I see Malky saying that we lost that one because we gave away "cheap goals" and cited the penalties in particular. I doubt he'd have had a moan if Whitts had popped a couple in for us. I can't believe the lack of recognition that we were completely outplayed by Friedman's side and deserved nothing. The Beeb article also said we were two goals up and in control. Never in a million years. I listened to the game on CC Player and have also watched it since on there. The initial set up was never right and Palace knew it. We set out to keep the point we started with and Palace came on to us as we sat back. The two early goals we got were both well taken but completely against the run of play to the extent that you could be forgiven for think Malky's game plan was going to work - it clearly wasn't. Listening to it live, I was just waiting for Richard Shepherd to mumble they've got one back. As it was, it was a penalty, but so what - they were allowed to come on to us with little fear of us picking them off at their end. Getting 11 men behind the ball is one thing, but trying to keep a tidal wave at bay for about 80 minutes is asking for it. Zaha and Bolasie were allowed to run at our defence without fear of anyone getting behind them and putting pressure on their own full backs. Bringing Noone on after they'd scored their 3rd and then Mason and Kimbo at the death was chasing the game and all too late. Given the first half pumelling we took, would it have been reckless to bring at least one of them on at half time? At least it would have made them think instead of coming back out and giving us more of the same. All to easy with hindsight I know, but we must play to our strengths and frighten the opposition not invite them to score with little fear of retaliation.
agree - surely with all the attacking players we have at our disposal we should be attacking teams with 4-4-2. mutch and whitts in the midfield with smith and noone on the wings, helguson and say mason up front.... biased opinions from a manager are normal, and they're all guilty of it at times..... very few managers call it as they see it, perhaps redknapp and a handful of others. if you are serious about promotion you need to win games like these and go on winning runs......
Could not agree more ,was up Palace yesterday and we played like a side wanting a draw but trying to hit them on the break . We are not good enuff to play that style and why we dont play our attacking formation of 442 away as well as home i avent a clue .Reminds me of the first and second half against Leeds ,first half we were playing them on a break but second half we played that attacking style that suits us so well with the squad we have and yesterday MM got the tactics and team all wrong even us being two up we were the second best .
With all the options we have going forward we really should believe that 'attack is the best form of defence'. We will lose a few games with this policy but we will win a lot more!
Different game - yes. Another example - Malky said that nine times out of 10 Bellamy would have buried that chance to make it 3-0 and game over. Bellamy has never been a great 'striker', witness his disappointing demise at Liverpool where they played him up front. If Malky thinks Bellers can just step into Maynard's shoes then we have a problem. We'd be better off with Mason in that role - which is what I assumed would happen. Putting Cowie in (I don't care how fit and willing he is) when we have both Bellers and Mason available defies belief. Did you see the number of times Bellers could not keep the ball when it came to him in that role. It is not his normal game, what a waste of talent.
Can't really add anything to the above and totally agree. Saw the full match today and we were on the back foot most of the game and no imagination going forward. Bellamy was all over the park more like Robbie Savage (not a complement) than the quality player he is in his own position. Too many long balls to try and get something out of the game.
I thought strikers were meant to score goals. Where have most of ours come from this season? That's right, midfield. HH and Mason scored at Bristol and, correct me if I'm wrong, but those are the only 2. Bellers was playing out wide when he scored. Even with Maynard injured and Earnie gone we still have 5 supposed strikers. Isn't it about time they started hitting the net?
ANSWER: - You've got to play them first. Heidi apart, the system Malky's deploying hasn't given them a chance.
It is very frustrating and if these tactics continue it could turn into a mediocre season at best. Roll on Blackpool and if he plays 451 against them i fancy the crowd could turn on him.
We commented before the game Sparky, we need to set up our formation to exploit opposition weaknesses rather than nullify their threats. If we'd given more going forward we'd have seen less of their threats, but we sat back and took it.
Shows how fickle most of us supporters can be. Most of us constantly criticised DJ for stubbornly sticking with 442. The only difference now is that we have the squad to play almost any formation we choose. I don't mind what formation we go with as long as we make the opposition worry about us and stop paying them too much respect.
its not necessarily the formation you play, its about players and mentality. what i want to see is either a more attacking 4-5-1 or a 4-4-2. it makes no sense to be defensive if your strength is attack. yes we'll lose more matches but we'll win more too - a win is 3 draws......
I agree Swamp set up to play to our strengths. As for Jones' 442, that was the shape he set up, but as soon as we had an attack it became more 406 and we got slaughtered in midfield when we lost the ball. I think MMs squad is better equiped to maintain shape and work to defend. Agree with Sparky that MM got it wrong on Saturday and he should have been quicker to change (especially when 2-0 up). Not just to keep what we had, but to set up in a way that stopped us being overrun and give us a chance going forward.
Yes, we did agree that at the time Remote. Respect the opposition by all means, but respect the ability of your own squad even more. I honestly think Malky is running a bit scared at the moment. This has a lot to do with confidence and expectation. That may seem a silly thing to say, but last year the prospects of promotion with the limited resources and squad at his disposal was not great in the owners eyes - Dato Chan has already admitted that. DC said, and I quote (I think) "last season we'd have taken it if it came, but this year we are ready". I think that quote from DC has put a lot of pressure on Malky.
I would rather a team that is worried about what we can do than us being worried what they can do ....... Lets play our natural attacking formation and in my view the best way to defend is to attack .
Doubt if the crowd will turn yet, but his honeymoon period is definitely over. It took five years for some to become sceptical of DJ's approach - partly because for most of that he performed miracles whilst selling some of our best players. Malky has had more money than DJ could ever have dreamed of, and we now have a better squad than ever. I think the extra pressure is coming from the fact that he often doesn't look like he sets up to win a game by attacking, even though we have the resources available to do just that. DJ's downfall was that in a season when we had Bellamy, Bothroyd and Chopra we had the misfortune to see all of them frequently sidelined by injury. How often were all three available? Therefore I have some sympathy with the fact that our only potential 20 goal striker has bowed out for the season, but wonder what on earth we are going to do about that now. Bit pointless getting a 20 goal striker on loan if we're not going to use him. Bellamy will be well hacked off if he has to play in that role for long. He'll look no better, and score no more goals than Kenny Miller did. Oh, and I never criticised DJ for playing 4-4-2. Playing 4-5-1 is OK, but not the way we play it with little link-up, and the ball being played long too often from the back.
