Can you give any examples, because I didn't see him do anything useful. His stats for his 45 mins included 9 touches (the lowest per minute of any player on the pitch), 33.3% pass accuracy (the lowest of any player on the pitch), and a 5.99 score from WhoScored.com.
At the time I didn't think it was a 'blatant block' on Greaves, but looking at the highlights you can see it was. Their player was looking at Greaves and Mitrovic (rather than the ball) then deliberately turned into Greaves to block him off. A bit too easy for them though. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...74BB5A9BC92E990D108574B&view=detail&FORM=VIRE You are right about Eaves. It's soul destroying when we make a change and it's Eaves that's coming on. As much as I want him to do well, he's just awful.
The “block” on Greaves, it’s just the way football is, some get away with it, some don’t. The ref & linesman didn’t see anything as the player was watching Greaves, but turned round by the time Greaves ran into him. So is Greaves at fault for not seeing a player he ran into? Or did he expect to get the foul. Too many times players throw themselves to the ground & we complain when it’s against us & love it when it’s for us. The main problem I have with that goal, is no man on the posts!
If any of you lot were parked in their car on Duke Street in the West End yesterday evening and saw a bloke point at your number plate and say to his family “Hull plate” then walk on not realising there was a driver in it in his City shirt till my daughter pointed that out, that was me and my brood, and hope you had a good day despite the result.
Just watched the highlights again. I was there on saturday. Anyone one else wondering why we put two men on the corner taker. No wonder there was so much room in our box for their set pieces. If an opposition player comes for the short kick, then surely one of ours could go too. Id rather have someone on the posts
Fulham Away was calling out for a change in formation and tactics to 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 and not the same old predictable 4-4-3 where we get outrun in midfield. Emmanuel should have been on from the start and we did not concede in the second half when he came on to help Coyle out it was a massive step up in class for Williams. KLP is far too wide out on the left wing and he is not a left winger he should be playing closer to Magennis. We also need an old head like James Chester desperately
He came on to prevent Robinson getting as much joy down our right as he got in the first half. Basically to help Coyle out as he was exposed when Williams was on.
But that's not the point though is it - if you tell the opposition , not 1 hour before kick off, not 1 day, not 1 week but before the season has even started what formation you are going to play then you make it very easy for the opposition to decide how to play against us - we should be keeping them guessing up until the last minute - its lazy management because he cant be arsed to think strategically about how we should set up for each game
You can make tactical adjustments. Within a 4 3 3 and plenty of successful sides play that way. Just because fans tactical awareness is based on how the game was played in the 90s, doesn't mean most teams play that way. We are nominally a 433 but we can set up with 2 holders and 1 AM, a Holder a box to box and an AM. We can play our wide defenders as fullbacks or wingbacks. We can play our wide forwards as wingers or more narrow effectively having one, or both in close support of the no 9. Like i say, just because you don't see tactical nuance doesn't mean it's not there and it worked effectively last season. The reason we'll struggle this year as opposed to winning the division is the quality of player we can attract, not primarily the shape we set up in. You can shift the formation around but ultimately you still only have 11 vs 11.
A 433 is a 451. Just depends on how advanced your wingers are at the time. It is also a 442 when the wingers stay back and the attacking midfielder gets in close support of the centre-forward in the no 10 role. You seem to assume that players set up in a pattern and then stand still. They don't.
So you have to adjust to play against better teams and not be so wide open Having wide men on either side high up the pitch and the centre forward too means your midfield is going to struggle against a team that keeps the ball well like qpr So don’t do it.
I’ve always said I don’t study formations but we are too narrow when defending and too wide when attacking . KLP and Bowen always have allowed an easy out down the wings from our opponents they then have to run 20 yds to press- poor defensive positioning . Coyle , Emmanuel and elder are primarily attackers and not disciplined enough to defend - maybe it’s the instruction they get ? Coyle gets caught out of position and is usually too late to cover the winger . Personally I’d prefer two stopper backs rather than two flying ones who leave too much space - or like top teams of the full back is adventurous and passes the midfield someone drops in to cover - again it’s down to instruction or lack of player focus . I think it will take two months for us to adjust let’s hope we are not to down by then
Given how advanced Elder, Emmanuel and Coyle play, I'm surprised Grant hasn't tried a 5-3-2. The three centre-halves compensates for allowing the full-backs or wing-backs to bomb forward. It would also offer an alternative to our current system which I feel can be too narrow defensively and too wide offensively, like others have said. Wilks is out for the time being, so now's the perfect time to play KLP closer to Magennis as a front-two.
I always felt the idea was that the holding mid should slot into the back line to provide that kind of cover. Effectively making a 3.
But does Smallwood or anyone else actually do that? I remember the 5-3-2 shape under Bruce was very different to our current shape off the ball. For one, when we played 5-3-2 in the 2012/13 season, we had our three centre-halves plus someone like Corry Evans or Meyler as the holding midfielder with Quinn and Koren given more creative freedom.
