"We'd have won if we turned ugly"

[alpine_saint]

Pardew, todays Echo.

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4753745.Pards__we_d_have_won_if_we_d_turned_ugly/

 

Is this another of these anti-Burley occasions when the axiom that "if you have nothing to say, its better to say nothing" applies ?

 

'Cos I read this as "I'm clueless and have lost the plot to what's important"

[Saints67]

Pardew, todays Echo.

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4753745.Pards__we_d_have_won_if_we_d_turned_ugly/

 

Is this another of these anti-Burley occasions when the axiom that "if you have nothing to say, its better to say nothing" applies ?

 

'Cos I read this as "I'm clueless and have lost the plot to what's important"[/QUOTE]

 

You, The Echo or Pardew matey?

[hypochondriac]

I disagree with Pardew in this case. I feel we should have stopped booting it long in the second half and we would have done better.

[krissyboy31]

He does know Iain Dowie no longer plays for us, doesn't he?

[hypochondriac]

Having said that, I disagree with alpine's reading of the situation. I think he's a little odd.

[Fowllyd]

Pardew, todays Echo.

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4753745.Pards__we_d_have_won_if_we_d_turned_ugly/

 

Is this another of these anti-Burley occasions when the axiom that "if you have nothing to say, its better to say nothing" applies ?

 

'Cos I read this as "I'm clueless and have lost the plot to what's important"

 

I've read the article, re-read it, then read it again just to make sure. Having done that, I still don't read it remotely the same way as you do. So, what exactly is there in that article that makes you think Pardew's saying he's clueless and has lost the plot?

[jam]

Not a great article... We should have won but Norwich deserved the draw. Oh and the other players let Connolly down.

 

I disagree with Pardew in this case. I feel we should have stopped booting it long in the second half and we would have done better.

 

This hoofing it from the back has been bugging me all season. Lambert doesn't seem like the type of player who thrives on it and we have good passers all over the pitch. Davis has the ability to pass the ball out quickly; why don't we use it?

Edited 23 November, 2009 by jam
typo

[a1ex2001]

Davis has the ability to pass the ball out quickly; why don't we use it?

 

If he does he has very very rarely displayed it in a siants shirt, personally I think distribution is on a par with comming for crosses on his list of weaknesses. He hardly ever plays it short and his kicking is poor at best.

[Graffito]

Essentially he's just saying what both he and Lambert said in interviews just after the match, that the game was entertaining but too open. It's not the first time we've been unable to hold onto a lead and see out a game. It's about keeping possession of the ball. We have the players to retain possession but for some reason we just don't. However, some credit to the opposition on this occasion.

[benjii]

The reason we didn't win was because James and Davis gave goals away. I suspect he decided not to single out any individuals so made this up instead.

 

If one wishes to take that as an admission of uselessness then one may. Although one might be accused of being weird.

[benjii]

If he does he has very very rarely displayed it in a siants shirt, personally I think distribution is on a par with comming for crosses on his list of weaknesses. He hardly ever plays it short and his kicking is poor at best.

 

His kicking is very accurate - it's better than 90% of goalies we play against. Last season he played it short all the time.

 

What are you talking about?

[INFLUENCED.COM]

Like Alpine I didn't watch the game but simply saw the 'highlights', however, I would suggest that AP is more than qualified to offer up how he thought the game went, subject to some individuals, would suggest those in attendance are better qualified to comment on how the game went and AP's interpretation of it, so, those that were there, is Alpine wholly wrong to suggest AP is clueless and has lost the plot as to what is important ?

My reading is he is saying winning games by whatever means is better than entertaining the masses.

[Wes Tender]

Whereas I wouldn't go as far as to agree with Alpine's terminology, there are elements in what Pardew said that I question.

 

He said " “We sacrificed a little bit of possession to catch them on the break."

 

What does that mean? That we deliberately sat back and played deep, inviting them on to us so that we could hit them on the break? A very dangerous strategy if so. Or was it an excuse to cover that we could not keep possession because they were winning the 50/50 balls in midfield and we were giving away possession carelessly as we have the past few games? Had we managed to keep possession and pass the ball around, would that have foiled Pardew's game plan?

