Minority Report v Queens Park Rangers

This was the first match for our new coach, and the score line would suggest that everything went perfectly. We changed formation to 3-4-3, and the score line would suggest that once again, everything went perfectly. It didn’t. In the first 20 minutes, it looked like the team had yet to be introduced, and in wing back Clarke Oduor, we had an accident waiting to happen. I made some pre-match predictions about the way that we would play. I was partly right, but I was also partly wrong. I said that the two wide players in the front 3 would press the QPR wing backs and that they would drop back to replace the wing backs, who would in turn drop back into the back 3 to become a back 5. In fact, the wide forwards did not drop back as I expected and neither did the wing backs. This left Sollbauer and Andersen positioned much wider than I had expected, and covering a lot more ground. Once again, Andersen was hung out to dry by Oduor who no longer seems to know how to play the defensive part of the wing back role, and it was no surprise when Oduor did not reappear for the second half, as James came into midfield and Styles went back to wing back.


It is very hard to make any conclusions about how we played after 27 minutes, because that was when QPR had their centre back dismissed for pulling back Cauley Woodrow in the box, and giving away a penalty. I am confused. Dickie was last man, he did foul Woodrow and it was undoubtedly a penalty, but I thought that there was now a double jeopardy rule that states that if the chance is restored by a penalty, then the player is booked, rather than sent off. Anyway, it made the rest of the game very difficult to judge objectively. In the first 27 minutes, when both sides had 11 players, QPR were on top. We were using a slightly different defensive system, a system that is more open, requiring the back 3 to play in a slightly different way, but there was more to it than that. When we recovered possession we kicked too much of it long and QPR were able to recover possession too quickly, and too easily. I said it before the game, and I say it again now, we do not have the players for that sort of game.


As might be expected, the 27th minute was the turning point, and it was underlined by our second goal just 10 minutes later. The changes at half time brought Matty James on to the field, and everyone knows what a good player James is. As usual, James played well controlling the way the game was played from his pivotal position just in front of the back 3, but for me, that was not the most important change. Callum Styles made the role of wing back that Oduor made look hard work, look very, very easy. He made tackles, he made chances, he was everywhere down that left side. I did not see our 3rd goal because my internet connection dropped out and I had to wait to watch that fiasco on SKY, but after that the game was up. QPR went in search of a consolation, but when a team does that and it has only 10 players, there are bound to be wide open spaces on the counter if we keep our heads, and so it proved. In the last quarter of an hour, we missed enough chances to have declared, and surprisingly, the main culprits were Schmidt, who hitherto has been just about perfect in front of goal, and Chaplin, who scored a hat-trick in this fixture last season .


So what do I conclude from Ismael’s first game. Well very little really. The sending off destroyed any comparison. I still do not like 3-4-3. I still do not think that we have the players for it. In addition, I think that Ismael’s version of the system is too open defensively, and if it comes to a shoot-out, under normal circumstances there is only one loser, and they play in red. However, I will keep my mind open. I will keep trying to learn, and I will keep hoping that I am wrong.


Rookie Watch


I thought Helik was better tonight, because Dykes was a real handful at times and the other two members of the back 3 were further away from him and less able to help.


As others have said, Brittain looks a real find, strong defensively and better going forward.


I thought that this was Frieser’s best game for us. He had the advantage over the rest because he has played for this coach, and in this system before.




Player of the Match


I thought that Frieser was our best player in the first half, but he was overtaken in the second half by Styles, he is my PotM.

 

Think he was sent off because it was deemed to be a cynical foul. No double jeopardy only where an honest attempt to play the ball is made.

Agree about the wide centre halves, although I only really spotted it when we were in possession and it allowed the wing backs to push much further up the pitch and gave Mowatt time and space to get on the ball.

Whilst QPR were certainly on top during the first 15 minutes I thought we were coming back into it before the sending off. We also made it look very easy against 10 men which is not often the case. So I’m still very encouraged despite only a quarter of the game being an even contest.

 

Imho as you say we were all over the place for the first 20 mins and i thought this lot are good. Adomah had oudour on toast and i was begining to fear a mawling. Thankfully we received the pen and sending off and for once we used the width of the pitch to good effect, especially when james arrived to show his class, Friezer reminded me a bit of bradshaw with his endless running and that caused rangers problems, im still not convinced yet though.
Brittain very good forwards and backwards, styles "a player" who puts a shift and a tackle in. Still not fussed for shmidt and it shows how much we rely on woody. Mowatt also played well (benefiting from james). The 3 cenre backs arent blessed wirh speed and skill but they are uncompromising and we look more solid with 3 at the back.
Overall a great result and scoreline, which should have been more. Hopefully this will give us confidence for saturdays match...but by god just get matty james out there!!

 

The double jeopardy rule only applies if the defender makes a genuine attempt to play the ball. He didn't - therefore the red card was 100% the correct decision.

 

Good report RR. Lots for the new coach to consider. Accurate passing and finishing being 2.

 

Correct. Surprised you didn’t know this RR.

