Minority Report v QPR

At the end of the day it's an opinion. Why would someone get banned for having a different opinion to everyone else? The BBS would be like Blackburn if everyone thought the same - pointless.

 

I wasn't there last night so can't be accused of hype or an emotional response but looking at your post in an analytical way:

The manager has a plan: positive
The players carry out plan: positive
The manager isn't naive enough to play all out attacking football for 90 minutes against one of the favourites for promotion: positive
Our flair players can play at times in a disciplined way to frustrate an in form opposition team: positive
The manager makes substitutions that may appear to the untrained observer as being defensive but actually won us the game
Our captain is savvy enough to win a free kick using his experience to get ever advantage he could for his team: positive
Despite apparently playing a cautious game we scored 3 goals and won the match: positive
For once we got a referee who made decisions on our favour: positive

As an unemotional observer I'd say almost perfect night!

Love how we have a clear identity. All the great coaches: Mourinho, Klopp, Wenger, Guardiola even Van Gaal have a clear style of play. Whether you like it or not is another matter but there teams have a clear identity. Not since the pass and move football of Wilsons first spell have we had such a clear identity. Other coaches we've had i have had no idea what they were trying to achieve of build. This was Roy Hodgsons major fault in the Euro's. Hecky has a clear vision of how he wants his team to play and we are following it. Incredible, awesome stuff! Proud to be a Red!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Oh and one last point...just do a normal match report like other people, none of this "minority" nonsense. Just comment on the game, positive and negative. By stating that you are deliberately looking to be different you end up boxing yourself in and looking for things that aren't there


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Of course he shouldn't be banned! I love his posts. I am just saying if certain people constantly posted saying "I know Winnall scored 3 goals but he should be dropped because I don't like his beard" people would say they should be banned. This latest post is as crazy as that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I find it really interesting reading these - not going to slate you but I've no idea how you can believe that it's all controlled by a system when we've got Aidy White breaking from left back and dribbling to the edge of their box, Hammill & Kent doing nothing but tricks and attacking their full backs at every opportunity etc. That doesn't strike me as players that do as they're told - they're told to express themselves.

Now, granted, to do that it's expected our midfield play a certain way and I think that's fair. I also think that in this league & with the pace we've got, direct balls into the channels from centrehalf will work and I'm happy to see it as it allows us further up the pitch & we have the pace to get up there.

I do believe that we can't continue to play at that tempo all season but I've been saying that since January and we've done ok...

 

I feel like you're deliberately looking to be negative for example 'the introduction of D'Almeida signalled PH had decided a draw was enough'. It clearly was a tactical move to cut out QPR's only real outlet which was the big punt up to Polter. After that sub they had no outlet & it gave us more of a hold of the game & allowed the other midfielders to attack more which won us the game.

The fact that a team with the budget of QPR had to resort to punting it up to a big man to have any sort of success against us is a massive credit to the team.

You talk about how deep the central midfielders are, this is because we're a team set up to attack out wide. On several occasions both Scowen & Hourihane covered full backs who were pushing forward.

It's like you've completely forgot all the times Hammill put balls in the box & Kent attacked the full backs with the two full backs supporting just to try & portray us as a long ball team.

There's also a massive difference between a long ball & the type of placed ball down the channel that we've played a lot of in the last two games. It enables Watkins to stretch the opponents defence by dragging the centre back out wide & creating space for the wingers & central midfielders. It's not just a punt up front which your post suggests.

We're far from perfect & in an ideal world we'd be able to pass rings around every team we play but that's not possible. We've took 6 points from 9 against 3 teams with realistic aims of the top 6. I'd imagine we'll have more possession against weaker sides.

As for the Hourihane 'foul', it's probably not a free kick but then again they happen every game, slight nudge, player goes down unnecessarily, free kick given more times than not. QPR got a couple of a similar nature through Polter dropping down. We took advantage of ours they didn't. That's the end of that. Jimmy needs to take off his rose tinted glasses.

 

Thanks for your comments, in fact, thanks for all your comments.

