O'Neil In, Out and Shaking it all about

[Deutsch Wolf]

I swear you think our squad is capable of having won every game so far. Four at the back, swashbuckling forward play, going toe to toe with the big boys! Fuck off, we're nowhere near it.

Why do you think that, I've never said any such thing?

We could and should have got points out of at least some of 6 games that we've lost this season though. And playing effectively 8 at the back wasn't ever going to be the way.

 

[The Dude]

It was fine against City given the context of our season. Against Brighton I'm not against a version of it, say a double pivot with 2 defensive mids and a winger, probably Forbs, but I don't think it's sustainable against the non top 6 teams.

But in the 8 games we've played so far, 6 are in the top 7!

Saying that, a tighter defence would have probably fared better at Brentford, unless you think shipping 5 goals is acceptable?

 

[Tony Towner]

But in the 8 games we've played so far, 6 are in the top 7!

Saying that, a tighter defence would have probably fared better at Brentford, unless you think shipping 5 goals is acceptable?

From the position we were in, losing to both Villa and Newcastle was poor management. How much credit you want to give for getting into that position is personal, but losing is on the manager. Chelsea was on the cards at half time too and he did nothing to alter it. Games like today or Liverpool aren't why we are likely to go down, those are.

 

[sycophantia]

But in the 8 games we've played so far, 6 are in the top 7!

Saying that, a tighter defence would have probably fared better at Brentford, unless you think shipping 5 goals is acceptable?

That's why I said not against the non top 6 sides

 

[The Dude]

Why do you think that, I've never said any such thing?

We could and should have got points out of at least some of 6 games that we've lost this season though. And playing effectively 8 at the back wasn't ever going to be the way.

You've advocated a back four since before the season began, despite the horrific opening fixtures.

Even I was sucked in to thinking André was some miracle cure to our defensive worries. He hasn't been.

We didn't have the personnel to play four at the back when Mosquera was fit, we're even less capable now.

The 6 2 shit show v Chelsea should have been the end of GON's experiment. To have persisted for 7 matches given the fixture list is negligent at best, insane at worst...

Yet you and others on this forum have maintained the formation is not the problem - in part at least, it clearly fucking is. It turns out that we can defend when set up to do so v arguably the World's best team...

To have treated any PL opposition with the disdain we clearly have is fucking stupid, really fucking stupid.

 

[The Dude]

From the position we were in, losing to both Villa and Newcastle was poor management. How much credit you want to give for getting into that position is personal, but losing is on the manager. Chelsea was on the cards at half time too and he did nothing to alter it. Games like today or Liverpool aren't why we are likely to go down, those are.

I agree entirely. I think setting up to be hard to beat v Chelsea, Newcastle, Villa and Brentford wouldn't have resulted in fewer points or more goals conceded. Do you dispute that?

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Well we still conceded 2 today, and we conceded 65 last season.

I don't see us being a rock solid defensive outfit whatever we do. Especially given that the manager seemingly doesn't care whether we do or don't keep the ball. Sorry.

So you're basically putting in an iffy centre half for an attacking player, which isn't the answer to anything.

 

[Tony Towner]

I agree entirely. I think setting up to be hard to beat v Chelsea, Newcastle, Villa and Brentford wouldn't have resulted in fewer points or more goals conceded. Do you dispute that?

I think saying 4 or 5 at the back fails to understand the bigger tactical issues that were in play during some of those games. I'd have played a 5 from Liverpool, but that's not why we lost the games I highlighted

 

[The Dude]

I think saying 4 or 5 at the back fails to understand the bigger tactical issues that were in play during some of those games. I'd have played a 5 from Liverpool, but that's not why we lost the games I highlighted

Playing 4 at the back is a tactic. It's one of the tactical issues. We've lost because defending has been atrocious, playing a back 4 with FB's caught horribly out of position and set pieces have been a nightmare.

I'll respect your opinion, I just think you're wrong, like your laughing emoji pals on here

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Go on then.

How are we winning home games against the likes of Palace and Bournemouth with that set up? Because we didn't last season.

Plucky draws aren't enough. We can't 0-0 our way to safety. We have 1 point.

 

[The Dude]

That's why I said not against the non top 6 sides

I'm arguing we should have played that way versus them though. With hindsight I'd argue with some confidence that three CB's wouldn't have been any worse v Brentford either.

 

[The Dude]

Go on then.

How are we winning home games against the likes of Palace and Bournemouth with that set up? Because we didn't last season.

Plucky draws aren't enough. We can't 0-0 our way to safety. We have 1 point.

Had we had a few 0 0's this season we could play with a bit more freedom that what we now can.

You've planted your flag. You believe going four at the back was the right decision in our opening 7 fixtures. Results though, suggest otherwise...

You carry on living in denial though.

 

[sycophantia]

I'm arguing we should have played that way versus them though. With hindsight I'd argue with some confidence that three CB's wouldn't have been any worse v Brentford either.

Playing that way we might have scraped 1 or 2 points more. If we play that way all season we might scrape some draws or even a few wins, we'll still go down. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

 

[Mel Evo]

Go on then.

How are we winning home games against the likes of Palace and Bournemouth with that set up? Because we didn't last season.

Plucky draws aren't enough. We can't 0-0 our way to safety. We have 1 point.

We’re not winning against any teams with this set up. As a needs must it’s got a place, but we don’t have the players to make it work as we might have done in the past, going forward they’re just not quite at the level.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

We aren't getting 0-0s regardless. You can go and count our clean sheets under Gary O'Neil if you want, three CHs or not. It won't take long.

 

[The Dude]

Playing that way we might have scraped 1 or 2 points more. If we play that way all season we might scrape some draws or even a few wins, we'll still go down. It doesn't have to be one or the other.

It's already looking like 28-30 points will keep you up this season. Having 2 more points on the board may well be invaluable.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

28-30 points will keep you up this season.

Not a fucking hope, what planet is this you're living on

 

[Lycan]

It's already looking like 28-30 points will keep you up this season. Having 2 more points on the board may well be invaluable.

Stop

 

[Derby Wolf]

I agree entirely. I think setting up to be hard to beat v Chelsea, Newcastle, Villa and Brentford wouldn't have resulted in fewer points or more goals conceded. Do you dispute that?

We haven't been hard to beat with a 4 or a 5 in a considerable time now hence the 8 defeats in our final 13 last season too.

Going as far back as Man United at home they could have been about 5-0 up at half time.

Having five at the back does nothing to stop Chris Wood, Pinnock or others scoring free headers. It doesn't prevent Harvey Barnes been given the freedom of Molineux to pick his spot etc

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Now come on guys, if we only concede 2 a game as we did today, we'll er, still get relegated.

I'm never sure whether to go with Linus from Charlie Brown or Nigel Tufnel playing Stonehenge metaphors.