I know why you say this and it’s possible, but I think the issue is more that we need to have a midfield 2 or 3 with chemistry It’s fast interplay when in possession and hunting in packs when out, that wins the midfield and I don’t see that at present Same needed with backs/wingbacks/wide forwards, a la Bridgey & CMFG or Bertie & Punch (For those old enough to remember)
Sunderland Till I Die documentary is a cracker and demonstrates some fans psychology really well When they’re winning they’re all “We’re the greatest fans in the fookin world” but when they miss out on promotion / get relegated they’re absolutely toxic
Watched the highlights back and we did enough to win. Robinson’s chances, Harwood-Bellis’ header, plus the ones from Downes and Stewart – on another day at least one of those goes in and it’s a different game. The bigger issue for me is how we let Stoke grow into it. With three at the back and two holding mids, we should be taking control from the start. You could see their confidence build after half an hour. We’re clearly still short on confidence after last season, but we should be controlling the game more than what we did yesterday, first half in particular. Frustrating result, but not the end of the world like I felt at FT yesterday – we did more than enough to win, and probably do on a different day.
On the issue of us not controlling the game, goals change games and if we start taking our chances, we’ll maybe control games better Need one of our two No9s starting and Adarma on the right
For sure, an early goal yesterday changes the dynamic for us completely. Instead, not only did we not score but we never get a foot on the ball to dictate the game and establish any dominance which I would expect from not only the ability of the players compared to the majority of the league but also the way we are setup. My point is, in the absence of a goal we should be looking to suffocate teams and our performance levels are not allowing us to do that.. yet Hopefully that comes as they grow in confidence and find a rhythm.
Trueish, but also I think Stoke are better than most and we aren’t as good as people think we should be Just to say, I’m not expecting auto promotion, and I’m happy not expecting that
I tried to let my frustrations die down before commenting, but still fells like this is going to be a long moan...I'll start with the positives...Whether you go for stat metrics like xG or not, we have been creating goalscoring chances and our xG is bar far the highest of all teams across the first 3 games (even including Coventry who have scored 12 goals in their last two games), despite our attack not functioning at all yet, we are creating chances that we should be scoring. The other positive is that the transfer window still has a week left for incomings.... Things that concern me though. Will Still talks a good game about being flexible and changing things to win the game, but he hasn't exactly shown it much yet. There is no reason to have started with Armstrong as the 9 AGAIN. There is no reason to still be playing a back 5 either, particularly at home. I don't buy that we don't have the players to play any other system. We have two brilliant for this level, more defensively minded midfielders in Downes and Charles and are playing both of them, and yet teams are finding it far far FAR too easy to break right through us. The midfield that should be a huge strength was utter **** yesterday. Downes was awful, Charles was poor and Fernandes was okay at best. There is an argument that we shouldn't be playing Downes and Charles in most games anyway, but you'd like to think they and/or the manager should work out that either one is the sitter for the game, and stays disciplined in front of the defence OR IF one goes the other sits. Instead they both seem to be going forward despite neither being creative and leaving massive gaps in front of the defence which they don't have the pace to recover. Fernandes looked a mix of trying too hard, and potentially not being in the right mindset to me which you can understand tbf. If neither Stewart nor Downs are fit enough to start, then one starts and then you have a natural replacement when they tire. At the moment all of our attacking threat and creativity has to come through JRob which is what we did to Dibling last season and look how that went for him in the second half of the season, so until we finally buy some wingers and creative midfielders I can understand a primary attacking game plan being to put balls into the box, as uninspiring as that is. But then why the **** are we playing Armstrong as the striker!?! Play Stewart, if he tires, replace him with Downs. Don't play Armstrong, realise for the 4000th time that he can't play the number 9 role and then just throw all your strikers on the pitch in a panic with seemingly no direction for how they should be playing. They just get in each others way and it's so predictable to defend as all we do is put balls in, often from **** angles because there is NO overlapping. Amazed me how inept we were against 10 men. You couldn't tell we had a numerical advantage. It was obvious that Stokes main tactic was to go direct, break on us with pace, and trigger the press high up the pitch like they did for the first goal, play balls over the top and take advantage of the space behind the wing backs. They were getting a lot of joy from it, so for one, I thought it was strange that we took Quashie out of the team for this game (who I'm not saying is brilliant and would have made a difference), but he is our paciest defender. And for two, I was disappointed that Still didn't alter our formation to close down that space that we were leaving for their most dangerous players. Thought that's what a tactically flexible manager was supposed to do. Stoke were like a poor mans Brentford of the last few seasons. A team that we have struggled with for years. They did the things you probably expect from a smart away side in this division. Time wasted at 0-0 in the first half, they were 'robust' and niggly and they were obviously effective at what they did, and did it well, helped by our complete lack of reaction to the weaknesses their play was highlighting. But it was still mainly only our needless poor mistakes that presented them with chances. They do have that pace, power, directness in their attacking players and are fairly solid at the back and have a solid manager. But they did put a hell of a lot of fairly aimless long balls straight out of play or straight to our players. I don't see them as anything more than a midtable side who could flirt with the playoffs at a push. Fair play to them for such a strong start to the season though. If anyone actually bothered to read all that. Fair play. This was more just for getting it off my chest tbh. And for those that think I'm overreacting. Each to their own. I'm not writing our season or manager off just yet, not even close. Just frustrated with some pretty basic mistakes and problems that we don't seem to be solving yet. I can also understand the 'overreaction' because as much as you should be able to draw a blue line under last season, it's not that easy for most people. I sat through most of the home games last season, and missed the Wrexham game so haven't seen a win since Everton on November 2nd 2024.
Fair post and fair criticisms tbh. Interesting point about it not being easy for some people to draw a blue line under last season - I suspect that’s very true of some of the players too.
Top post, Still is making errors that were resolved 2 years ago and it is frustrating. Hopefully he learns quickly but I do wonder if he has watched our promotion season and before cos Adarma is clearly not a CF that can play up there alone.
Yeah, as others have said, great post I’ve already said about AA & 3x CB’s, which drives me nuts. I asked my son, who’s more tactically astute than me, why 3x CB’s. He made an interesting comment that he doesn’t think we have a competent 2x CB pairing that will support a RB pairing (and visa versa). I questioned, even at this level but it sorta makes sense why WS persists. About AA, he just shook his head
I just assumed WS took off Armstrong at half time as he realised he looked about a foot shorter than everyone around him and was never going to win any form of aerial 1 on 1 but seems he had a back issue
