Minority Report v Birmingham City

The tactics last year were clear and obvious, but in spite of that, the team accumulated enough points to finish 5th. Ismael has moved on, and we have Schopp at the helm. Clearly, he wants to change the way that the team plays, and I applaud him for that. However, he has lost players who were influential for us last year, he has injuries and absentees through visa problems, and it is clear that he has not fixed on the right tactics and formation just yet. It was not the time to meet a very aggressive Birmingham City team that were bent upon making the game a physical one. The referee did not exactly help either.


Once again, we scored early, but after that we barely touched by ball again until half-time, by which time the score was 1-1. Of course, there are many ways to play the game when you are in front. What I want to do is examine why we played the way we did. In possession, we were brave enough to take on the Birmingham press. We drew their pressing players forward as they hunted for possession, and we passed the ball, even in or own 18 yard box with opposition pressing players within 10 yards of our keeper. We beat the press too many times to count, accessing the free space beyond their press and 30 yards from our goal. I would like to say that we made good use of the space and time that taking the risk had afforded us. But we did not. As far as I could see, the player on the ball and in space repeatedly went for long ball glory, and those long passes were easily picked off by the Birmingham back line.


So what is the problem here? Should the player in possession retain the ball until a clear opportunity presents itself? Should he go for the comparative security of retaining possession with an easy pass to an open colleague, albeit by slowing down that important forward momentum and potentially giving the Brum defence the time that it needs to reset itself? Or should he simply try to retain possession in order to give our hard pressed defenders more time to recover. The last time I saw him, I thought Benson was a star in the making. Today, he looked ordinary, and because he played so deep he was hardly involved, especially as Brum transitioned from defence to attack. He wasted possession by repeatedly hitting long balls and not only giving away valuable possession, but also putting our hard pressed defence back under Brum pressure. However, if Schopp was not happy with his play, or his positioning, he would have done something about it. He did not. As we say, the plot thickens.


The team must be playing the way that it is because the manager wants it that way. Why might that be?


We knew before he arrived that Schopp’s favoured systems are 4-1-4-1 or 4-2-3-1. However, the club does not have a player capable of playing up front on his own. Cauley Woodrow does his best, but to be honest, he is not built for the role, and today, it was like taking sweets from children. To play on your own up front, you have to either be big and strong, or you have to be able to run like a whippet. Cauley is neither of those things, and neither are any of our other forwards that we have seen. Cauley has simply drawn the short straw. That just leaves the ones that we have not seen. You see, in Football it is easy to blame the guy nearest the ball when things go wrong, the guy who makes the obvious error, who repeatedly fails to find his target, when in fact the blame lies elsewhere. It is my belief the Schopp knows what his problem is and that he is doing his best to cover the cracks until our 2 Belgian lads are allowed to play.


I believe that after the international break, we will see a totally different system, a system that is more in keeping with Schopp’s past. I ask you all not to write off Schopp until his team and system has had time to settle in its personnel and shape. I ask you to keep open minds.


At half time, I sat thinking about what I had seen. I hoped that we could turn the game around, but I could not see how. Marc Roberts’ procession of long throws ensured that we were well and truly battered in that second half, and it was only our strength of character and our team spirit that got us through it. Oh, and a fair bit of luck. Referee Matt Donohue will not look back on the game with any pride either. OK, Clarke Odour still had 50 yards to go when he beat their last defender (Roberts), but stopping his progress in order to award us a foul throw, must surely not be his finest hour.


Entertainment Index:

Barnsley 32

Birmingham City 77

Match 109


Performance Index: -40


PotM Brad Collins

 

Please explain the entertainment index?

 

Can't disagree with much of that. You could have mentioned 2 amazing saves from our keeper, Collins, otherwise we would be looking at another defeat.

 

Agree, certainly happy to be patient and give Schopp time to get it right. I’m actually pretty happy with what iv seen so far, it’s easy to get carried away with our finish last season but I can see performances and results picking up eventually. Trust the plan and trust the process for me.

 

I was going to write a majority report but you’ve written exactly what I was going to say RR

 

Oddly, I was quite encouraged. First half we were good in my opinion. Brum are not so much a long ball team as a long throw in one. That second half was a real test and yes we rode our luck a bit, but we did not crumble. The squad looks lightweight at the moment and the bench does not provide the coach with many options. Hopefully, once visas are sorted and injured players back that will change. Big shout out to Helik, Liam, the Callums and Josh. We are where we are and don't have five subs to bring on second half and don't have Alex or Dike. That makes a big difference. But even so some good signs of better football.

 

Regarding the foul throw incident and the ref pulling play back, unfortunately that's the law of the game I think. Game can only be restarted by a throw in by the opposing team.

 

Is it really.

 

Law 15!

 

Not expansive enough for me..

 

Ditto.. or even ‘’..

 

Cauley up front on his own? He rarely goes within 30 yards of goal and let's Odour, Freizer and Miller take the flak.

 

I also think that there’ll be a change of formation after the break. If we get a left back, then I think 4-2-3-1 would be a decent fit for our squad, with Odour, Woodrow and Frieser playing behind Oulare.

 

Cauley wasn’t a lone striker ! He wasn’t even the furthest forward as much as I could see .
I’m not into spitting formations or owt like that but even I know Cauley wasn’t a lone striker and if he was he was **** at it as I’d say Clarke was further forward but ineffective.

 

yup

what’s this entertainment index all about?

 

Significant irony in the fact that Birmingham played us off the park by utilising more or less the precise tactics that you bitterly bemoaned and that we battered most of the division with last season, and yet you see fit to award them 150% of the ‘entertainment index’ that you award us.

Has it ever crossed your mind that you were wrong, and that Ismael worked miracles in getting a squad of obviously limited talent to such dizzy heights and that you should have just enjoyed it while you could, as the rest of us did?

 

Samesies

 

No he wasn't. We played 3-4-3 as we usually do. However, Woodrow was often the central player in that front 3 and as such, he was often the player that we aimed at with our first ball forward. That ball was often a long ball, even when we had played through the Birmingham forward press, and it was often a high ball that would be meat and drink for a big man. Cauley tried to act as the lone forward, the one who redirects the long ball or brings it down and plays it to his support players, but his failure to perform the role was obvious, and we immediately lost possession. We tried to play that way for most of the match, even though the overall system was 3-4-3 and not 4-1-4-1 or 4-2-3-1. The structure of our play, and our constant use of the long ball forward, even after we had beaten their press left the question running through my mind. WHY. I wondered whether it might be linked to a change in system, which the players will practice during the international break.