Exactly, the club were stronger than ego and thats why they werent bullied by those players you mentioned. Can't comment on spurs don't care about premiershit clubs..
Me too. Occasionally. When he was a sub. However ..... Awful as a starter. Awful since his seizure starter or sub. And no improvement this season - in fact, a noticeable lethargy that wasn't there before.
Nor do I but I do know they’ve handled their egotistical players so well that they haven’t been champions of England for nearly 60 years
Well…… Not so much veni vidi vici, more I came, I saw, we got stuffed. I’ll keep this short(ish) as a lot has been said already on here. Was too peed off to comment before now. Impressions: never been to Charlton before. Had the pleasure of seeing Millwall’s ground from a distance on the train there. I was worried the animals would pick up my scent from last time I was there but we went past quickly. First funny moment – after we got off the train and it left the platform, a couple of ‘Wall fans still on it started mouthing off at the Charlton fans. Bravery personified. (At the games end some equally courageous Charlton fans did the same to the Leeds fans – separated by a 10 ft metal gate, lots of police and the width of the train track. They seemed to be trying to do a poor imitation of Millwall fans – even threw a few coins). Charlton crowd was noisy. Usually I’d say the Leeds contingent make more noise than the home fans but that was not true this time (not that Leeds had a lot to shout about). I was expecting the ground to be bigger (I thought they had a big ground) but it seemed cosy by ER standards. I was in the home end, fans around me before the game expected Charlton to get stuffed. Charlton were not that good, very average team, the sort I always expect us to beat, especially away from home. I think they had a pretty good midfield, hard to tell, lacked firepower, defence looked ok but then against our star studded attack who wouldn’t? We started off like it was first half Derby again, 3 corners in quick succession, winning every 50-50 situation, passing rings around them. Thought Bielsa had us set up quite defensively, both wingers playing as wingbacks but trying to break forward fast. Then gradually we let them come into it. We probably deserved to have scored before they got their slightly fluky goal, but then again we don’t do that do we? Second half we looked to be playing 3 at back (Phillips dropping back) so we could attack more but as a result did not control the game as well. Could have equalised, but didn't. I’ll comment on a few players, but my bottom line is – we are a one man team. When Pablo plays and plays well, we are as good as any team in the league. Costa, started off well, seemed to have beating of FB. But lost his way, stopped trying to take him on, watching him off the ball he looked unsure of himself, and where he should be. Not his fault he was replacing Pablo, but it was clear he did not have the understanding with the other players. Wasn’t terrible, he’s fast, seen a lot worse in that position, just not the ‘big’ player I’d hoped for - yet, anyway. Bamford – somebody called him a nearly player, starting to think that’s the case. Holds ball up well, but is not the sort who you always feel is about to score (Eddie is, though in this game didn’t happen). A lot of players buzzed around a lot, not that badly. I just think we need Pablo to turn us into something more than that. A worry, given his age. This will please LL – Phillips although starting well, soon started making mistakes and giving away fouls. I think that’s because we were losing control but it’s a fact he did not have a great game. Harrison – I can see why he is picked, he makes that side of the pitch robust both attacking and in defence and is a handful, but end product….. not so much That’ll do, I don’t want to remember any more of it. Final point – our worst performance in the league this season against only workmanlike opposition. The defeat means we have fallen behind the 2 points a game we need for auto. Annoying thing is we could have won a game like that and been top. God I’m depressed and its only September.
Not dissimilar from my report 20... were you in the big stand that goes up the hill.... so Leeds fans in the end to your left? I don’t think we ever lost control of the game, a few spells perhaps, we were just a bit toothless. Agree on costa... did a few nice things early on, looked like he could skin the full back but never really tried to... too content to retain possession... orders or confidence? Phillips got given the run around by Williams a couple of times - dunno if that affected him but he was very poor. Klich the pick for me of our lot and quite comfortably... even if his shooting boots still seem to be in the cupboard.
Yes - East stand, Leeds ruffians to my left. Agree on Klich. And that reminds me, another problem is none of them have shooting boots (again, apart from Pablo). Klich puzzles me, he can score (I recall he got a few when first in the team) but now never does. We were unlucky to lose, but can’t complain that we did.
I'd be interested in what the match attendees make of this: I read Rat Boy's comments before the match & his comments after. I think he played us - and very cleverly too. He basically did us on formations, in 2 ways: * First of all, he decided to play 3 at the back, which blew most of Bielsa's 360 hour prep out of the window, as they don't normally do this. * Then later in the game, he played 2 up, knowing that Bielsa would pull KP back as the 3rd CB, as he likes to outnumber the strikers by 1 defender. The benefit of this, of course is that KP was pulled out of his best position & forced to be an average CB (which is about as good as he gets there, tbh). Simple, but effective, imo. Most certainly not game-winners in their own right, but unsettling for our players who are expecting A,B,C, but find it's actually D,E,F, which they haven't drilled for. Also helped that they scored Apologies if wildly out, but as I said, this is based on Rat Boy's comments, & only a short phase of the game I watched on a laptop screen (which illustrates very little). Thoughts?
Wasn't at the match but my observations are; Wigan, last season were probably the first to be successful with similar tactics. Defend narrow and drop deep to your own 18 yard line, midfield to drop in front to form 2 defensive lines, allow space and possession out wide and then encourage crosses to come in from 15/20 yards out rather than the dead ball line. The line of 5/6 defenders with only small gaps between them should effectively deal with this type of attack. All players to be defensively and shape minded, the exception being 2 left up front who will try to feed of long balls and run in behind if possible. Not sure if that's exactly how Charlton approached the game but it was the impression I got from watching on LUTV.
I don’t know about the first point (no opinion) but the second is untrue. We started second half with a back 3, KP was clearly told to drop back it was not forced on us.
He was on talksport today. Said we are by far and away the best team they have played. Then said he played three at the back as he noticed that’s when we struggle to score. Most interesting for me, and those saying we need a plan B, he was staggered (but implied he and his team got a lift) from Bielsa’s decision to switch to a back three to match them as he never deviates from his preferred formation, using it to force teams into defeat. He obviously could just be being wise after the event of course.
Costa wasn't Costa, he blew it and hope this performance was a blip. However he doesn't look like a £15m player yet does he, but the kid we tried to buy for £6m has just been the best player on the park for Man Utd V Arsenal. Tireless down the flank and through the middle, creating countless chances and was unlucky not to score. Wolves sold Costa because they play wing backs, but maybe didn't fancy him in the Prem? Whereas the kid James has had a great season so far playing against anyone? Maybe we should have coughed up £10m back then and sealed the deal?
The mention of £10m jarred me, so I looked back, as I thought it was £1.5m that was disputed. Turns out that we'd started off tryingto sign him for £7m, but after a while, Swansea decided it wasn't going to happen. No reasons given (again). Then it was a £1.5m loan fee until the end of the season. They wanted it all up front, we wanted 2 instalments of £750k. The same Phil Hay article then mentioned a fee 'in excess of' £5m, but it was all conditional on us being promoted, so we were never going to get him anyway. I think they must have been tapped up by scum, imo. I'd forgotten all that (if I actually knew that much in the first place, tbh).
Re ‘matching formations’ is there a conflict in the descriptions? They played a back 3, we switched to one at half time.