 

And then he surmises that we should have played "ugly" whatever that means. We should have shut up shop for the remaining 25 or more minutes with only a one goal advantage. And if they scored in the last five minutes, presumably we would have switched to playing pretty football and gone all out for the winner. So did we go for the winner after they equalised on 75 minutes, or were we settling for the draw?

 

The trouble with his assessment, is that he made a substitution in the 57th minute before they equalised, but then only made further substitutions in the 84th and 88th minutes 16 minutes after Norwich had made their double substitution that had gained them the equaliser. Their equaliser was scored three minutes after one of those substitutes came on.

 

The Murty substitution was a good one, shoring up our right flank and the team showed more purpose and bite with James in midfield. Arguably that was a good tactical move and possibly the difference it made, led to the goal from Connolly. But to expect to shut up shop for the remaining 25 minutes or so? If that was required, why didn't Pardew put on another defender when Norwich made their substitutions?

 

I am not convinced by the tactics. Norwich had sussed out Antonio by half time and we should have brought on Papa and carried on taking the game to Norwich for another goal or two and the three points.

[Liquidshokk]

Not a great article... We should have won but Norwich deserved the draw. Oh and the other players let Connolly down.

 

 

 

This hoofing it from the back has been bugging me all season. Lambert doesn't seem like the type of player who thrives on it and we have good passers all over the pitch. Davis has the ability to pass the ball out quickly; why don't we use it?

 

I have to say there was at least 4 or 5 occasions where Davis was going to kick or throw the ball out quickly but pardew was yelling at him to wait, which gave Norwhich the chance to get back and defend every time....

[Greenridge]

Not a great article... We should have won but Norwich deserved the draw. Oh and the other players let Connolly down.

 

 

 

This hoofing it from the back has been bugging me all season. Lambert doesn't seem like the type of player who thrives on it and we have good passers all over the pitch. Davis has the ability to pass the ball out quickly; why don't we use it?

 

He did it in the first half with a pass to James who miscontrolled it, got closed down by the Norwich forward and ended up conceding a throw-in halfway in our own half. That's probably why he doesn't do it too often lol!

[jam]

He did it in the first half with a pass to James who miscontrolled it, got closed down by the Norwich forward and ended up conceding a throw-in halfway in our own half. That's probably why he doesn't do it too often lol!

 

By that logic we should have given up on the big hoof to Lambert long ago!

 

(besides, James was probably caught by surprise with the short ball!)

[Minty]

AP will have watched Norwich and studied their tactics, and I for one don't see any reason to doubt his analysis, having heard from a Norwich supporting friend who said that Norwich have done particularly well in games where the opposition have tried to play football against them, and unpicked them as a result.

 

Hence AP's tactics and comments make perfect sense to me. I would rather he studied the opposition and came up with tactics as a result, than hope that the way we play is good enough to overcome them. It shows he's thinking about it. Sometimes he might get it wrong, but that's fine by me, that's how we learn.

 

Playing 'ugly' just means making it hard for them... sacrificing a bit of our attacking verve, to break up their play and deny them space and time on the ball. Sadly, as you can see from the move leading to their goal, they were able to execute a slick move forward, about 4 passes, which we had no answer to, because we had players caught ahead of the play. Davis could've done better but the ball was moving a heck of a lot and was not easy to deal with, and his defenders should also be automatically moving back towards him to cover any such rebound.

 

As always, results dictate the reaction and managers are often damned if they do and damned if they don't. Let's not go back to the over-analysis of past seasons, lets acknowledge that we (manager and players) didn't quite get it right, but recognise that we still matched one of the form teams in the division and nearly won.

[Blandford saint]

Well said, Minty. Norwich are definitely one of the best sides in the division and obviously well coached by Lambert. They have only lost 1 game in about 15 (away at Leeds, and they shouldn't have lost that - goalkeeper howler in injury time.)

 

They were horrible conditions for goalkeeping on Saturday and I don't think that Kelvin should be too heavily criticised in the circumstances. He nearly saved the penalty and it could have gone anywhere when it came back off the post. We had defenders following up but, of course, the ball diverted away from them. Murty read what was happening for their second goal, but it obviously not going to be 100% match fit yet to get there first. We played well, but so did they - just look at how often they are losing.

[DT]

We need to sign Dowie again then.

