possible and is happy with the role he has in the team.

    Fans won't like seeing him deep, especially if we're struggling and losing games. But once we get a foothold in this league, and I still think we will, he'll be involved in everything, scoring goals from everywhere.
     
  13. Ste

    Stephen Dawson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2018
    Messages:
    2,665
    Likes Received:
    1,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I thought Mowatt was sold down the garden path at one point during the second half when he and Wilks broke quickly. Mowatt bust a gut to get in the box and Wilks wouldn't square it to him.

    Overall I thought Mowatt had an outstanding game and him and Sibbick looked composed on the ball. Mowatt covered a lot of ground breaking up Leeds attacks whilst we were pressing hard.

    He isn't the quickest but he's no slouch either. He has more pace than some give him credit for. Put it this way. I'd sooner have Mowatt in the middle than Mcgeehan.
     
    benjamoose and Django like this.
  14. Red

    Red Rain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Wombwell
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    I know that your comparison between Liverpool and Barnsley is mostly theoretical, but even so, you have to make allowances for the formations and the other players attributes besides just Fermino and Woodrow. Liverpool play 4-3-3, with Mane and Salah beside Fermino in the front 3. The fact that both Salah and Mane can catch pigeons is bound to affect the starting position of the opposition back line. It will be deeper so there is less room behind it for those two to exploit it with their pace. The fact that the opposition defensive line is pushed back means that Fermino can play slightly deeper and in a pocket of space effectively created by the pace of Mane and Salah. If 55&Counting was talking about 4-3-3 and he was talking about a front 3 consisting of Mane Woodrow and Salah, then I think you would have a point, but I do not think he is. In fact, because of the conversations we have had in the past, I do not think that he is even talking about 4-3-3, because he always corrects me when I refer to us playing that formation.
     
  15. MDG

    MDG Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Messages:
    2,432
    Likes Received:
    766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Darton
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    Agree with 99% of that.. Exception being Sibbick can play anywhere. I wouldn't play him at fullback again in this division. Centre Half or indeed the role he played v Leeds he looked solid.
     
  16. nezbfc

    nezbfc Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2005
    Messages:
    7,377
    Likes Received:
    499
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Normally with such in depth analysis I can nearly always find something that I would have felt different with or even had the opposing view.

    Not on this one.

    Good read

    Ps. Edit. i wouldn't agree with sibbick as a full back, bit if anywhere means centrally in defence or midfield then I'm still in agreement :)
     
  17. 55&counting

    55&counting Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2015
    Messages:
    1,297
    Likes Received:
    505
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Avid Vic & Bob fan.
    Location:
    Ardsley
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    By way of reiteration I would confirm that my thoughts are as you suggest. DS seems to prefer 4231. We agreed to disagree on that point. Therefore I guess that particular debate is dead in the water.
    Re Woodrow.......it is interesting because (as you point out), if Sunday is anything to go by, then Cauley will be playing slightly deeper, in between the lines, theoretically feeding off the front man (Wilks on Sunday), picking up the ball from our midfielders and generally trying to make a nuisance of himself in the old Beardsley No.10 role.
    Like you I don't think Cauley is best suited to that position. His work rate is good and he is a very skilful footballer, but for me by playing him 5 yards deeper it reduces our goal threat.
    Like you (mysteriously I find myself in agreement with you again) I feel he would work better with an out and out striker creating chances for him 5 yards up the field....ie in the opposition's penalty box. Cauley is a goalscorer. That's his key strength. mebbe 442 would play to his strengths more than the current system

    As for Liverpool. I'd still maintain that they play a classic 433. Mane Salah and Firmino play as a front 3 which is totally dissimilar to the way Daniel sets us up. They are far more interchangeable than our front players playing in our current system.
    Whew!!! It's quite therapeutic this and also very bloody interesting!!!
     
  18. Ste

    Stephen Dawson Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2018
    Messages:
    2,665
    Likes Received:
    1,384
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    About Schmidt. Where does he fit into the team? At the minute he's no goal threat whatsoever because he isn't even making the bench.
     
  19. Red

    Red Rain Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    3,223
    Likes Received:
    805
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Wombwell
    Home Page:
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    On Sunday, we played 4-4-2, so our disagreement about whether our system in previous weeks was 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 is irrelevant. However, I will ignore all that and I will concentrate on what method of play suits the way that Cauley Woodrow plays best.

    Cauley Woodrow is a striker in the most literal football sense of the word. If he gets a chance, there is a reasonable chance that he will take it. However, he does not create chances on his own, either through his pace, or through his strength. He gets his chances by being in the right place at the right time. If you like, he is a very good reader of situations, and very good at being, there or there abouts when a mistake is made by a defender. However, the rest of Woodrow's play does not live up to the standard of his goal scoring. I do not think, for example, that I have ever made Woodrow my MotM, because that award tends to go to someone who is very much more involved in play. A player does not need to be involved all that much to score goals. He simply needs to be in the right place for a split second. To my mind, Woodrow does not qualify as an ideal candidate to link play in front of a back 4 ( a Targetman), and neither does he offer enough pace to convince a back 4 to drop deeper, and by doing so, create space ahead of the line of the back 4 for others. He is a finisher who can take advantage of either of those two types of player, but he is not one of them.

    The question is, does the club currently have either type player to play beside Woodrow in a 4-4-2. The latest to give it a try was Mallik Wilks on Sunday, and his contribution was his pace, but he was not playing on the shoulder of the last man, and consequently, he does not qualify as Woodrow's ideal partner. We have tried Conor Chaplin in that role, but once again, he does not play on the shoulder of the last man either. Actually, it is arguable whether either player carries enough pace to cause a credible threat, one that would affect the positioning of the defensive line. I have no idea what Schmdt does, but I assume that he has not impressed our Chief Coach yet, or he would be playing. Frankly, pace does not come cheap and it is unlikely that we could afford someone quick enough to dictate to the opposition where they set up their defensive line in the manner of Mane or Salah.

    That only leaves us with the other option. I was very disappointed when we lost Kieffer Moore prior to the start of the season because I was convinced that he was exactly right for Woodrow's game. They hardly played together last season. First Woodrow was injured and then it was Moore. I looked forward to watching them develop their partnership in the Championship. When Moore left, his replacement went to the top of my wish list. As we both know, no replacement was signed and that might just be the biggest mistake that we made during the summer transfer window. When a player wants to leave, a club live Barnsley does not have the resources to keep him. It must though, be able to find his replacement, or it will face the consequences of that failure. That is where we now find ourselves.
     
    Last edited: Sep 18, 2019
    Django and John Peachy like this.
  20. 55&counting

    55&counting Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2015
    Messages:
    1,297
    Likes Received:
    505
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Avid Vic & Bob fan.
    Location:
    Ardsley
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    We started playing 442 but then it did become 4231 as Cauley dropped too deep. The Coach should have been screaming at him to get further forward but he didn't.
    Other than that I agree with everything you've said about Woodrow. I too was looking fwd to seeing him kick off the season with Keiffer.
    However, optimist that I am I do feel that we have enough to stay up and possibly a bit more as this group get familiar.
     
    Stephen Dawson likes this.

Share This Page