As I said at the start of my report, this one worried me. I know that I will be seen as some sort of pseud who cannot enjoy himself, and it concerns me that I am seen as such a person on here. I care about my team. Everyone who has been watching for 50 years does. I have a deep desire that the team is successful and I hope that this team will be the one. We certainly have some very good players, but we are also short of good players in many areas. I am not trying to rubbish the team, but in my experience, the fans go from one extreme to the other when they are disappointed that their expectations have not been met. It is these fluctuations of mood that result in good people losing their jobs, in good players being chased out of a club. In my 50 years supporting the club, I have seen it too many times to count. The fans mistake a few good results for a good team, they start to believe that the impossible is possible and they are frustrated when their dreams crumble before their eyes.

I was against the call to dismiss Lee Johnson, just as I was against the call to dismiss Keith Hill. I was in a minority then too, but I did it because I believe that we must have consistency if we are going to build anything at the club. Managers rarely do anything innovative. They all work hard and they all try to find a balance in their teams that works. In the end, the better managers are those who have most to spend. PH does not have very much, and his teams are bound to be limited by that lack of cash. So long as we all understand that, and understand that our team is limited in what it is possible to achieve because of that, then I have been successful in delivering my message.

I am happy that my contributions on here are anonymous. I do not want my real life persona and my on line persona to become synonymous. I like to analyse the game, but I find that I only do so when I am not interested in what is happening on the field, and that is what happened last night in the first half. It simply did not interest me. I will understand all those who chose not to read my stuff any more. That is really your choice anyway, and I do not have the sort of character that needs to be told how good a piece is anyway. I write these pieces for those who enjoy reading them, but if no-one does, I will write them anyway. Sorry, but you can always ignore me.

I sit with a good friend at games, someone who has been supporting almost as long as I have. My thoughts on the first half were discussed at half time and we both had the same view of the incident that led to our second goal. We do not always agree though, but we have a way of talking things through in order to make our thoughts more clear. Sometimes I change my view because of his input, and sometimes he changes his view. I would love it if that happened on here. Sadly, the combative nature of a written forum often means that this is just not possible, and this thread is a good example. Many contributors cannot debate ideas, they can only question motives. This place could and should be a place to exchange ideas rather than a place to trade insults.

 

Bizarre statement of the day. Congratulations sir, you are the outright winner!!

If you cannot get interested in watching your team pinging the ball about like a Champions League side (no, forget that - BETTER than a Champions League side) then I suggest that you sever your lifelong links with this football club.

As many others have said we played some staggeringly good stuff in that first half last night. Ryan Kent hit a ball with such swerve and power that it bounced off their keeper at a crazy angle and he could do nothing about it. You are not interested in stuff like that?

Watch the Olympics. Plenty of analytical effort required in that.

 

Perhaps you should put your pen and paper down and watch the same game as the rest of us, or most of us, watch. My wife gets on at me when I take my camera on our days out because she says I spend all my time faffing with it, taking photos, but missing the occasion.
We've had years and years of crud at Oakwell so you will excuse those of us that over the last eight months are now on some fluffy cloud enjoying the moment. It may not last but it gives eleven thousand people joy and excitement, even you wouldn't want to spoil that, would you.

 

When you are in a hole, stop digging!!

It's actually right that some fans have wild mood swings however the vast majority can recognise when things are good. If the football on offer last night didn't interest you then Id suggest you've been pretty bored for the vast majority of your 50 years.

 

I have two problems with the way that we are playing. The first is that central mid-field is too far away from the front two for there to be any sort of connection between them. As a result, the front two are cut off from the rest of the team and isolated. You describe the long balls from back to front as passes down the channels and I describe them as being punts from the back because I do not see how the forward can be favourite for a pass delivered from so far back.

My second quibble with the system is that our best player, Conor Hourihane, is playing far too deep to be effective going forward. We rely on Conor's passing ability to create our chances, much as we used to rely on Jacob Butterfield. He is also our best chance of a goal from outside the box. But neither is likely if he is stading in front of the back four because our system calls for us to be more defensive when we have a narrow lead.

I thought that our wingers were very ineffective last night and was amazed that Kent was made motm. Even after the above comments about Hourihane, his dead ball skills made him my motm. It is just a pity that we have decided not to release his full potential.

