' Result, but performance from 60 minutes on. We just turned into a pump it long team, no attempt even to play it short like we had done before. Obvious that Keef saw tonight as a no lose game - we get battered it's expected which is why I reckon we saw change in formation towards end, plus 90 minutes for Dagnall that I reckon any other game he's have been brought off. Mention for Digby, looked really good considering his age. Got stuck in and passed it. Let's not get carried away though. And Davies worked his ballacks off - as they all did really. We'll lose 2-0 at Coventry.
I thought Hill took the opportunity to try something different, rested players, tried different tactics that almost worked. To play the game we did the ball has to stick up front unfortunatly it didn't but I believe Hill got plenty of positives out of the game.
The problem getting the ball to stick up front is that Davies takes 8 touches to get the thing under control. He has hois strong points, but control isn't one of them. If I was a coach I'd be working on nothing else with him (though how a pro footballer can get to this level & still require that amount of time to bring a ball down is a bit bizzare). Pumping balls up to a front 2 of Davies & Dagnall was a strange tactic. Davies is miles better running the channels than he is holding the ball up in my opinion.
We also have players that can't make a short simple pass under pressure also bizzare at this level but you have to play to their strengths.
It was not a concious decision to start hitting the ball long. It was a reaction to what Birmingham did in the second half. They made is more difficult for us to pass the ball by closing down our full backs and forcing the ball through the centre of the field. Our centre midfield were unable to dominate that area of the field and resorted to passing the ball back to the centre backs, who having no outlet to full back were forced to hit the ball long.
Correct... so as a reaction to that, I'd have done 2 things ... firstly tell the midfielders (probably Smith), that he's going to have to take a chance and run forward with the ball, to engineer some space. Take them on, cos they lapped up everything thrown at them in the air, and closed us down. Secondly, if we have to play a long ball, at least have someone on the park who can get his head to it - Gray.
Davies was winning headers but couldn't be on the end of them . Gray doesn't work hard enough for me.
Don't you come on here with that sensible match analysis it isn't appreciated ! No we're *****, we chose to play long ball, nowt to do with the opposition closing our full backs down ! ;-)
You must have seen a different game to me, our wide players played more on the inside we kept it compact and hit the ball down the middle this was effect in the first half due to passing and creating space up front. In the second half they did close us down in midfield this gave Davies and Dagnell less time and space on the ball.
The players who played central midfield are simply not the "get it down and beat a few" type of player. Smith is perfectly adequate as a defensive midfield player. He is not a Jacob Butterfield type. From what I have seen of Digby, which is one academy game and one first team game, he seems to be a safe passer in the Doyle mound rather than someone who can make things happen like Butterfield. If you are hitting balls forward from as deep as we were hitting them in the second half, I do not think it would have made any difference who was on the other end. For the forward to stand a better than 50% chance against a tight defender, the pass must be delivered accurately and at the right pace. In the past, Gray has been critcised for not winning more in the air and I was happy to defend Gray as I am now happy to defend Davies. If you do not win the midfield battle, it is hard to win the game. Birmingham were just to good for us in that area. In fact, Birmingham were too good for us in most areas.
KH is on record for wanting the team to pass the ball on the floor. Why would he have gone back upon this central tenet of his managerial regime, especially when the passing game was working so well in the first half. I accept that O'Brien became increasingly narrow as the second half progressed, but my interpretation was that he was being starved of the ball because the service from full back had been stopped as a result of Birmingham marking more tightly.
he tries to make things happen deep RR. Hes makes really good passes but to say hes some how not good becuase hes not Jacob Butterfield.
