1. Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!

attack attack attack

Discussion in 'Fulham' started by frogman27, Oct 19, 2011.

  1. frogman27

    frogman27 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    797
    Likes Received:
    5
    #1
  2. dempsey's revenge

    dempsey's revenge Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2011
    Messages:
    1,333
    Likes Received:
    20
    That was an interesting read. I don't disagree, but the higher up the pitch we play, the more likely we are to get burned on the counter-attack. And since we don't have much pace in the back four (Briggs helps), it's risky. We might get lucky playing that way against weaker sides, but better and faster teams will make us pay.
     
    #2
  3. Cottager58

    Cottager58 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2011
    Messages:
    12,919
    Likes Received:
    1,378
    Agreed, a very interesting analysis. In Sidwell's defence the movement of players in front of him may have a bearing.

    DR - don't have the stats but my recollection of the Man C game was that we played as per Stoke in the first half and as per QPR in the second. So there has to be something in taking the game to the opposition.
     
    #3
  4. frogman27

    frogman27 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2011
    Messages:
    797
    Likes Received:
    5
    I guess that as a manager when you see you have Stoke away, you must think that this is going to be a tricky one. As mentionned on a previous post not many teams have got points there. I would prefer to see us lose 3 points but play attacking football and taking the game to the opposition. We have shown that when we get the ball moving among the top 4 we are dangerous and we still have a very effective defence.
     
    #4

Share This Page