[once_bitterne]

We need to sign Dowie again then.

 

As manager?

[ribbo]

AP will have watched Norwich and studied their tactics, and I for one don't see any reason to doubt his analysis, having heard from a Norwich supporting friend who said that Norwich have done particularly well in games where the opposition have tried to play football against them, and unpicked them as a result.

 

Hence AP's tactics and comments make perfect sense to me. I would rather he studied the opposition and came up with tactics as a result, than hope that the way we play is good enough to overcome them. It shows he's thinking about it. Sometimes he might get it wrong, but that's fine by me, that's how we learn.

 

Playing 'ugly' just means making it hard for them... sacrificing a bit of our attacking verve, to break up their play and deny them space and time on the ball. Sadly, as you can see from the move leading to their goal, they were able to execute a slick move forward, about 4 passes, which we had no answer to, because we had players caught ahead of the play. Davis could've done better but the ball was moving a heck of a lot and was not easy to deal with, and his defenders should also be automatically moving back towards him to cover any such rebound.

 

As always, results dictate the reaction and managers are often damned if they do and damned if they don't. Let's not go back to the over-analysis of past seasons, lets acknowledge that we (manager and players) didn't quite get it right, but recognise that we still matched one of the form teams in the division and nearly won.

 

excellent post.

[derry]

We matched Norwich's diamond but lost our width, as they have been playing that way for a while they were able to play into the space we left on the flanks and pulled us around a bit with their pass and move.

 

Our goal wasn't down to tactics or shape it was a player out wide coming inside and brilliantly shooting over the goalkeeper from long range.

 

We took our pacy player off and went narrow so we didn't play on the break. Antonio should have been replaced by Waigo and the 4-4-2 continued. Murty could have replaced James at half time.

 

Neither of their goals were quality, the penalty was pure stupidity on a greasy surface and Davis bats the ball out far too often for forwards to capitalise. I'm sure forwards are instructed to follow the ball in as there is a decent chance of it bouncing off him as he never catches shots.

[kpturner]

.......as he never catches shots.

Generalisation? :confused:

[Fitzhugh Fella]

Out of all our recent managers, going back 20 years Pardew talks the most sense.

So he can talk the talk for sure.

He has a way to go before he can claim to walk the walk however but he does not have an easy job, even without financial restrictions.

 

I am extremely grateful I haven't got to listen to the gibberish of Burley however.

[hypochondriac]

Out of all our recent managers, going back 20 years Pardew talks the most sense.

So he can talk the talk for sure.

He has a way to go before he can claim to walk the walk however but he does not have an easy job, even without financial restrictions.

 

I am extremely grateful I haven't got to listen to the gibberish of Burley however.

 

I completely agree (and I haven't said that very often with regards to your posts over the last year!) Good post.

Edited 23 November, 2009 by hypochondriac

[derry]

Generalisation? :confused:

 

No. He knocks the ball down or palms it out if there is any pace at all on the shot. He doesn't catch shots unless they are low pace.

[Wes Tender]

AP will have watched Norwich and studied their tactics, and I for one don't see any reason to doubt his analysis, having heard from a Norwich supporting friend who said that Norwich have done particularly well in games where the opposition have tried to play football against them, and unpicked them as a result.

Hence AP's tactics and comments make perfect sense to me. I would rather he studied the opposition and came up with tactics as a result, than hope that the way we play is good enough to overcome them. It shows he's thinking about it. Sometimes he might get it wrong, but that's fine by me, that's how we learn.

 

Playing 'ugly' just means making it hard for them... sacrificing a bit of our attacking verve, to break up their play and deny them space and time on the ball. Sadly, as you can see from the move leading to their goal, they were able to execute a slick move forward, about 4 passes, which we had no answer to, because we had players caught ahead of the play. Davis could've done better but the ball was moving a heck of a lot and was not easy to deal with, and his defenders should also be automatically moving back towards him to cover any such rebound.

 

As always, results dictate the reaction and managers are often damned if they do and damned if they don't. Let's not go back to the over-analysis of past seasons, lets acknowledge that we (manager and players) didn't quite get it right, but recognise that we still matched one of the form teams in the division and nearly won.

