Holmes_and_Watson

There's nothing phony about crop circles! - This post was sponsored by Matthew Le Tissier.

Better yet for the LDs would be to not get drawn into sweeping, limiting statements. Also to have learned from their negotiating failures of last time, rather than crying about it and saying they won't play with one kid, as they were mean to them last time. I'd want them to assess their position along policy lines now, rather than because they negotiated a bad deal years ago.

That undermines their negotiating position. LDs: If you don't give us what we want, we'll back the Tories. Labour: No you won't because you've told all your voters, that's something you'd not do. LDs: Sod. Where do we sign off on all the Labour plans?

Hasn't got the pace for walking football. 🙂

Alert

Card

Celebration

Great to see our youth academy have picked up Martin's philosophy. We're going to see players come into the squad with a lot of experience in his style of play. The grey hair even matches what it's like watching a lot of it. 🙂

Pie

Spray

I can see him being marshalled more by 2-3 centre halves. Also, there's little in our style that releases players centrally to run in behind. Alcaraz as the same issue there. Our central players would be expected to psychically know when that ball is going to be played, and stay offside, as opposed to the ball being just one of dozens making its way across the park to gradually draw our opponents out of position. They would also be expected to play their part in such build up moves, as well as waiting for that killer ball. Che has put in yards all over, as part of build up. As a result, he's been nowhere to be seen for some of the better deliveries. Our style likes shifting it to across and up the flank, allowing Sulemana to draw in and try to get past his full back. That may just be as good as place as it gets as things are.

Martin This season (with the goal of promotion) Scoring 1.55 per match against a xG of 1.93 Conceding 1.91 per match against xGA of 1.28 The last time we were promoted, we were scoring 1.85 per match. And conceding 1 per match. This season, Leicester are scoring 2.09 per match against a xG of 1.61, while conceding .55 against xGA 1.11 Ipswich are scoring 2.27 per match against a xG of 1.93, while conceding 1.18 against a xGA of 1.23 Ralph/ Jones/ Selles Last Season (being dumped out of the Premier League) Scoring .95 per match against a xG of 1.19 Conceding 1.92 per match against xGA of 1.19 In recent seasons... Ralph 21/22 Scoring .1.13 per match against a xG of 1.57 Conceding 1.76 per match against xGA of 1.67 Ralph 20/21 Scoring 1.24 per match against a xG of 1.31 Conceding 1.79 per match against xGA of 1.54 Ralph 19/20 Scoring 1.34 per match against a xG of 1.67 Conceding 1.58 per match against xGA of 1.55

