Minority Report v QPR

I want Lee Johnson back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I sit in the ESU and our team is set up so the wingers can be our biggest goal threat.

Because of that our central midfielders sit slightly deeper. However Conor in particular is not sitting as deep as he was in the back half of last season. He is pushing on and is a result is back getting 2-3 efforts at goal a game.

Surely if you are he tactical genius you think you are you would realise that the centre midfielders sitting deeper benefits out wingers and gives them a licence to bomb forward with the fullbacks supporting or overlapping.

You cant have your fullbacks, centre mids and wingers all pressing forward. Unless you're Pep that is and we know what happened last time we tried to copy him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I rated Hill as a manager but I believe his heart wasn't in it anymore. I felt he was building something brilliant but that one window in January killed him & the team losing Butterfield, Drinkwater & Vaz Te & he couldn't or didn't have the will to recover from it. He had to go.

I wanted Johnson out, it wasn't just the results it was the style of play, I've never seen football as dull & uninspiring. No width, no bravery, no players over lapping, no support for the strikers, players out of position, constant chopping & changing, wrecking players confidence. It was dire.

 

Well, I have tried very hard to explain my motives in this thread. If posters still do not understand, then I have done my best. After 50 years, it must be clear that I am in this for the duration. I have seen many things in my time. We have been 92nd in the league and we have been in the Premier League. I have seen more bad teams than good in that time, and experience has taught me how to make a distinction between the two at an early stage. The current team is nowhere near as good as the teams managed by Norman Hunter, Danny Wilson and Dave Bassett. It shows promise, but it can still go either way. There are those on here who claim that the current team is in that class. They are wrong, but they are building expectations in themselves and others too soon, and that is dangerous.

 

This isn't the game I watched. In the game I watched our goalkeeper didn't touch the ball, with his feet or his hands or any other part of his anatomy for the first 30 minutes of the game, which was played almost entirely in QPR's half of the field. He wasn't called upon to make a save throughout the entire first half. Meanwhile, some of our football was sublime, passing the ball with speed and skill creating numerous opportunities.

Removing emotion does not necessarily lead to good analysis and I think the above is a perfect example of that.

 

me too

 

Emotion isn't removed as Red Rains emotions when watching BFC are geared towards writing these minority reports.

Because of this he watches with an unbalanced view and one which looks for problems in our style of play which aren't actually problems.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I think you're missing the fact that Conor Hourihane, despite playing deeper, is still able to dictate play and create chances from such a position. If I could be arsed to watch it back the amount of balls he played out wide to our real danger men from said positions would be pretty impressive.

All I would say is personally I'm just enjoying seeing a young side go at it and playing blood and thunder football and being really entertaining, regardless of what you see as tactical inefficiencies. Just enjoy it whilst you can.

 

I do not claim to be a tactical genius. I have never claimed to be a tactical genius. I have never played the game at a decent level. I have never been on an FA coaching course. I would love to know the game better than I do and I would love to see how a professional's mind works at close quarters. I am just somebody who observes the game and who tries to learn as much as he can from observation. I do not claim any professional knowledge of the game. I just report what I see.

You are right to state exactly what is happening, but I have no trouble at all in understanding how our current system is working. I do not dispute any of it. Kent and Hammill supported by the two full backs are our main way of attacking and they are all allowed to get ahead of the ball, but Conor Hourihane is our best attacking player and because of our system, he finds himself within touching distance of our two centre backs for much of the game. My question is whether the system makes the best use of our best attacking player with a follow up question of can any of the forwards presently on our books actually play this system effectively given the poor quality of most of the ball up to them.

 

Completely agree.

I can't imagine myself lying on my death bed, holding my sons hand, pulling him close as my last dying words are "I wished I'd approached Barnsley games with a more analytical mindset. Remember son, even when we're playing well and winning, you need to look out for the negatives..."

 

But we're playing 4-4-2 which means Hourihane is always going to be box to box and never in a number 10 role.

His attacking is much more effective when arriving late in the Lampard role than hovering around up their in the Silva role.

He's scored in all 3 games so far and had hit 4-5 more efforts that have gone close.

What more can you ask for?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I do not dispute that Hourihane's passing from the deep position that he occupies most of the time is excellent. Furthermore, his delivery from set pieces has improved since last year. He seems to be able to put it into a space measuring 6 inches by 6 inches. My only regret is that he is not playing far enough forward to be able to do so more of the time and that he is too far away from the front two to establish a connection.

I found the second half very entertaining but the first half gave me too much time to think, and as many in this thread have observed, that is never a good thing.

 

Read the report from the QPR fan that's as balanced a repeat you will get.

I'm not sure what you were watching in the first half but it was unbelievable and I'm sad for you that you didn't see it that way.

The away fan agreed with the majority on our first half.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Good.

 

Haven't our central midfielders scored 4 goals between them? That doesn't suggest a disconnection with the strikers. And it has escaped your notice that we have 2 very quick wingers and overlapping fullbacks. Luckily, Josh and Conor know this and also when to hold station.

I also thought we were full of invention and improvisation last night. Or was I at a different game? And while I respect everyone's right to their own opinion, it doesn't mean that it's any good.

I know that if I came away from a game like that as glum as thee, I'd stop going.

 

Derby was an own goal, I nearly fell into that one...

 

As you will know, if you have read this thread, I have been watching Barnsley for a very long time. During that time, I have seen us have success with various systems including 4-4-2, 4-5-1 and 3-5-2. Even on Wednesday, although we started with 4-4-2, we did not finish with 4-4-2. My long experience has thought me that that the system that a team uses is governed more by getting the best out of the individual strengths and weaknesses of the eleven members of the team than it is to some slavish adherence to some magical system. It is true that PC has identified 4-4-2 as the club's favoured system, but if he thinks that we should have some slavish addiction to it, excluding all others, then I have to disagree with him, because it is a basic tenet of my understanding of football that the system flows from a fundamental understanding of players strengths and weaknesses.

There is no doubts that 4-4-2 does suit some members of our current team, but my argument is that it does not suit them all. There are also some fundamentals within the 4-4-2 system that are flexible like how much space the back four leaves behind them in order to condense the space in front of them. How closely the midfield four aligns itself to the back four and how closely with the front two. Currently, it is my opinion that Hourihane and Scowen are too close to the back four and not close enough to the front two and that this is the reason for the disconnect to the front two.

You obviously want me to accept that nothing can change, not the system or the alignment of the players within it, but for me, we are being too negative at the moments. As I said in my Derby Minority Report, we are lacking in confidence and that is a major factor in our alignment. It is something that I look forward to seeing a change in as we gain in confidence.

 

What system and Lineup would you choose out of curiosity?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I think the word you are looking for is Organised. And the phrase playing as a team and knowing their roles in the team.

Its good you see things in a good constructive report but to say you didnt enjoy what was the best game ive seen down at the well for some time suggest you are following the wrong team.

If you are lookng for things off the cuff what about Hamill taking the piss with his skill in the first half.
Kent with his skill and ability to ghost past players.

proper players
proper team
proper manager
going places

are the words id use.

just need to keep the team together and hold off any bids.

 

I agree. it's probably the worst analysis of any game I've ever read.