Jump to content

Adkins's thoughts . . .


.comsaint
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm sorry but at 4-2 up you have to close up the game. The game was far too open. Chaplow and Hammond had too much work to do and they needed help in closing them down. You could see Seabourne was loosing his battle and maybe bringing Jaidi, N'Guessen and Dickson would have been better. We couldn't get to grips with there right side. I would have brought off Chamberlain, Harding and Barnard. It would have helped if Schneiderlin was available.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but at 4-2 up you have to close up the game. The game was far too open. Chaplow and Hammond had too much work to do and they needed help in closing them down. You could see Seabourne was loosing his battle and maybe bringing Jaidi, N'Guessen and Dickson would have been better. We couldn't get to grips with there right side. I would have brought off Chamberlain, Harding and Barnard. It would have helped if Schneiderlin was available.

Don't think NA made any bad decisions, and of course Spiderman wasn't available so that can hardly be NA's fault, unless he took him out in training or something. I thought NA did take offf Harding and Barnard as well, so actually he did what you are suggesting. Bringing on Richardson was a good move, and exactly what we needed to do to shore up the MF, we had looked vulnerable there all evening, one of the drawbacks of playing a diamond. Had to take off Guly before he was sent off, in any case was having a poor day. I guess the only possible different decision he may have made would have been to bring on N'Guessian for Chambo. I think some people think they would make good managers, it is not always as simple as saying "lets shut up shop chaps". It depends on the opposition being outclassed and not playing an attacking force like Posh have, CMS, Boyd and the others were absolutely flying tonite and in some ways we were lucky they didn't score 6. I'm no fan of Davis but he kept us in it at several points and Fonte was immense dealing with CMS, thankfully the referee was very astute in dealing with this as well, realising that Smith was backing into Fonte time after time trying to draw free kicks. Sometimes you know you actually have to give credit to the other team, much as I hate to give credit to anything related to a Ferguson, it has to be said they have some great players, thank goodness none of their back 5 could be categorised as such

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't think NA made any bad decisions, and of course Spiderman wasn't available so that can hardly be NA's fault, unless he took him out in training or something. I thought NA did take offf Harding and Barnard as well, so actually he did what you are suggesting. Bringing on Richardson was a good move, and exactly what we needed to do to shore up the MF, we had looked vulnerable there all evening, one of the drawbacks of playing a diamond. Had to take off Guly before he was sent off, in any case was having a poor day. I guess the only possible different decision he may have made would have been to bring on N'Guessian for Chambo. I think some people think they would make good managers, it is not always as simple as saying "lets shut up shop chaps". It depends on the opposition being outclassed and not playing an attacking force like Posh have, CMS, Boyd and the others were absolutely flying tonite and in some ways we were lucky they didn't score 6. I'm no fan of Davis but he kept us in it at several points and Fonte was immense dealing with CMS, thankfully the referee was very astute in dealing with this as well, realising that Smith was backing into Fonte time after time trying to draw free kicks. Sometimes you know you actually have to give credit to the other team, much as I hate to give credit to anything related to a Ferguson, it has to be said they have some great players, thank goodness none of their back 5 could be categorised as such

 

This.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't think NA made any bad decisions, and of course Spiderman wasn't available so that can hardly be NA's fault, unless he took him out in training or something. I thought NA did take offf Harding and Barnard as well, so actually he did what you are suggesting. Bringing on Richardson was a good move, and exactly what we needed to do to shore up the MF, we had looked vulnerable there all evening, one of the drawbacks of playing a diamond. Had to take off Guly before he was sent off, in any case was having a poor day. I guess the only possible different decision he may have made would have been to bring on N'Guessian for Chambo. I think some people think they would make good managers, it is not always as simple as saying "lets shut up shop chaps". It depends on the opposition being outclassed and not playing an attacking force like Posh have, CMS, Boyd and the others were absolutely flying tonite and in some ways we were lucky they didn't score 6. I'm no fan of Davis but he kept us in it at several points and Fonte was immense dealing with CMS, thankfully the referee was very astute in dealing with this as well, realising that Smith was backing into Fonte time after time trying to draw free kicks. Sometimes you know you actually have to give credit to the other team, much as I hate to give credit to anything related to a Ferguson, it has to be said they have some great players, thank goodness none of their back 5 could be categorised as such