INCOMING WALL OF TEXT WARNING! 🙂 Thanks for taking the time to give so many of your thoughts. Lots of interesting points. The match brought out a lot of things that Martin will have been thrilled with, while at the same time showing just as many problems, not least the actual result. 1 - From what I recall it was 12 in the first half, with 5 on target, and not far off that in the second. Utterly dominant for most of the first half. Moved the ball around well, working hard to create structure for us to get it forward so far. We played out from the back comfortably, always looking to find our man, rather than give the ball away. Ironically, the one I do recall being given away was from Baz, whose distribution has been really good. 2 - I’d say we were better [caveat with all of this considering the opponent of the day] at getting it into the attacking third. We certainly created enough efforts. If we overdo it occasionally, then fine, as the best decision isn’t always going to be made and it’s a style that can be overdone, waiting for a better opportunity. And to our credit, a patient, careful style that created those efforts. Being vulnerable with a 1-0 lead is the same across any number of tactics. But if you’re playing one that is deliberately patient, potentially giving up opportunities to put a team to the sword in favour of possession, then it will open up criticism. While we created chances with Martin’s tactic, would another one simply have been more effective against weaker opposition? 2 - The Rotherham manager waited until well into the half to change things around. That was when our utter dominance changed, and they closed us down for several minutes. Thinking back, it’s a little alarming it was so successful at doing so for several minutes. It was then, the penny dropped that for all our possession, we hadn’t capitalised on it, and the game had changed. By half time though, we had been creating space again and were back on top. Plenty of reason to be optimistic for the second half. But Martin’s tactic faltered. I’d be interested to see some detailed stats between the halves. We certainly weren’t pushing for a second. We were waiting for opportunities. And that affects the intensity. Our subs made us weaker, and most glaring of all was we didn’t have a plan when we had to score a goal. It was more of the same, with the clock ticking down. Changing tempo seems to be a big ask, and the first half was patient more than intense to begin with. 3 – Rotherham are very possibly relegation material. But for all our chances, we didn’t beat them while I’ve no doubt that plenty of other teams, who choose not to pass them to death, will. That’s part of the key issue. MartinBall is deployed regardless of opposition. Our squad is now build around it. But being unable to switch it up, when we need to or when circumstances clearly allow for it hampers us. We struggle to even keep a reasonable tempo of MartinBall for a half, let alone across a game (scar tissues apparently whether we go one down, one up or are level). Rotherham waited quite a bit to change. When they did, they sat in and waited, and waited. We got undone by one of their two efforts, couldn’t adapt when we needed too, and they had five more minutes of getting at us. 4 – Their goalkeeper had a good game, making some good saves. I don’t go along with commentator quotes of him having one of the best games of his career. He wasn’t pulling off world class, baffling saves. We created plenty of chances. In the first half playing towards what Martin would like to see every week. In the second, more disjointedly, but still creating things. Some of them were good chances. I actually thought our players did well to carve some of them out. I though Smallbone’s technique for his shot was excellent. As with 2) and 3) I’m left wondering how many more chances we would have created, killing the game off early had we set up to play that way. 5 – A check of the stat says we had an xG of 3.3 to their 0.14 (sporting life). Assuming that’s a decently progressive way they are calculating that, then it’s something Martin can look back on and wonder why we didn’t put the game to bed. He can indeed point to the finishing for the chances we created, which should have been enough in any game. Critics will say that that could actually have been higher, had we bothered to drive at them. That having a lower xG, but actually getting 2 in the net would have been preferable to passing it around to create a better figure, but without the end result. 6 – The first half was clearly where Martin would like to get to in every game. But with the players being able to finish from the positions, this tactic creates. It would be nice to think that we will score lots, and in the Norwich game we did. But we’re very easily undone (poor passing, our own corners, no fullbacks etc etc), so it’s not something I’d count on. 7 – Sulemana definitely looks very capable. It’s a shame that for the most part, he’s shackled in a tactic that allows teams so much time to reset. That said, he did get away a couple of times, and his short bursts cause problems even with defences set. Results meant Edozie didn’t get minutes, and to me he’s gone back to where he was at the start of the season. Decent dribbler, with little end product and positioning and passing issues. Hopefully, he’ll get minutes again to get him back up and improving again. 8 – 13 Lots of good possession play, particularly in the first half. Smallbone pins it all together with movement, while he and Arma provide lots of work rate. Stu is technically better, and Martin seems to be getting him towards his best again. I think both Stu and Charlie get caught with the tactic. They both like to be direct, but that risks giving it away, undoing the possession Martin wants to have. Charlie doesn’t have Stu’s awareness, so got put forward and central. That allows Stu to support others, and cover gaps. I’d see Charles more as our holding midfielder. We’ve got a selection of players who all contribute different things, but none of whom quite covers two roles effectively enough to be certain picks. Adams is a support striker who has been stuck in multiple tactics for over 3 years, that don’t require a support striker. He normally gets his head down and does what he can. I saw a few runs of his not get picked up, because we’re just not that clinical to pick him out with this tactic yet, combined with some of his movement taking him out of good positions when they do come up, to support the overall passing move. Behind the scenes he’s now got yet another manager playing a tactic he’s not best suited for, demanding an all-in approach when Adams would have been quite happy to leave in the summer. Without doubting his commitment for a moment, that’s going to affect anyone. Point 15, about the armband is interesting though. I agree about Adam Armstrong. As far as MartinBall is concerned, I think he’s vital to have on the pitch. The amount of ground he’s covered this season, just to close down the massive gaps that are left, gets him in alone. Not what he’s there for, but… Good point about Manning covering for Sule. I’ll need to watch for that more, but it was certainly the case with Edozie earlier on (Stu had to do a covering job at points too for Edozie, which I thought worked well.) 14. There might be a bit of ironic humour around Baz being a fan favourite. 😊 16. Although it looks like a settled back line, it will be interesting when Martin-favourite Stephens comes back. 17. It came up in an earlier point, but I don’t think the Rotherham goalkeeper had to have one of the best performances of his life to keep us out. There’s still a bit of subjectivity and variance in things like xGs and other stats. He made good saves, but we were not all over them, in the sense that he was making a succession of world class saves, as we carved their defence apart. We created various chances often with Rotherham being back in numbers, as Martin’s tactic allows for. 18. Aribo’s build does belie a bit of his ability. He is glacial, and his ability to hold the ball up must be about the only similarity to Antonio. It certainly isn’t pace. 😊 He may actually suit being brought off the bench to play up front centrally in a Martin tactic that doesn’t mind opposition defences sitting back. 19. I imagine there’s a lot of reasons for the reaction. The main one being the result in a results driven game. Recent history of the division and our relative size and resources indicate that we should be pushing towards the top of it. Before the start of the season, and I was picking up snippets for a couple of days, I got the feeling SR were saying that it was an ongoing project where promotion wasn’t an absolute first season goal, but could take a few years. That was followed by a few more comments reinforcing that promotion was the goal (possibly thinking of season ticket sales). I’m usually looking for 3 worse clubs in any season, I’d get nosebleeds when Ralph’s team was performing so far ahead of expectations. Not this season. I’d be expecting a solid promotion push. Not to be sitting wishing we’d got 2 more points against a relegation contender to keep us close to the outskirts of the playoffs. To cap off a week that a solid week that a promotion contender would expect to have. Not to need those points after a tactical disaster where we were found out by everyone we played against. So frustration with where we are with that; with the style of play (which isn’t going anywhere) that has us in this position (which isn’t insurmountable, even if it is disappointing), SR’s philosophy (considering the cost of relegation and their dreadful January signings, isn’t the cash generator they thought) and year on year of different variations of the same. Our home record is appalling. People are going to express that in different ways.