Thanks for your constructive comments.

 

I don't like it either when we give the ball away from the back. Both centre halves like a long ball, and most go to an opposition player. But I accept that because these two lads are playing at Oakwell not the Nou Camp. I think you will find that the majority there last night had NO problem whatsoever with how we were playing. It was exciting, it was thrilling in parts, and we scored three goals. In doing that the team got the crowd roaring on their feet. Did you sit glued to your seat?

Oh, and one other thing. We beat a fancied team. We played them off the park. Second time in a week. What's not to like?

 

How on earth can you say that about Conor.

He scored against Ipswich arriving in the box. Assisted by our striker Marley Watkins.

He scored against Derby arriving just outside the box.

Scowen scored last night arriving into the box. Assisted by Stefan Payne.

The central midfield are playing a perfect game at the minute.

They are actually supporting more than the slightly deeper role they played which got us promoted last season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Everyone can have a view some of the personal insults on this thread seem well out of order. In essence I'd agree we relied on long ball a bit much and Scowen is better when playing his natural game. At the same time unlike Red Rain Im just along for the ride enjoyed the game and don't care. Nothing wrong with caring though and no need to attack him.

 

I think that it some situations, especially in those connected with art or entertainment, it's possible to have too much technical knowledge, which can seriously spoil your enjoyment of what's going on, and I feel that you are unfortunate enough to fall into that trap. I used to be the same about DJing. On many occasions I'd be at a club with my mates who would all be loving it as the DJ dropped killer tune after killer tune, but I'd just be there listening to how technically adept the DJ was, and if he was sloppy or I heard mistakes (which nobody except another professional DJ would be able to recognise), it would ruin my night. Bonkers when I look back on it.

 

He's got 2 goals and 3 assists in 3 games. "Too deep to be effective going forward" my arse.

 

Thanks for your comments.

Last night there were comment from behind me that accused the ref of being biased towards the opposition for awarding the two clearest penalties that I have seen for some time. Fans are biased. They think that it is a quality that they must have in order to support their team. I have never said that other teams do not con the ref, but equally, I am just pointing out that so do we. You would expect JFH to do so and I would expect PH to question the decision in his post match interview. That is what happened and it happens all the time. The ref gave a home decision, and he made well reward Huddersfield in the same way on Saturday.

 

You're welcome.

The consistency I see is a polarity between what you type and what a consensus may be.

I agree there are waves of negativity and of euphoria at varying times and they tend to be linked to results rather than performance.

Its your prerogative what you post and how you post, just as it is for everyone.

The only thing I would say, is think about your intent. If your intent is to prompt debate... maybe you could consider you're missing the mark in the way you post. My perception as someone with no axe to grind and with an analytical mind wanting the club to do well, is that you arent enjoying whats going on at present. If that were me, I'd wonder why that was the case and if it wasn't the perception I wanted to give, what I may do differently to better engage.

But thats just me. Sadly, I think you've created a rod for your back and as such some incisive views could be lost and missed in a sea of contraryness.

A huge shame if that becomes the case.

 

You were in the minority who wanted Keith Hill and Lee Johnson to stay?

Keith Hill would never build anything at this club. He was divisive. Dissmissive of us as fans, and what this club means to us.

Lee Johnson showed the loyalty of a one eyed snake. Patrick stood by him. He knifed Patrick in the back first chance he got.

The fact that these two individuals are long gone, replaced by a man who galvanises the spirit and passion of the Barnsley fans is one of the key factors in both our upturn in form and my personal enjoyment of games.

I have my team back. We have have our team back. Our club is one of only a handful that are owned by a fan. And probably the only club also managed by a fan. Come sun or rain I will support this club so long as these men are in charge, and putting the interest of our club first.

 

I'm sorry, but you are missing the point. The ball is going from back to front because the midfield players are too close to the back four so there is no other pass possible. I do not know where you sit, but if you were sitting with me in the ESU, I would be constantly pointing this out to you. It is all part of the disadvantage of playing your central midfield so deep. The advantage is that we are less easy to attack. It is a balance, and my argument at the moment is that the balance is not quite right and that is does not allow Hourihane to play where he is most effective.