Pre-Season Fixture thread (22/23)

[Dire Wolf]

Missed the first half and 10 minutes of the 2nd, but what I did see we looked like we can defend in a 4. Not much quality attacking play in the 35 minutes or so I managed to see. Have no idea why Campbell got booked, it looked like he was nowhere near the player! Ref looked a bit shit. Unsurprisingly so did Hwang. I really want to be positive about him and believe I'm being harsh on the lad, but I can't and I'm not. He's just terrible. Couldn't trap a bag of cement.

 

[PuntsWolf]

We tired badly. Lage should've made changes much earlier.

We desperately need a STR and to bin Donk off. He's no business being on the pitch for us.

Think it was purely for the fitness benefit accepting the drop off in ability. That said we don’t have any alternatives anyway. 2 players minimum as additions and then a Traore replacement.

 

[The Bear]

Who was No. 77? Looked lively when he came on.

 

[Law's Bus]

Who was No. 77? Looked lively when he came on.

Chem Campbell.

 

[AndyWolves]

Back 5 seemed quite good to me

Midfield will always be let down by donk, a half decent midfielder in there would give us an extra dimension. Neves & Moutinho seem to be able to influence the game more in this formation.

Front three looked decent too until they started to tire a bit. MGW looked involved and trying to make things happen, the interplay looked very good.

We probably need to figure out how to manage games more to preserve stamina as when we tired our tight passing dropped off.

 

[Loki]

Donk is stealing a living at our Club.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Very good first half and then other than Sa, very poor second half.

Still very much a work in progress, but we'll need results along the way.

Hard to know what to make of it all. We could go either way.

 

[Del Woppio]

We can't play a 433 with donk as an 8. We can't play a 4231 without a forward. Why the fuck are we putting ourselves in such a shit position

 

[b3h]

I always thought RAN had the tools to play wing back but it never really worked for him.

I think we all did and in theory he is the perfect type of player for wingback surely. But with the way we played it he had limited options, either cut it back in for Moutinho (or Neves) and then not much happened or pointless crosses as there was only 1 in the box. He could drive inside but then he's on his weak foot and without options it's easier to just run into trouble. Thinking if we play with the 3 attackers off a striker and have him driving forward with more options plus more to aim at for crosses it will be better. Prob just talking out my ass but that's what I'm thinking ha.

 

[Tony Towner]

Was always clear he's a full back not a wing back, as are Jonny and Semedo. His best game last season was against Liverpool whe he essentially played there and we only lost because he went off. It was my biggest frustration about the 3 at the back. All will have good seasons when they are attacking options rather than the primary focus

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Pretty sure RAN only played as a LB at Angers.

He's been easily the stand out in pre-season. Approaching Naylor under Hoddle levels Seriously, that link with Podence yesterday looked very promising in the first half.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

Was always clear he's a full back not a wing back, as are Jonny and Semedo. His best game last season was against Liverpool whe he essentially played there and we only lost because he went off. It was my biggest frustration about the 3 at the back. All will have good seasons when they are attacking options rather than the primary focus

The system didn't allow anyone to flourish as a wingback for a long time. The build up was too slow which meant they were too easily isolated and became dead ends rather than outlets.

Earlier in Nuno's reign the distribution out to them was a lot quicker, remember the frequent big switches of play from Coady? Douglas got a lot more crossing opportunities than anyone who's taken his place since and Doherty ended up as a good outlet in behind later on from the same service.

The last few years that sort of distribution has largely disappeared, the wingbacks rarely got to receive the ball in such space and so were frequently asked to do things you'd have been asking of a 90's winger. If there had been better support and interplay maybe they could've worked quick exchanges to get in behind but there was rarely any chemistry between wingback and wide forward in 343, no opportunity at all with 352.

The wingbacks were always going to look more like fullbacks because the balance of the team was inherently defensive and negative. If they'd been more attacking and expansive maybe we'd have seen more from the wingbacks, we'd certainly have got a fairer sample to judge them by if nothing else.

 

[Carsy]

If you look at our 11, we have 3 ‘kids’ who have unbelievable potential in Collins, RAN and Neto. I’m trying to stay positive and excited…

 

[Tony Towner]

There's merit in some of that, but certainly not all. Semedo can't cross, shoot or beat a man. He wouldn't make a good wing back in any system.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

There's merit in some of that, but certainly not all. Semedo can't cross, shoot or beat a man. He wouldn't make a good wing back in any system.

Doesn't sound like much of a fullback either by that critique, unless you want him to play for Tony Pulis.

There isn't a massively different skillset between the two positions, you'll get the odd one who flourish in one setup and dwindle in another but for the most part I think players who do a reasonable job of either role will be passable with the other too.

 

[Tony Towner]

Twaddle

 

[Tredman]

Doesn't sound like much of a fullback either by that critique, unless you want him to play for Tony Pulis.

There isn't a massively different skillset between the two positions, you'll get the odd one who flourish in one setup and dwindle in another but for the most part I think players who do a reasonable job of either role will be passable with the other too.

There’s too much of a focus on formation rather than tactics and ambition on here at times. Changing to 4 at the back isn’t a golden panacea.

 

[North Shropshire Lad]

I agree with Tredman. Intent is as important as the formation in determining whether you play attacking football or not. Three at the back could have been exciting and expansive, it’s just that we didn’t have the plan and/personnel for it to be so.
Likewise, four at the back can be boring and staid. However if played with an attacking mindset, it can equally be thrilling and adventurous.

Systems are necessary but the application and objectives are greater. The way we have approached pre-season gives me hope for a much more enjoyable year. Hopefully both the players and management don’t revert to type.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Hopefully both the players and management don’t revert to type.

In that respect I'd still be concerned about in-game management. In as much as we still don't have any.

Plan A is fine until it isn't.

 

[Johnny75]

There’s too much of a focus on formation rather than tactics and ambition on here at times. Changing to 4 at the back isn’t a golden panacea.

Changing to 4 should free up an extra player in midfield to go forward and join the attack or be part of a fluid front 4.

Sadly, Lage is playing Donk in a 3 and no striker. That’s just fucking bizarre.

At least play Hwang up front and the fluid 3 in behind or buy a striker and ball carrying midfielder.

The squad building has been disgusting for a few seasons now.