Minority Report 2019-20 v Swansea City

I do not want to paint this game in a new bright light. I do not want to draw any conclusions about our future, or our place in this league. It is far too early for anything like that. Personally, I am a lot happier tonight, but that is just me. I am happier because the game had more structure. I am happier because we did not play the sort of pressing game that plays right into their hands. I am happier because we played in a way that they did not want us to play. I am happy because it all seemed to work. We would have won easily if we had taken only half of our first half chances, and against a good side like Swansea, that is significant.


I really do not want to get into the Stendel debate again, but if we had played 4-4-2 with the press tagged on, we would have lost today. Swansea have more pace than we do, and an open game is just what they would have wanted. Today they did not get that until the final 20 minutes, and they almost made their dominance of that final quarter tell. They would have done if we had been that open for the whole 90 minutes though.


Of course, many will say that Diaby was back and Dougall was back and that was the difference. I will respectfully have to disagree. In my opinion, the difference was the change of system and the abandonment of the press.


First of all, Swansea are a very good side, and where they excel is in their pace. They play 4-3-3, but they split their front 3 so that the outer 2 look like wingers. In response, we split our back 3. Halme took Surridge in the centre, and it was a very physical affair that Halme came out of on top in. Diaby took Celina on our right and dominated his man until he tired in the later stages. The one problem for me was Sibbick on our left. He had to mark Swansea’s best player (Ayew) and he found him a bit of a handful. He was that bit too quick for him, but that was not his only problem. Sibbick is not comfortable on his left side, and in that position, you have to be able to kick with your outside foot.


In midfield, we had 3 players centrally, Dougall and Mowatt with McGeehan central and ahead of them. When we had the ball, our wing backs (Brown left and Cavare right) were ahead of them like true wingers and Cavare in particular, was a revelation. When we did not have the ball, they played full back and allowed Diaby and Sibbick to get closer to Halme. That defensive organisation does not come overnight, and that was where most of the work over the international break has been done. Of course, every system has a weakness, and 5-3-2 is weak down the sides. That has to be accepted, and the occasional glitch tolerated because of the strength that it gives us inside, and when Swansea took over, they found most of their success by going outside us. By that time, many of our players had tired from the workload, Diaby and Dougall because they have not played for months, Cavare because he is not used to the workload of playing wingback, McGeehan because he is usually the one who holds, and not the one who goes hunting for the ball. Many of the players were outside their comfort zones, and yet we still should have won the game on the back of our first half performance. I loved it.


Up front, Woodrow and Chaplin put a real shift in. I thought that was Chaplin’s best game for our club. He never let them rest and he set up our equaliser for Mowatt.


Whilst I was happy to see Simoes late in the game, I was surprised that he came on for McGeehan. We were pretty tired by that point and our midfield had stopped exerting pressure on the passers in the Swansea midfield. Swansea were using that extra space to great effect, timing their passes forward to their front 3 so much better. We needed fresh legs to restore that pressure on the ball, but the coach seemed to think we needed someone on the field who he thought could win us the game. To my eyes, that was over-ambitious, and all that happened was that Simoes showed how far he has to go before he will be truly ready.


I spite of all that I have written about our dominance, Swansea should have won the game in the final 20 minutes, and during that period, Brad Collins kept us within touching distance.



Rookie Watch


Brad Collins was once again faultless, performing near miracles in the last quarter of the game.


Bambo Diaby is an awesome looking individual. He must put fear into his opponent before he even kicks a ball. He has been out for a month, and clearly is not match fit again yet. He was everything a coach would want in that first half, but was already tired. He saw the match through until 91 minutes, although tiredness had taken its toll long before then.


Aapo Halme had his best game for us and clearly prefers to be the warrior rather than having a free role. He was very close to PotM


Toby Sibbick I said early in the season that Sibbick can play anywhere. Perhaps not anywhere.


Mads Andersen was only on the field for 4 minutes.


Conor Chaplin had his best day in a red shirt. He isn’t 6ft 5in, but that is not his fault



Player of the Match


I agree with the club nominee. Brad Collins kept us in the game after we had lost control of it.

 

Firstly, you don't know that, it's speculation, written as fact. Secondly, we haven't played 4-4-2 this season at any point. And thirdly, Stendel hasn't had the luxury of having Dougall and Diaby in the same side.

You said to me earlier this week that you wanted intelligent debate about tactics, but it's very difficult to engage in that with someone who posts statements like the above.

 

I think it's wrong to dismiss the return of Diaby and especially Dougall as major factors in the improvements today.
I agree the formation definitely seemed to suit us and probably helped that the opposition will not have been able to scout us playing that way either.
But a formation is nothing without the players within it. I would say both factors in tandem were important.

 

Wow

I can only apologise for writing such nonsense. Perhaps it will be better next home game. Sorry

 

Yes but we could have tried to play that way, even without Diaby and Dougall. We have three central defenders even if we ignore Diaby. We have 3 central midfield players even without Dougall. My main concern with our long run without victory is that we have never tried any other way. Because we never tried any other way, there is no definitive answer to the question. It is merely opinion, and I have registered mine.

 

No problem with that was just giving mine in response.

 

Talking tactics.

We hoofed the ball most of the game. We played percentages. We were pretty well organized. We got a point as a result, and would have taken 3 if we were more clinical.

Worked today, but I think it has a limited lifespan.

Brown at left wing back was odd. Looked better when Williams came on.

Dougall was superb, we've missed him so much.

Simoes was a strange change, maybe Bahre could have fitted that role.

