This three at the back stuff seems very subjective in our case Col. Until the formation change Bidwell didn't seem to get forward at all. After, he hit one beautiful first time cross (though it may have been Freeman) which Smith made good contact with, but straight at the keeper. First half we were very lopsided, everything went down the right, through Lua Lua, and it probably wasn't the best day for him to be seeing a lot of the ball. After the change it was a bit gung ho, I think we ended with Ned and an injured Perch as our defence (before his injury Perch was getting forward a lot. Bizarrely he picked up his injury in the left back position). I thought with Smith and Sylla on Washington had gone left, but then he popped up in the middle to chase the long punt which made the second goal. I don't think I have the skills to analyse it properly. I'm sure it was exactly what Ollie planned though!
Col, we clearly played 3:5:2 in the 1st half and then we changed to 4:3:3 from the beginnng of the 2nd. On the stream it was very difficult to recognize the formation after Baptiste came offf as we besieged the Hull massed defence. But the formation was not obvious as Ollie passed written instructions to the team. Perhaps we will only really know should the laundryperson find, remove and publish what was in Ned's stocking.
Watching the QPR stream on a lapIop doesn't give great overviews but it looked like we played 4 at the back all game, confirmed by London and Sinton's comments. 4 4 2 til Smith came on, then 4 3 3, with the backs especially Perch getting forward a lot. Perch went CB when Baptist went off. Pawel looked to be the RB when he came on, but also got forward a lot, by then we were chasing the match.
When I went to the Reading game, we played 3 at the back, but again, it was very lopsided, with Bidwell alone on the left. A more adventurous left wing back would help, but we could also do with one of the three midfielders covering the left a little more.
Problem is, our 3 at the back can easily look like 4, as Bidwell doesn't get forward a lot (although he did ok against Reading). Having looked on the official site, it appears we started with 4-1-2-1-2 which I don't like much at all. This explains the lack of width down the left reported by those at the game. I really hope that Ollie doesn't **** around too much with formations!
Although the graphic on the official site appears to be the formation as it ended up after the substitutions, but it has Smith in midfield, so I can only assume they're as confused as everyone else!
I thought Drones was a great album. Don't know about seeing them live now as they only play enormo-domes these days. I saw them in a tiny venue in Bristol many moons ago. Each to his own when it comes to music, personally I think muse are incredibly talented and reinvent their sound every album.
Bidwell got forward more at Sheffield and Norwich and some yesterday with some good crosses in from the left wing. Yes first half most everything was going down our right with Perch and Lua Lua.
Very true. The problem with watching a match on TV or on a stream is that you cannot really see and appreciate the formations. That is the massive benefit of seeing a match live as you can then see not only the formation, but all the off the ball movements, plus of course the atmosphere.
It was difficult to tell but I think it was pretty much this after 63 minutes and a goal down ... please log in to view this image and then this after 91 minutes when 2-1 up with 7 minutes additional time ... please log in to view this image
I thought there were lots of positives particularly our movement. Our midfield worked the ball well but we still look lost for ideas up front. Washington and Mackie didn't make a big enough impression and that's a concern.
Don't know what you were watching but it was a flat back four in the first half of perch Baptiste Ned and Bidwell. We didn't seem to play a left midfielder at all until the subs
It was poor of Hull not to spot this and do more to exploit it. The few times Bowen got away down the right he was by far their best player. Quite early he was switched to the left and wasn't as good, despite the goal.
When sylla and Smith came on the shape was much better. Connor and sylla out wide of Smith with a midfield 3. Was a great day at loftus road. Loved every minute and always thought we were likely to score. Scowen looks a decent aquisition.
It was also why the majority of our attacking in the first half was down our right. Scowen dropped between centre halves to try enable Bidwell on but with no left midfielder it seemed bizarre
I think the idea was meant to be that Washington would fill in there when we didn't have the ball but it was all a bit disjointed. I don't mind that risk though if it gets the best out of Freeman but doubt we can get away with that next week given how Cardiff are going.
For once I was quietly confident even when we went behind. We were hugely dominant in midfield again and created loads of half chances in the first half plus a golden opportunity that Freeman somehow spurned. Despite that miss Freeman was probably MotM again for me and Scowen again confirmed that he is an excellent piece of business as his untiring effort frees up Luongo who can finally really impose himself. So more chances were bound to follow in the second half but the big question was how our diminutive front line could find a way through the land of giants that was the Hull defence and whether Lua Lua could actually pass to another QPR player in the course of the entire match. The answer of course was to bring on our own giant and didn't he do well as a certain Brucie might say