 

It used to be said that we always played better against the teams that used to try and play decent football. Why should we have attempted to stop Nowrwich playing decent football at the expense of stopping playing decent football ourselves? Are they a better team of footballers than us? I don't think they are. We should have played our game and let them worry about stopping us playing football. We proved that we were capable of two excellent finishes against their two lucky chances and had we kept our width and pace, would probably have given them a damned sight more to worry about. I don't want us playing ugly, as there are no more guarantees of success than by playing pretty. Play keep ball for the last few minutes, certainly. But with 25 minutes of the match remaining after we went ahead, we should have kept them on the back foot.

[Saint_clark]

I thought Pardew got it wrong after we scored the second anyway. We were playing far too deep and not closing down. At one point THEIR keeper had the ball and every single one of our players was in our own half - this then led to their goal.

However, I still think he's a fantastic manager. He was just trying something different as we haven't had to shut up shop against a good team so far this season.

[Wes Tender]

I thought Pardew got it wrong after we scored the second anyway. We were playing far too deep and not closing down. At one point THEIR keeper had the ball and every single one of our players was in our own half - this then led to their goal.

However, I still think he's a fantastic manager. He was just trying something different as we haven't had to shut up shop against a good team so far this season.

 

And I hope we don't have to again, unless it's a higher division team from a cup match, or the last few minutes of a game.

[Saint_clark]

And I hope we don't have to again, unless it's a higher division team from a cup match, or the last few minutes of a game.

 

If we are 2-0 up V Leeds, Charlton, Dons or Norwich this season with 20 minutes to go i'd like to see us shut up shop like we have in pretty much all the games in our winning run.

[up and away]

AP will have watched Norwich and studied their tactics, and I for one don't see any reason to doubt his analysis, having heard from a Norwich supporting friend who said that Norwich have done particularly well in games where the opposition have tried to play football against them, and unpicked them as a result.

 

Hence AP's tactics and comments make perfect sense to me. I would rather he studied the opposition and came up with tactics as a result, than hope that the way we play is good enough to overcome them. It shows he's thinking about it. Sometimes he might get it wrong, but that's fine by me, that's how we learn.

 

Playing 'ugly' just means making it hard for them... sacrificing a bit of our attacking verve, to break up their play and deny them space and time on the ball. Sadly, as you can see from the move leading to their goal, they were able to execute a slick move forward, about 4 passes, which we had no answer to, because we had players caught ahead of the play. Davis could've done better but the ball was moving a heck of a lot and was not easy to deal with, and his defenders should also be automatically moving back towards him to cover any such rebound.

 

As always, results dictate the reaction and managers are often damned if they do and damned if they don't. Let's not go back to the over-analysis of past seasons, lets acknowledge that we (manager and players) didn't quite get it right, but recognise that we still matched one of the form teams in the division and nearly won.

 

This one is mainly down to Pardew. Why, because he chose to use players and a formation that resulted in our midfield not being in control. AP's tactics and comments do not make perfect sense, because it completely ignores our pronounced known weakness in midfield. He knows it as well as the rest of us, otherwise we would not have been playing 451 at home previously. You could see with his exasperation on the sidelines that our players were not capable of following the game plan laid out before hand. This I believe is because of wanting to play all our best players rather than our best team. Pardew gambled that these players would be able to hold the midfield together, it was obvious they could not. What we had was a very open and exciting game similar to Newcastle under Keegan.

 

We did have individual errors but there is not one player on the pitch who was perfect. I am not going to start panning Davis or James for their mistakes, because they have their pluses and minuses, no player we have is exempt from that. But it is not alone down to these individual errors, a system by nature which allows the opposition more control and opportunities by the law of averages will be converted into goals.

 

Although I lay the blame for this mainly at the feet of Pardew, I can understand the possible benefits of what he was trying to do. But in doing so I believe he has lost us points. I look at Brighton and Norwich and consider a tight game, which attackers are more likely to sneak a goal? I would rate our atackers as easily superior to these two teams, but only if you play the game to allow for our weaknesses as well as strengths.

 

I remember when Craig Brown was being interviewed at the end of his Scotland career and was asked what his success was down to with such a mediocre squad. His answer was simple, always have one extra man in midfield over the opposition. Without control everything else will not work.