Be interesting to see how we approach Tuesday.

 

Cavare, dougall and diaby the best 3 players (in their respected positions) were back.
Massive, massive reason why we played well today.

 

I agree about Williams and Brown.

 

How would they have played in a 4-4-2?

4-4-2 means Cavare is restricted in his forays forward.
4-4-2 means that Dougall and Mowatt play in central midfield
4-4-2 means that Diaby plays with Halme at the centre of the back 4.

Swansea's system with a front 3, 1 central and 2 wide means our full backs are stuck because they have to mark to 2 wide players in the front 3.
If we play a press, we are caught because we do not have enough pace in the team and our press means that we are too high. Dougall looked good because he was not drawn forward in the press and he was not exposed.

For you, it appears to be about players. For me it is systems and tactics.

 

No i will concede that the formation had something to do with it...but if you play your better players in a system that works...hey presto.
Today we could afford to play a system that be fitted the players we had avaiable.

 

I'm about 95% certain we were still playing with the press. I saw Murray constantly saying to the players to push themselves further up the field when defending and to close down the opposition quicker when they had the ball.

If that isn't pressing then i'm not sure what is, maybe we didn't press as much as we have under Stendel but we certainly haven't just abandoned the idea.

 

I agree, but I also don't think we pressed as far up the field as we have previously.

I've seen us play just as well as we did today a few times this season. Fulham (obviously), Derby other than for 5 minutes in the first half, Leeds other than the final 10 minutes, and Brentford in the first half. The big difference between today and three of those other games is the period in which the opposition were on top our Keeper saved us, in the others he couldn't quite manage that.

 

Exactly how I saw the press. We were happy to sit back until Swansea came into our half then we pressed. What we didn't do was press right up the pitch at all times.
The other significant change was we didn't look to play our from the back and instead went for long balls either in behind or down the flanks.

 

We played with the press and haven’t played 4-4-2 in any game this season.

 

Todays improvement was mostly about the formation and not the returning players, Sibbick, Brown and Mcgeehan struggled in the position s and maybe Williams Anderson and Bahre may have given us a bit more of an edge but generally 532 suits the players we have at this stage of their development.

Cavare, Halme, Chaplin excelled in this formation and it also suited Dougal, Woodrow, Mowatt and Diaby, its was a good performance and Murray was brave to make such a change on his first game but it shows his knowledge and confidence.

 

For me that's a comprehensive and accurate summary of today.
I also agree that we have played 442 at times this season under Daniel.....as well as the 4231!
Today we were better organised by a long chalk; in particular at the back.

 

I enjoyed today's game and that is all that mater's to me, we played well against a top 6 team the new coach did more than was expected as most of us thought we were in for a thrashing if there honest, our goalkeeper played well.

Hi Geoff,
Having met you at the Funeral for the 1st time hope we can meet again maybe at a match if you come over from Driffield.
I know you don't post on here but read the posts, but there are ways as you know through Pat to get in contact.
All the best, J.

 

We played 4-4-2 in our last match so I've no idea why some are so adamant that we haven't played it all. It's been used a few times this season. But certainly at Preston it was 4-4-2.

Collins
Williams Sibbick Halme Williams
Brown Mowatt McGeehan Bähre
Chaplin Woodrow


As for Red Rain's summary, I also believe the change of shape was key to our improved performance. We looked a lot more organised and until tiredness set in we looked a lot more solid out of possession. From 60 minutes on as the aches and pains emerged for some, and Swansea's slight change of shape which hasn't been mentioned, I feared for us every time they attacked us particularly in behind Cavare who did his usual level best to take a big dump over his impressive display up to that point by not working hard defensively once the tiredness kicked in. He's a liability defensively and I hope Brown plays there on Tuesday with Ben Williams the opposite side.

It helped that Diaby and Dougall were back, the latter especially whose presence allowed McGeehan and Mowatt to be more expressive. Cameron scores on another day and I won't beat him up for those misses. That central area still lacks pace or guile at times however and I'd not be averse to seeing Bähre or Styles in there, maybe Oduor. It's very one-paced at times.

Chaplin I believe was the best player for us in the outfield and looked like he could have run for another 90 minutes. Very direct, very hard-working and got himself an assist. Halme was outstanding but there were a couple of moments where he was wrong side and nearly cost us. Not seen a more dominant header at the back though in years.

But Collins was easily my MOTM. I can't think of a foot he put wrong and even for the conceded goal he nearly rescued us. Not sure why Brown was inside the goal because he clears that if he's the right side. Probably easier to say when things aren't happening so quickly.

All in all I was impressed and hats off to the caretaker staff for changing things up and trying something. The press remained but not as high up the pitch. And I enjoyed seeing us clear the ball rather than trying to play our way out at all costs.

I can see us having a great little team in the future, but God knows if that'll be in this division. It's difficult to play like that, to play so well and not win regardless.

 

We tried to make their keeper kick the ball long by marking up the 2 Swansea lads in the box and McGeehan pushed up on the one just outside the box. That was the nearest that we got to the press.

Stendel himself explained the press thus. The team tries to win the ball back as soon as it is lost. To do that, the player who lost the ball in the tackle engages the ball winner immediately, and the other players mark his short passing options. In order to do that, it requires more players to push forward into advanced positions, and that is why the press is usually associated with the 4-3-3 system. Recently, Stendel has tried to use it tacked on to the 4-4-2 system, and it has not worked.

Having said that, I am not sure what the 4-4-2 system is any more if we have not been using it in recent home games.