 

Was encouraged that the new coach rectified one of our weaknesses discreetly,quietly at half time .
I think Struber would have left it later if it wasn’t working although I don’t think he’d have picked Oduor on the first place .
He hasn’t seen all the players yet and won’t know his best team in his own opinion for a few games yet .

 

A decent report RR, as you suggest things were far from perfect. However, Valerian has only been with the players a couple of days. If that's what they can come up with after 2 days imagine what they can do after a few weeks.... months. Was it perfect, far from it. Does it highlight areas for improvement, that's a resounding yes. Was it better than the first 4 games of this season, again a resounding yes. The first 15-20 minutes were a little sticky, but we weathered the storm and then slowly came back into the game. Styles pass to Woodrow was a sublime defence splitting pass and should have resulted in a goal anyway.

Overall, it shows what is capable with this fantastic group of young players and Matty James is the key here, to stick the team together in the middle of the park. What a class act he is, we are very lucky to have him here.

I have a slight objection is to the reference to their being only one winner if the game comes to a shootout. I disagree wholeheartedly with that statement. I think we will be able to hold our own in that department if we can keep everyone fit and healthy. Work to do on the new system, but I believe that the players, coaching staff and Valerian Ismael have a bright future.

 

It seemed to me that the players took a little while to adjust to the new formation in the first 15-20 minutes or so. Before the penalty/sending off there were clear signs that we were coming into the game more and beginning to probe the QPR defence. The move leading to the penalty and also the movement before Chaplin's goal were excellent, and we were deserving of the 2-0 advantage in my opinion, regardless of the dismissal.

Over the years it has been said by nearly every team in the land at some time "oh, it's hard to play against ten men". That is usually when a team has failed to make their advantage count. Barnsley in the second half looked as though they were playing against eight or nine men, such was their movement of the ball and their dominance. It has to be said that that impression was aided by the lack of confidence and woeful passing that crept into QPR's play.

Going forward, I would have no concerns about playing this 3-4-3 system. Sure, some sides will overcome it, but to my way of thinking it makes very good use of two of our primary assets - youth and energy. Leavened by the older heads of James and Sollbauer, I think we can look forward to some good entertainment in the coming games. Last night would encourage me to part with my tenner for those games not on Sky or the red button. As for the missed chances, well yes you can quibble with the finishing. But the fact that they were created was quite something, and if we can replicate that when the numbers are equal then I think the players will get used to the idea and begin to improve their conversion rate. Well done M. Ismael and every lad in a reds shirt last night.

 

You missed the quarter of an hour between 12 minutes and 27 minutes where we readjusted, where Odour made a number of great tackles, where the balance of play changed and where a goal for Barnsley looked inevitable. It's always going to be a minority report if you're not a very good observer. Maybe football isn't your thing?

 

Ouch! lol

Jay has a point though. To say we were terrible up to the sending off is unfair an inaccurate. It was a key moment but we had started to play better before then

 

I don't know why but that's the funniest reply I've seen on here for a long time

 

Considering we have no females playing for us it’s ok to have man of the match

 

oduor was being torn a new one by adomah nearly everytime qpr came forward which i think was the game plan, a very experienced, classy winger who at 32 still has pace to burn against a very young inexperienced player who was playing a new system, beat the kid, throw a few crosses in to the 2 big forwards get in front and make us chase the game, as soon as the lh centre back comes across to cover oduor then that creates a big gap so the ball is played inside and adomah goes on the overlap leaving oduor flapping about like a fish on a carpet. when oduor did get the ball and go forward he looked good but the defensive side of his game needs a lot of work. the sending off made qpr change that tactic. 2nd half when styles moved over adomah got took off as he was losing more than he was winning

 

I know it’s a cliche, but the game is all about opinions. In my opinion, Adomah did very well for the first 15-20 minutes and Odour struggled to contain him. From then, up until half time, Odour looked fine. Styles is clearly a major talent and will do well wherever he plays, but I think the criticism of Odour is somewhat unfair.

 

I'm surprised so many people don't know this.

 

My thoughts too, until the harsh bit at the end! I feel like Red Rain often tends to have a whipping boy in his reports. Oduor has hardly played for the last season or so and was up against a seasoned Championship player. I thought he did well after the initial onslaught. We were playing well at the time of the penalty as evidenced by the Woodrow chance. And the match isn't over Vs ten men as evidenced by the Stoke match in which they arguably had more chances to win the game after that than we did.

 

I must confess that your reply has made me laugh out loud.

My problem with Oduor is that he was starting in the wrong place most of the time, and therefore, his tackling was desperate. If he was reading play as he should have been, he would often have been deeper and better placed to tackle Adomah. I do not know whether he misunderstood the instruction to get further forward, or if he was just very poor, but it was not a good day.

 

On the contrary, I try to avoid individual blame and am critical of others who indulge themselves. In fact, I have been very complementary towards Oduor in the past. However, his difficulty with reading the game has constantly exposed Mads Andersen, his covering defender, and if he is to play wing back, I think he must go back to school.

When asked whether Oduor's substitution was because of injury, or tactical, Ismael replied "tactical". The player was lost.