Chez

that moment stood out for me. Feels like years since we scored goals on the break. Every other team seems to be able to do it except us.

I am also with you that I struggle to understand what the plan is other than get between the lines and see where that takes us or to get it to Fellows and see where that takes us. Maybe that's enough of a plan...but it's not working just yet. I say that because I haven't given up yet. It was weak as piss CB that cost us today. We identified that we lacked physicality in that position, and signed Quarshie, but we haven't played him.

what a load of bollocks

I thought he was harshly treated on here and by Still after the first game. He had some chances and didn't take them, but the way he got into positions and was positive was encouraging. The trouble we have is not having a striker that can play on his own. How do we solve that issue?

Boro's best player was Hackney and WBA's was Heggem. Sadly we couldn't get either of them, as they are kind of what we need.

Simple solution. Pick Quarshie. That's what we bought him to do (nullify the likes of McBurnie), wasn't it? I am fed up of having centre backs that don't win the majority of headers in favour of lightweight ball players...and that's from someone that preaches constantly how important keeping the ball is (and thus the need for ball playing CBs) if you want to win games of football. You have to do the basics. Just look at the top sides. They have monsters at CB. Even Liverpool sacrifice a little skill on the ball in favour of power.

he's scored some goals at this level. But that doesn't automatically mean he's a great championship player. Whatever his level, we need to get more from him (and others). For me, not having a solitary striker that can be a focal point and play off is an issue. None of Downs, Stewart, Armstrong and Archer have so far shown they are that player.

Personally I thought he was overrated and the fact no PL side fancied him backed that up. Early days though, but if you are getting a free role you need to be the dogs bollocks, so he needs to do a bit more.

the first goal was THB's fault IMO. The third was Azaz. Check out how pathetic he was challenging McBernie.

THB. Weak as piss.

I thought we looked OK. I feel confident we will turn it around and get the win.

I thought we offered him a new deal but he decided to leave?

To me the stat highlights that Scienza was/is very happy to fall over when hardly touched to get a foul. You may call it an achievement, but I'm less inclined to do so.

What I want to see in the games going forward is us working harder to take charge of a game in the first half. We have started games poorly in a lot of games. If we are passing it out from the back, which any decent side will do, then the midfield 3 or 5 have to be more fluid and make more effort to lose their markers so we can get between the lines. These players need to be on the half turn far more otherwise we will have the same problem as Sunday...the ball goes nowhere. If the press against us is good, especially in the first half, then going long is absolutely fine, but what are we doing to hold up the ball and play off a forward? In the second half, the space tends to open up as the press fades, so getting between the lines is far easier. But what are we are doing with it once we do? I'd like to understand why our own press is so shit. Are we not actually bothering? I saw Archer and Aziz trying to cover four players on Sunday. Not sure where the wingers went. In contrast the skates press was regimented. Perhaps the change of formation meant we had not perfected our own press, but the truth is our press has not been great for a long time. Maybe we just don't want to tire ourselves out, but all successful sides seem to do it well, so why wouldn't we?

His tactic seems to be to not have a specific tactic. He seems happy for us to pass it short and try and get between the lines, but if that is not on and we are under pressure then the keeper smashing it long to relative safety is perfectly fine. Note that is different from him instructing us to play it long. He's not doing that, but he isn't asking players to play there way out of trouble. Reduced risk, basically. I think oru main route of attack is get the ball to the wingers and ask them to make something happen. He then seems happy for the wingers to get to the byeline and cross, or to dribble inside and shoot. That said, he doesn't seem to mind us hitting some longer balls down the channel for Archer to chase, but mostly its working it across the pitch to the wingers.

I don't recall there being too many crosses after he came on, but I recall that there was one where he went near post and the ball went far post. It happens. I don't blame Stewart for that. Possibly the crossers fault on that occasion.

Thought Manning did OK. I've never been his biggest fan, but there wasn't much threat down his side.

yeah he reigned it in, only mentioning Norris' goal about 4 times.

What a load of fucking bollocks. By the time that game comes around we could be flying.

thought the first set of subs came at about the right time personally. We needed some height in the box and fresh legs. Didn't think it effected our momentum.

Hard to argue. The safe one touch backwards pass is a killer if you want to get between the lines. Whether Jander can step up and offer enough defensive quality is to be seen.

what's your solution when the opponents press is excellent?

So everything bad is down to the head coach, everything good is down to the players. Gotcha.

Their press was excellent and we didn't know what to do. We looked terrible. Still seemed to sort it at half time though and we dominated. Shouldn't Still get a little credit for the changes he made at the break?

Maybe the whole midfield needed to work harder to find space. There wasn't a lot of it though, so the next option was to go longer and play off the striker, at least until the space opened up, but not sure Archer can do that. Tough for any striker. We need a way of countering the press