Minority Report - Walsall

I am absolutely convinced that Red Rain is none other than our beloved owner Patrick Cryne. Same writing style as he has on Facebook. Certain he comes on here to wind people up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I thought Lalkovic played well. He stood out for me as their best player. I also thought Scowen played well both defensively and offensively. I didn't see one player dominate the other, I saw a ding-dong battle between two good players. Sometimes Scowen got the upper hand, sometimes Lalkovic.

However, if I was going to pick out a winger to talk about from that game it would be Lloyd Isgrove who caused the opposition problems time and time and time again. He scored a perfectly good goal too. You often hear people say a player was 'yards onside' when the linesman gets it wrong, but it's an exaggeration, they mean inches. In this case lsgrove literally was yards onside. That came after he'd stung their 'keeper's hands with a rasping 25 yarder and beaten their very highly rated left back sometimes with skill, sometimes with pace, on numerous occasions. You don't even have to talk about the ground Isgrove covered, his greatest strength, which is always phenomenal, to praise his performance yesterday. Lalkovic and Scowen had a very entertaining battle, but no one got anywhere near Isgrove.

 

This thread has lurched towards becoming a 'Red Rain' thread rather than a BFC thread. I guess that if you head up your threads 'Minority Report' then it is perhaps not surprising that people will suspect you have an agenda. As others have said above, you surely can't be in a minority all the time - unless that is exactly your ambition? And when we come off the back of two stunning performances at the conclusion of what was, for worryingly long periods earlier in the season a joyless experience, is it asking too much to find some positives? I do agree that you should keep on posting though - after all, you have certainly stimulated debate!

Anyway, back on point. I've said it before - Josh Scowen would be the first name on the teamsheet for me. To my mind he is playing out of position to help us out of a hole, and is doing it tremendously well. We have just played two games against top three sides (including the champions) who have won 48 games and scored 153 goals between them. With Josh playing right back we have conceded exactly one goal. Playing out of position, Josh at times drifts further into the centre than ideal, and allows his winger space. This gives the winger room to get himself set in order to take the full back on. But in one-to-one battles, Josh's body positioning and tenaciousness allow him to recover and defend well. He was beaten once or twice last night, but on several occasions damped down the danger and came away with the ball. He plays at times as though he has the experience of a man of 33, not 23. We all know Milan Lalkovic has pace. But we also know that he often fails to deliver what he promises, which was why he was a somewhat frustrating player at Oakwell, and presumably why we let him go. On the evidence of what I saw last night I don't feel that the assertion he "had Josh Scowen in his pocket" could be justified. But I haven't rewound the tape and counted the incidences of play, and I accept it's an opinion.

Positives I feel you could have focused on:

Leadership and commitment to the cause
So often lacking in our seasons struggling at the bottom of the Championship, and to an extent, last season. We struggled under the captaincy of the hapless (only my opinion) Martin Cranie. In these last two games we have at times looked like we had eleven leaders on the field. And the application of the players last night was the most impressive I've witnessed in a long long time.

Sam Winnall
For me, his best ever game for us last night. I've questioned his fitness (injury-wise) and his pace at times, but on last night's showing I'm happy to believe that playing to his strengths, he may be capable of taking his game to another level. On a night of some towering performances (e.g. Marc Roberts and Alfie Mawson) Sam as MOTM was the easiest decision of the night.

Paul Heckingbottom
While I've defended Josh Scowen, I agree that the decision late on to move him up and bring in Aidy White was very astute. Walsall were beginning to press hard in order to try and salvage the tie, and the clean sheet was a very vital component of the night for us.

The crowd
The support last night was epic. It made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up, and stirred memories of 96-97. A truly magical atmosphere, and a performance from the lads to justify it.

I could go on. There were many more positives. Football is a game that is often played through the heart, not just the head. That's why it is "the beautiful game". Last night it was a privilege to be there.

 

No mate if you've read Whitey's Q & A with Patrick you would realise the OP post would be full of humour.