Expression

There are a number of ways of interpreting that result. In the end though, it’s that it’s a single point at home for a team that should be looking for promotion against a team who are towards the foot of the table. We had over 80% possession in the first half. Possession alone, isn’t going to win any games. So what did we do with it? In an earlier game Martin pointed to a single chance for Adams as justification for his approach. So, he’s going to have no problems at all pointing to the 12 efforts on goal, with 5 on target in the first half. And he would have a point. We were completely dominant, got an early lead and created a number of opportunities. When out of possession, we looked a lot more solid. When in possession, we worked the ball patiently towards creating an opportunity. We were on top at the break. Rotherham changed formation with a sub. That stopped us having quite so much space for several minutes. But we’d started creating again before half time. There’s always going to be a bit of me wondering if that 12 efforts could actually have been more, had we been more determined. Or if fewer, could they have offered even better chances, as we drive at them, taking us clear before half time. The second half should have been more of the same. We didn’t seem to have the same level of dominance, although we ended up with just as many efforts and chances as we had in the first half. We had plenty of nearly moments too, in both halves. A couple of deliveries across the box, that no one got on the end of. The idea of multiple subs is to presumably to bring energy into the side. Quite often it just means that the teams gets a bit disjointed and loses momentum as the new arrivals settle in. That’s what happened today. Sulemana was the one causing the most problems, but off he went. I like Edozie’s development. But rather than have him keep up his minutes, he’s been missing for a few games due to our form. That really showed today. Some good things combined with lots that took us back to his most raw days. Adam Armstrong going off lost us that high work rate, meaning that when the ball was given away (which is was more often) it was tougher for us to get it back. The switches lost us that dominance, and we have no alternative plan of action to compensate. Rotherham were like us under Selles. Sit and sit and sit, and hope for a breakaway or a mistake. In the end, it was a punt up from their goalkeeper. Our clearance dropped kindly for them, and Bazunu was chipped from distance. A criticism of the patient, build up approach is that it seems beyond a lot of teams to up the tempo or change approach if a goal is needed rather than be carefully being built towards. We created a lot today. But not anywhere near as much, when we actually needed to. Martin will no doubt put this down to “scar tissue” the players all apparently have, preventing them from making the right choices at key moments. In the end, it’s the job of the coaching team to give the team tactical options to work towards when that sort of decision making is going on. If the patient, multi pass model falls apart every time they need a goal, then have them well trained enough to do something else. Even if just to get back control and drive. When Rotherham went more direct and pushed, we looked at our most fragile. That’s something we’ve seen a lot of. If we’re allowed to play to Martin’s tactic, then it can work well. If we’re put under pressure we don’t come away with the three points. Today, it didn’t; even take pressure to give the goal away. It came from only 1 of their two efforts on target. We wobbled after it went in, unable to move away form the pace and style that gave us so much control of the first half, but simply wasn’t quick or dangerous enough when we needed a winner. Martin will point to the control, the efforts on goal and the ones on target. He will rue an unlikely outcome from one of their very few efforts on target. Behind that, there’s an awful lot to be done to provide a much faster, more dangerous edge to his tactics. We’re a team that continues to be easily undone. From the glaring tactical gaps in earlier defeats through self-made errors to things like today, where it was just a soft goal that we didn’t have enough to bounce back from.

Off the line!

Goals incoming ... Adams off... 🙂

A tackle from behind on Edozie, that Bednarek gets booked for. Thanks ref.

That looked like a bad one on Edozie.

It would have had to have been a special shot from Alcaraz to score form there. Their keeper will be happy with that. There is a reason why Fraser, Edozie and Alcaraz weren;t starting. We're relying on them having to be part of a team that now needs to break Rotherham down, rather than wait for opportunities that might arise with a lead. Meanwhile, ROtherham keen to be direct and make that difficult, sensing at least a point.

All that time spent learnign complicated positioning, possession and passing. Undone in secods by a direct, straight down the park attack. >sigh<

That was an oscar winning dive from one of theirs.

How's his passing? 🙂

Edozie did so well, but didn;t get it across the box in the end. Well, we made our triple subs so let's see if that offers anything.

Oh Noes!!!!!!! Baz chipped!