Just go back to the MK Dons game and our level of control was embarrassingly one sided and but for missing sitters would have stormed that first half.

[John B]

It used to be said that we always played better against the teams that used to try and play decent football. Why should we have attempted to stop Nowrwich playing decent football at the expense of stopping playing decent football ourselves? Are they a better team of footballers than us? I don't think they are. We should have played our game and let them worry about stopping us playing football. We proved that we were capable of two excellent finishes against their two lucky chances and had we kept our width and pace, would probably have given them a damned sight more to worry about. I don't want us playing ugly, as there are no more guarantees of success than by playing pretty. Play keep ball for the last few minutes, certainly. But with 25 minutes of the match remaining after we went ahead, we should have kept them on the back foot.

 

Dont you think 25 mins is a longtime to play ugly when the team is not really used to it

[Legod Third Coming]

No. He knocks the ball down or palms it out if there is any pace at all on the shot. He doesn't catch shots unless they are low pace.

 

This is a criticism I would level at Davis and EVERY other goalkeeper in every team.

 

For some reason - and it must be to do with coaching or the new balls - keepers rarely attempt to catch the ball.

 

In my day you cupped your hands around the ball and caught it in your chest - thus reducing the opportunity for precisely what happened on Saturday.

 

If a keeper is going to parry, the key must be to parry with distance.

 

However, given that we conceded two goals to errors, I'm finding it hard to blame the manager or the formation.

 

I fear our love affair with Kelvin makes him immune from criticism and sends it elsewhere...

[Legod Third Coming]

This one is mainly down to Pardew. Why, because he chose to use players and a formation that resulted in our midfield not being in control. AP's tactics and comments do not make perfect sense, because it completely ignores our pronounced known weakness in midfield. He knows it as well as the rest of us, otherwise we would not have been playing 451 at home previously. You could see with his exasperation on the sidelines that our players were not capable of following the game plan laid out before hand. This I believe is because of wanting to play all our best players rather than our best team. Pardew gambled that these players would be able to hold the midfield together, it was obvious they could not. What we had was a very open and exciting game similar to Newcastle under Keegan.

 

We did have individual errors but there is not one player on the pitch who was perfect. I am not going to start panning Davis or James for their mistakes, because they have their pluses and minuses, no player we have is exempt from that. But it is not alone down to these individual errors, a system by nature which allows the opposition more control and opportunities by the law of averages will be converted into goals.

 

Although I lay the blame for this mainly at the feet of Pardew, I can understand the possible benefits of what he was trying to do. But in doing so I believe he has lost us points. I look at Brighton and Norwich and consider a tight game, which attackers are more likely to sneak a goal? I would rate our atackers as easily superior to these two teams, but only if you play the game to allow for our weaknesses as well as strengths.

 

I remember when Craig Brown was being interviewed at the end of his Scotland career and was asked what his success was down to with such a mediocre squad. His answer was simple, always have one extra man in midfield over the opposition. Without control everything else will not work.

Just go back to the MK Dons game and our level of control was embarrassingly one sided and but for missing sitters would have stormed that first half.

 

I am bored of asking people to check Keegan's defensive record at Newcastle but please do. I can tell you if you want.

[up and away]

I am bored of asking people to check Keegan's defensive record at Newcastle but please do. I can tell you if you want.

 

Obviously not that bored I see. Any idiot can see that just a slight change in emphasis could have resulted in Newcastle winning the league rather than ManU, but that was never Keegans style. It's rarely about one particular aspect on it's own, but in combination with all the other aspects that make up the team.

[Legod Third Coming]

Obviously not that bored I see. Any idiot can see that just a slight change in emphasis could have resulted in Newcastle winning the league rather than ManU, but that was never Keegans style. It's rarely about one particular aspect on it's own, but in combination with all the other aspects that make up the team.

 

Keegan's team conceded four more goals than United and scored seven less. The following year they conceded four fewer goals than United.

 

But everyone thinks of that game against Liverpool.

 

It is a travesty and one, as you can tell, I feel strongly about.

 

People should be judged on their record not on their media profile and one incredible game, or being slumped over the advertising hoarding...

 

Manchester United won the league because they scored more AND conceded fewer goals than Keegan's team. They did not win the league because Keegan sacrificed all in the desire to win every game 6-5. Nothing could be further from the truth.