 

yep, that's how I read it too JD.

 

I head up my match reports "Minority Report" only because that has become my trade mark, my signature if you like. The heading tells others that the report will be in my style, which is analytical. Anyone who does not like my style is immediately made aware, and if they do not like that style, then they can simply avoid me. However, as I have said elsewhere in this thread, I am amazed at the reaction that it has had. Other posters seem deeply upset that I have posted my opinions, and that said opinions do not conform to their own. I do not post in order to court controversy. I am actually a very private person who values their privacy, and I am not happy that my opinion has provoked such a strong response. I genuinely thought that this place was a place where I could air my views. A place where alternative thoughts about the game could attract reasoned debate, but as the season has progressed, and the team has improved, this place has become less tolerant of the alternative view. It has been homogenised by the thought police who demand conformity. All the majority seem to want to read is what they already think, and those with alternative opinions have gradually been chased away. I have no problem with that. If you do not want to be challenged, then do not read my stuff. As I say, the title tells the reader what he is going to get. But what really gets up my nasal passages is not the posters who do not agree with me. It is the posters who think that they know me, and know my motives because they do not agree with me. I have no problem with those who challenge my ideas. I do have a problem with those who think that they can read me and my motives, and as a result they do not think they need to challenge my ideas.

We have been corresponding since the early part of the season and I hope that I have at least earned some respect over that period. I recall that you used to castigate me about my opinion that LJ should be preserved with because I was sick of constantly changing managers/coaches. I spent the early part of the season telling people on here to be patient, and that if they were patient, things would eventually turn around. In my wildest dreams, I never thought that we would finish 6th, but I could see that we were not as bad as other posters insisted we were. The whole thing has turned about, and now I am being berated for being negative and boring and I am being accuse of posting in order to incite a reaction, when all I am doing is being even minded and steady in my praise and criticism. In my experience, things are rarely as bad as other poster insist, or indeed as good. Others on here dislike me for refusing to get caught up in the hype that they like to generate. I am suspicious of hype, and I am suspicious of extreme reaction.

I have not enjoyed the reaction to my original post, but the truth is that I should have seen it coming. I should have kept my thoughts to myself, just as I did when we won the JPT. You live and you learn.

 

I know it's your writing style but your posts do come across as been condescending and talking down, I honestly believe it's not your intention but that's how you do come across, yesterday was a fantastic day that we all just wanted to enjoy, I'm not saying our players are above being criticised but yesterday was not the day, I still disagree with your Scowen comment and if I'm being honest I'll probably still disagree with a lot of what you write but that doesn't make me right and you wrong or vice versa it's just we probably look at games very differently. However having said all that you shouldn't let the negative responses stop you from posting, I think you're a valuable poster to this board, a lot more than me if I'm honest. Plus I'd be more than happy to buy you a beer if you ever wanted to meet up for a pre match pint.

 

It's all very well saying "analytical in style", but to me, the comments about Scowen and Lalkovic are not born out by my impression of the game. I suppose if someone has the time and patience to actually work their way through the video of last night's game then we could have a definitive idea of how many times Lalkovic beat Scowen, or vice versa. I think it's also worth observing that Aidy White probably wasn't fit enough to see out 90 minutes, so I think we had to continue to rely on Josh. But I also think it was right for PH to make the change when he did in order to get what he could out of Aidy and preserve the clean sheet.

I couldn't agree with you more about LJ. You did indeed support sticking with him, and the way things have turned out couldn't possibly have gone any better for us given where we were at the end of November. I always liked Lee, but I couldn't see how we could continue to persevere with him given the (worst-ever) run of results we were experiencing. So thank goodness I'm not making the decisions! But before we get carried away with that, did the switch to 4-4-2 and the acquisition of Hammill come from LJ or elsewhere? And did Bristol City come to our rescue and provide a solution that we couldn't have afforded to initiate ourselves? These and other interesting thoughts emerged as Grandfathertyke and I discussed the game on our way home.

