Someone should explain this 442 to me

I agree with that bit. That's why Hecky went 2 up surely?

 

Yes we definitely need someone to hold the ball up, link play and score.

 

He's called Mc Burnie.

 

Absolutely. It was the right thing to do IMO and almost paid dividends.

I like the look of Thiam. He could be a real asset this season.

 

They were tearing us apart in the second half until Thiam came on, we started to press and that slowed down the constant flow of balls straight up the wings or through the middle, their defence had to think twice about what they were doing.

They scored, but they scored with a good pass and an unstoppable shot.

Nothing to do with formation.

Your reading of the game is poor.

 

Agreed. I thought it was a strange thing to do at the time, especially when we lost the lead, but in hindsight it was a good ploy and had Barnes shot gone in off the post Hecky would have been a hero for ringing the changes.

 

We could get Paul Wilkinson to put his boots back on.

 

Poor goalkeeping again. Beaten on his near post because he was expecting a shot across him and made it easy for Asombalonga.

 

I've watched it again, hit hard and it starts outside the post and comes back in.

If it was cricket that would have taken anyones wicket

 

Moncur scored one very similar against Sunderland, and I can't remember anyone saying it was poor goalkeeping at the time

 

Probably because if they had they would have been crucified for trying to discredit Moncur.

 

To cover that (assuming Davies had prior knowledge of the intended trajectory) he would have had to take at least 1 step to his right, leaving an entire net unguarded. Then we could have criticised his positioning. Striker deserves a lot of credit for that goal - now if you want to talk about us getting turned and the defenders caught square by the through ball.... but imho both defenders are learning at this level against far better players than they've encountered before. It's a harsh classroom though.

 

Just watched the game. I reckon he'd have been a little disappointed but it was a hell of a shot that was going wide then bent back in so credit the striker. First goal he was completely unsighted. He made one horrendous throw out but other than that he made a few smart saves. Not a standout game from Adam but he did ok.

 

Well done and high high fives to Phil.

Another 6 page plus thread.

 

Replacement for David Dimbleby on Question Time.

 

What? Five panellists spending an hour telling Dimbleby he's an idiot? At least it would be a consensus panel for a change.

 

Towards the start of the thread there were some agreeing with him.

I assume like him they were watching a different game too if they still feel it was an error to change the shape.

I’ve watched it back again, I think we should look back on this as a great point gained, not two lost. They were a decent side, better on the ball than without it, but still.

 

A few points.
Firstly, I think, as stated 451 isn`t necessarily negative if we are on top of a game with midfield getting up quickly to support the striker. Unfortunately we were under so much pressure on Saturday from a good team that these opportunities were rare after the first ten minutes - that made Bradshaw`s job so much harder. I, like most, think the change on Saturday was for the better.
Secondly, I`m not convinced Thiam could effectively play on his own up front as he couldn`t put in the shift that Bradshaw or Ugbo can he wasn`t chasing around as much as Bradshaw even in the 60 minutes he had on Saturday.
Next, I don`t dislike 352 but we haven`t got the personnel to play it - what would you do with Hammill, Barnes Izzy and Hedges - none are wing -backs?