[Fowllyd]

This is a criticism I would level at Davis and EVERY other goalkeeper in every team.

 

For some reason - and it must be to do with coaching or the new balls - keepers rarely attempt to catch the ball.

 

In my day you cupped your hands around the ball and caught it in your chest - thus reducing the opportunity for precisely what happened on Saturday.

 

If a keeper is going to parry, the key must be to parry with distance.

 

However, given that we conceded two goals to errors, I'm finding it hard to blame the manager or the formation.

 

I fear our love affair with Kelvin makes him immune from criticism and sends it elsewhere...

 

You're right with that first point - you see a good deal more parrying and punching of the ball than once was the case. I've heard that the balls used nowadays are the root cause of this; they're prone to swerve in the air late in their flight, making it more difficult to judge a catch correctly. I'd also guess that the fact that they're lighter makes a difference - as a comparison, a cricket ball is easier to catch than a tennis ball because it's heavier and harder, and therefore less likely to bounce out of your hands before you can clutch it.

 

And, as you say, a punch or parry should take the ball well away from the danger area, otherwise it's all too likely to offer an easy chance for a striker.

 

I wasn't at the match myself, but judging by the highlights I've seen I wouldn't put any blame on Davis for their first goal (excellent save, unfortunate in that it came straight back out off the post), but it seemed to me that he should have held onto the second.

[Legod Third Coming]

You're right with that first point - you see a good deal more parrying and punching of the ball than once was the case. I've heard that the balls used nowadays are the root cause of this; they're prone to swerve in the air late in their flight, making it more difficult to judge a catch correctly. I'd also guess that the fact that they're lighter makes a difference - as a comparison, a cricket ball is easier to catch than a tennis ball because it's heavier and harder, and therefore less likely to bounce out of your hands before you can clutch it.

 

And, as you say, a punch or parry should take the ball well away from the danger area, otherwise it's all too likely to offer an easy chance for a striker.

 

I wasn't at the match myself, but judging by the highlights I've seen I wouldn't put any blame on Davis for their first goal (excellent save, unfortunate in that it came straight back out off the post), but it seemed to me that he should have held onto the second.

 

Agreed, the penalty was just very unfortunate. It hardly ever rebounds to the taker!!

 

I think the second bounced badly in front of him but, that being the case, I think he could have parried it better if he didn't fancy his chances of catching it.

[John B]

Agreed, the penalty was just very unfortunate. It hardly ever rebounds to the taker!!

 

I think the second bounced badly in front of him but, that being the case, I think he could have parried it better if he didn't fancy his chances of catching it.

 

He did a lot better than the Charlton Goalkeeper did with Lamberts Goal in the JPT

[Legod Third Coming]

He did a lot better than the Charlton Goalkeeper did with Lamberts Goal in the JPT

 

I thought that was a poor effort at first but when I saw the replay later maybe he was a bit unsighted? Either way, it ended up being a goal!!

[Rebel]

we should have started with 4-5-1 against both Brighton and Norwich - and only switched to 4-4-2 if we needed to go all out to score a winning goal in the second half

 

the reason we lost against Norwich was due to lack of protection for the back 4 from midfield - and the failure to press Nowich when they had posession or simply close players down

 

Wotton would have made a massive difference playing in the defensive midfielder role on Saturday

 

and both James and Davis had bad moments for the penalt and the goal!

 

Davis' distribution of the ball is terrible - whether by foot or hand - and he still fails to dominate the box

[benjii]

MK Dons will win.

 

[benjii]

Tactics were fine.

 

We had numerous chances to win it with breaks, as AP hinted, and their goals were down to two individual errors. They created nothing.

 

We created more in the last 10 minutes than they did for the whole of the second half, despite their possession.

[Wes Tender]

Dont you think 25 mins is a longtime to play ugly when the team is not really used to it

 

Exactly the point I made.

[krissyboy31]

Both managers said it was too open in the second half and it was. Made for great entertainment but because of it, the final score could have been anything. Were we unlucky not to win? Yes! Were we lucky not to lose? Yes again! The draw was the correct result but if we could learn to tighten up and protect the lead a little more, we would turn some of these close games into wins.