But without labouring the point, shouldn't any "Report" (minority or otherwise) be balanced, and consider the positives as well as the negatives?

 

What words have you taught me? Im not a teacher and I have a low paid low skilled job so what words have you taught an idiot like myself?

 

You are no idiot. You are someone whose posts are always interesting, but who tries to draw an unguarded reaction from the unwary.

 

Agreed. Lalkovic was their best player, he did in fact beat scowen a couple of times. Both red rains analysis of this however and the hysterical reaction to it is over the top!!

 

I am happy for posters to disagree with me over the Scowen/Lalkovic match up. It is my opinion, an opinion that to me was obvious, and an opinion that was supported by Hecky's late change of personnel. But it is, for all that, just my opinion.

I do not go along with the idea that 4-4-2 is a magic formula guaranteed to produce success. The coach will chose a system that best suits the playing staff at his disposal, and if he has a special player, the he will chose a system that makes best use of that player's special skill set. When we were promoted to the Premier League, we used 5-3-2 because we needed to take advantage of the fact that we had Nicky Eaden, who was an outstanding wing back. I cannot recall anyone extolling the virtues of 4-4-2 during that season. In Dave Bassett's play-off season, we played 4-5-1 just as frequently as we played 4-4-2 because in Craig Hignett we had a star player who was best let lose to do his own thing, unfettered by any defensive obligations. In my opinion, the biggest factor in the turnaround this season is time. The changes that were made to our defence meant that the central defenders needed the time to settle into each others games. The period that Long spent with us also helped.

 

Sadly, I do not drink alcohol because of a stomach condition. Nevertheless, I appreciate the offer.

 

I'm not sure that the change in formation does actually support your view that Lalkovic had Scowen on toast. In my opinion Hecky wanted to shore up the defence and go to a 5 man midfield. His options from the bench were (a) to do what he did at Wigan and bring Moncur on or (b) bring on White and switch Williams to right back. He went with option (b) because, I think, he also rationalised that he could see how far White was off the pace and give him a run out, given his injury problems. Barnsley are stronger with White and Williams as fullbacks. 3-0 up, 20 minutes to go with a spare substitution in his pocket, I think he felt it was worth a punt. If White breaks down he can go back to plan (a). As soon as Hecky thinks he's fit, White will start at left back and Williams will go to right back.

I've just finished watching the game back this morning and I thought the Lalkovic/Scowen duel was a good one. Lalkovic beat him 3 or so times during the match, Scowen contained him, tackled him or snuffed him out a few more times than that. But Lalkovic did look like the go to man for Walsall. I suspect they decided to try and expose a converted midfielder playing out of position, it's a fairly sensible strategy.

Don't go changing.....

 

Didn't know we had nicked George Moncur off Colchester?

That definitely warrants an FA investigation

 

Lol I meant I meant McCourt. It's early.

 

I know you did. Just couldn't resist it. Think I'll get on with writing my report now. Feel free to pick me up on anything at all

 

Alternatively White was brought on to give him a bit of game time and ease him back in before next thursday

 

I think people react to the writing style more than the content the tone of which seems patronising and arrogant. I know when I first read his stuff it took me ages to get past the style to reading the content. Now I rarely agree with him and he frustrates me in his tunnel vision but I appreciate the time taken and the fact that he promotes debate. Any post I would have written yesterday would have just said '******* yes' over and over. More simplistic in style but not exactly promoting discussion.

Like you I thought Laikovich played pretty well but and they had clearly targeted that side but Scowen for the most part battled well and it was an even match up.

It does still amuse me that RR won't admit that the switch to 4-4-2 saved our season though I can't recall if he now acknowledges that Conor Hourihane can play in a midfield two or not but we all gave our blind spots and reflecting when events prove you wrong his one of his.

 

As I have said repeatedly throughout this thread, it is all about opinions.