• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Wolves 2-6 Chelsea: Verdict Thread

Sick of reading bullshit about formations too……”playing a five will make us more solid”…..blah blah.

Utter shit - it’s not the formation that’s the problem, it’s the personnel we’ve got playing for us.

Two (being massively generous) out of our back four today are entirely unfit for purpose. Doesn’t matter what formation they play in - they’re shit footballers.

Again, on O’Neil. They’re his players. He’s had most of them for over a year now.
 
Watching the goals back way too high a line to be playing. We turnover possession way too easily and simply don’t work hard enough to win it back.
Three at the won’t solve this issue it’s far more deep rooted.
Read a stat we ran 8km less than Arsenal did last week.
 
NicholasG1973 said:
Sick of reading bullshit about formations too……”playing a five will make us more solid”…..blah blah.

Utter shit - it’s not the formation that’s the problem, it’s the personnel we’ve got playing for us.

Two (being massively generous) out of our back four today are entirely unfit for purpose. Doesn’t matter what formation they play in - they’re shit footballers.

Again, on O’Neil. They’re his players. He’s had most of them for over a year now.
Click to expand...
You're in the wrong place if you're fed up of hearing about formations.
 
I would never describe myself as a glass half full kind of person (and neither would any of my therapists) but I'm of the opinion that if that first half is indictactive of the standard they play this season, then we'll be easily safe from relegation once again. Goals and creativity from fit JSL/Cunha + others, but scrappy defensively should see through more than enough wins to be above 3 other teams.

Second half, well that was an ugly write off, but it was against a Sky 6 opponent. If we're not poaching a win from one of them (like we did last season) then in the scheme of things it doesn't really matter how bad they lose. If relegation comes down to GD, shouldn't be in that position to begin with. Maybe I'm just being too contrary. Never as bad as worst loss, never as good as best win cliche blah.

Obviously the squad itself needs improvement, we didn't need this game to tell us that. Sarabia/RGomes/Podence/Guedes is plenty of options off the bench but is very similar in player type and "meh" ability and ideally you need someone coming in who can get Bellegarde off the pitch to start and someone who should be to back up Larsen who isn't named Guedes.
 
C.L.D said:
. Goals and creativity from fit JSL/Cunha + others, but scrappy defensively should see through more than enough wins to be above 3 other teams.
Click to expand...
I do agree. The issue being though that when we play the Brentford’s and the Palace’s we don’t tend to be so effective going forward as they don’t leave acres of space, but we still look likely to cocede.
 
Last edited:
One look at our opening set of fixtures should have shown O'Neil that he needed to be careful in how he set us up , pragmatic , and whatever word you wish to use .
Instead we begin the season with a new formation , using two very young and inexperienced centre backs , one experienced full back suspended , leaving us very bare when it comes to ' solid full backs ' .
O'Neil can't be held responsible in my view with not purchasing better , more experienced and therefore more expensive players at this stage in the season - he is strictly a head coach and has I believe only a very small role in player recruitment when it comes to the final decision on how much to spend .
He did however recently sign a new deal . He therefore agreed to work with what he had , knowing full well our owners history is refusing to spend big in the transfer market .
Why then is he being all gung ho with back 4s and high lines against a top side like Chelsea ?
It matters little how long O' Neil's contract is - if we are on 3 points after 10 league matches , then it's good night Gary . It's not as if he will be fully paid off either . There will be plenty of clauses in there to ensure any pay off is limited and is tied in to performance .

I know people hate out insistence on a back 5 , but right now we need to steady a very rocky ship . We need Dawson back to hold the hands of the other two CBs . We need a holding midfielder to shield them as well I would have thought .
Let RAN plough up the field and let Nelson stay back . Cunha and Larson might have a partnership going already .

We need a reset and we need new players with others making way out the door .

Pragmatic , steady nerves and close the open spaces .
 
C.L.D said:
I would never describe myself as a glass half full kind of person (and neither would any of my therapists) but I'm of the opinion that if that first half is indictactive of the standard they play this season, then we'll be easily safe from relegation once again. Goals and creativity from fit JSL/Cunha + others, but scrappy defensively should see through more than enough wins to be above 3 other teams.
Click to expand...
I've not quoted your full post, but that's much too simplistic for me. A previous poster used to suggest any game against a team above you is a free hit, but it never plays out that way as you don't beat every side below you. Without points against the Sky 6 we would have gone down in the Lopetegui year, and would have only got 31 points last, which relegates you most seasons.

The way both sides played yesterday isn't sustainable for either of their ambitions. If Chelsea played the top 3 like that they'd be the team losing 6-2, we'd have let a couple in against anyone including the promoted teams.
 
Last edited:
Tony Towner said:
I've not quoted your full post, but that's much too simplistic for me. A previous poster used to suggest any game against a team above you is a free hit, but it never plays out that way as you don't beat every side below you. Without points against the Sky 6 we would have gone down in the Lopetegui year, and would have only got 31 points last, which relegates you most seasons.

