Match Day Thread Hull City v Peterborough

I've no idea for sure but at a guess id say 4/5, at the time of their 2nd we were well on top and creating chances

 

I've no idea for sure but at a guess id say 4/5, at the time of their 2nd we were well on top and creating chances

 

I've no idea for sure but at a guess id say 4/5, at the time of their 2nd we were well on top and creating chances

 

So, you’ve no idea?

 

Eaves and adelukan at least, smallwood and Burke half chances from memory. Their second came against the run of play after docherty came very close twice and Wilks hit the woodwork.

 

Cheers. That sort of backs up the “no change needed, **** strikers” argument.

 

I think 2 strikers on the pitch playing as central strikers would have had a positive impact. The problem is McCann won’t stray from his one striker two wingers formula.

 

Strangely enough, I don't note down the minutes we create every chance!

Why is it when we win your pretty much MIA on here but the second we have a loss you can't stop posting?

 

Just reposting this for no reason whatsoever...


Number of shots means **** all - a team could have 30 shots from the halfway line, it still gets counted as a shot. It's like when people claim possession stats, which also mean sod all.

Posh's play was mainly coming through our left hand side from the moment the second half began, so I would've moved to make sure that side has someone constantly covering the fullback and adding some stability to that side.

For me, Mayer would've come on once Posh equalised (for KLP) - I'd have moved to 2 players up front (Move Wilks further up alongside Magennis) and possibly changed Smallwood, who was flagging early in the second half, for Alfie Jones. Move Honeyman or Docherty to the right midfield, and line up as a 4-4-2.

 

Must be the coaching thats consistently rubbish then...

 

I don't see how that would have changed the outcome today. Missing chances isn't about overloads and support or possession in their box its about only one of the 5 forwards we played hitting the back of the net with the abundance of chances they had.

Playing 2 centrally or 3 across the front line wouldn't have necessarily made them any more clinical.

I agree that having a plan b would be an asset to us at times and there have been games crying out for 2 up top, especially last season but that wasn't the tale of the match today. Wasteful finishing and sometimes poor final ball was.

 

The first main test of the season and same old story. Posh did a proper Bannister and Warboys on us.

Soft as ****e.

 

I think if you check my post count you’ll see I’m very rarely MIA as you put it. You have certainly liked enough of my posts over the last week or so. Do you have the memory capacity of a goldfish?

 

I like the occasional nugget of sense you post, just as I'll disagree if my opinion differs to yours... I know you really don't like or normally accept people not thinking the same as you, but one day you might realise it's healthy and the whole point of a discussion

 

Well generally you have 2 players occupying a central position rather than 1.

Dirty word I know, but look at how well Leeds played last night? When they attacked Villa they generally had 4/5/6 attacking players in the Villa box.

More often than not we have 1 and they are often isolated. What’s to say having 2 strikers on the pitch we might have had 28 shots on goal, 15 on target and converted 4 to goals.

 

Well you have liked an awful lot recently for it to be only a nugget of sense.

 

I didn't see the central striker as being isolated today. I have in the past but I felt we got enough bodies in the box in support today.

 

Or a Sunderland on us...

 

You seem to have issue with anything and everything I do...care to enlighten me as to why?

 

I mean, you seem to have an issue with everything GLP does, so you can't claim superiority there.