The way both sides played yesterday isn't sustainable for either of their ambitions. If Chelsea played the top 3 like that they'd be the team losing 6-2, we'd have let a couple in against anyone including the promoted teams.
Click to expand...

I am not sure, I think most teams in this division would have scored 6 past us yesterday. Every Chelsea goal was a direct result of our failings. The only goal that had any class was Palmer’s finish…but he should never have had the opportunity in the first place.
 
As good a player as Ait-Nouri is there are massive issues with his positional play especially in a back 4. When we briefly had a bit of success with a 4 under Lopetegui, he had to play Bueno there as he didn't trust RAN as a left back in a 4. I'm not sure if that can be worked on quickly enough to make it workable for now.
 
Deano said:
As good a player as Ait-Nouri is there are massive issues with his positional play especially in a back 4. When we briefly had a bit of success with a 4 under Lopetegui, he had to play Bueno there as he didn't trust RAN as a left back in a 4. I'm not sure if that can be worked on quickly enough to make it workable for now.
Click to expand...
EP was ripped apart for suggesting RAN should be playing further forward & we should either sign a proper left back (or shouldn’t have loaned out Hugo) - but after seeing that ‘performance’ from RAN yesterday, I wouldn’t necessarily be against it - especially if Gaz continues with a back 4.

The best thing RAN did yesterday was the run for Cunha’s goal. Play him further forward and let him do it more often without being ripped apart over & over again at left back and sign an actual left back that can defend.
 
His issues yesterday weren't because he wasn't playing wing back, he'd have been the man responsible for Madueke in that formation too. He can defend, we've seen it, although I have no explanation as to why he's making the most basic of errors this season. As for him playing further forwards, that takes away his biggest strength which is running from deep. The first goal doesn't happen if he's playing as a left forward.

I'd like us to try and play a more conservative way with a back 4, rather than reverting back to the comfort of a 5 which let's not forget last season still wasn't defensively sound and offensively relied on moments of individual brilliance. Play the centre halves 10 yards further back in possession, don't get caught with both full backs high up and less emphasis on being 'brave' on the ball which for us just means being loose in possession. You'd need a partnership of prime VVD and Rio to be a successful centre half in this side with the way we give the ball away all over the pitch and where we expect their starting positions to be.

If that fails then revert to a 5, but an extra centre half, just moves the issue around again. Wash, rinse, repeat.
 
Tony Towner said:
His issues yesterday weren't because he wasn't playing wing back, he'd have been the man responsible for Madueke in that formation too. He can defend, we've seen it, although I have no explanation as to why he's making the most basic of errors this season. As for him playing further forwards, that takes away his biggest strength which is running from deep. The first goal doesn't happen if he's playing as a left forward.

I'd like us to try and play a more conservative way with a back 4, rather than reverting back to the comfort of a 5 which let's not forget last season still wasn't defensively sound and offensively relied on moments of individual brilliance. Play the centre halves 10 yards further back in possession, don't get caught with both full backs high up and less emphasis on being 'brave' on the ball which for us just means being loose in possession. You'd need a partnership of prime VVD and Rio to be a successful centre half in this side with the way we give the ball away all over the pitch and where we expect their starting positions to be.

If that fails then revert to a 5, but an extra centre half, just moves the issue around again. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Click to expand...
I don't think we need to shift to a more defensive 4 or a 5.

We could just not play 4-2-4 with inside forwards which is madness in this league with these players.

A simple shift to a 4-3-3 with a shield in front of the back 4 and a frontline of Cunha - JSL - Sarabia.

It allows RAN more freedom and gives Toti and Mosquera the ability to shift into full back cover if needed.

Liverpool do this incredibly well and effectively.
 
Johnny75 said:
I don't think we need to shift to a more defensive 4 or a 5.

We could just not play 4-2-4 with inside forwards which is madness in this league with these players.

A simple shift to a 4-3-3 with a shield in front of the back 4 and a frontline of Cunha - JSL - Sarabia.

It allows RAN more freedom and gives Toti and Mosquera the ability to shift into full back cover if needed.

Liverpool do this incredibly well and effectively.
Click to expand...
Liverpool have Arne Slot in charge, our manager is more like Arse Snot.
 
Johnny75 said:
As much as I think GoN is out of his depth he is quite a personable chap.

He's not Lage levels of unlikable or even his deputy Derry who is a repugnant man.
Click to expand...
You do make a good point, I was too harsh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Bear
Brighton 2-2 Wolves: Verdict Thread
13 14 15
Replies
285
Views
8K
Carsy
C
The Bear
Wolves 1-2 Man City: Verdict Thread
21 22 23
Replies
440
Views
12K
Paddingtonwolf
Paddingtonwolf
The Bear
Aston Villa 3-1 Wolves: Verdict Thread
8 9 10
Replies
194
Views
7K
Elephant Pyjamas
Elephant Pyjamas
The Bear
Wolves 1-2 Liverpool: Verdict Thread
9 10 11
Replies
216
Views
7K
StuardoWulf
S
The Bear
Chelsea 2-4 Wolves: Verdict Thread
13 14 15
Replies
282
Views
12K
sycophantia
S
Back
Top