 

Would have brought n'guessan or forte on earlier to take advantage of the fact that the wind was behind us and had them on the back foot. Pace would have torn them apart in the conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry but at 4-2 up you have to close up the game. The game was far too open. Chaplow and Hammond had too much work to do and they needed help in closing them down. You could see Seabourne was loosing his battle and maybe bringing Jaidi, N'Guessen and Dickson would have been better. We couldn't get to grips with there right side. I would have brought off Chamberlain, Harding and Barnard. It would have helped if Schneiderlin was available.

 

Agree until you mentioned Jaidi , their forwards would have been 10 yards passed him before he turned. The experiment of playing Guly in midfield/hole is dangerous away from home because one of our flanks is always exposed if their full backs push on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Itll be lallana for Barnard if fit and jaidi for seabourne. Very unlikely any other changes. HTH.

 

Seaborne gave away a pen but looked to me like it could of happened to anyone so I don't hold that against him. The only other thing wrong with his performance was him getting done for pace. Can't see jaidi being the answer for that one. Both seaborne and jaidi are good in the air but get done for speed too often. Harding and butterfield are good going forward but that leaves the defence short. As long as the defence stays the way it is we will always be liable to concede goals.

 

I like the back line we have along with the options available. But they all need to step up a few levels if they want to be 1st choice at our club especially the higher up the leagues we go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really, how would we have got our third goal then?? Given that Chaplow could have scored 9.5 for artistic merit...

 

Agreed, I just can't see how the ref gave that as a penalty, shoulder to shoulder and nothing more. Then again if it's not a penalty and Chaplow falls forward and not sideways he has to go for diving doesn't he?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, I just can't see how the ref gave that as a penalty, shoulder to shoulder and nothing more. Then again if it's not a penalty and Chaplow falls forward and not sideways he has to go for diving doesn't he?

 

For my money that was the only poor decision the ref made. The last penalty most of us would have given. If Oxo jumps with his arm up then you're asking for trouble...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chaplows penalty was very soft - but nowhere near as bad a decision as the one give against Chamberlain. Seaborne had a terrible game - gave away a penalty, and let McKail-Smith score the first goal. Too often our defense tried to play the ball out of trouble when they should have booted it into touch. We also seemed incapable of playing the game out - keeping of the ball - at 4-2 or 4-3. What were we doing longballing it from the back with a one goal lead and only minutes to go? - at best giving the ball away for a 50-50. Sometimes our players seem to have no game intelligence whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still not sure what to make of that result.

 

On the way home and after a long day travelling, I was fuming and thinking that surrendering a 2 goal lead (twice) demonstrated that we just don't have enough to go up.

 

This morning, I'm reflecting on my original line before the game of "I'd settle for a point" and thinking that 4 points from 2 away games isn't that bad.

 

As for the game itself, I'm just not sure we ever looked that comfortable, which does seem a bit crass when you consider we scored four and were leading twice. Is it acceptable to be critiquing our performance when viewed from that context??? I just thought our set up always exposed us and Chaplow and Hammond were being asked to do too much in the middle of the park. Chamberlain and Guly had been set up to go forward which left big holes on both flanks which Peterborough exploited.

 

Posh were a very decent team going forward, but their set up also exposed a leaky defence.

 

My criticism would be that after going two up early in the second half, Adkins should have gone more compact and try a 4-4-2 to see the game out. I would have put Richardson on at right midfield (in place of Guly) and told Chamberlain that whilst he could still forage forward, his priority was to support Harding. He seemed to make the substitutions but persevered with a similar system and POSH came steaming forward.

 

Good away turnout, but wished it had been a normal KO without SKY as we would have probably doubled our travelling support and got a really good atmosphere going on that terrace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree until you mentioned Jaidi ' date=' their forwards would have been 10 yards passed him before he turned. The experiment of playing Guly in midfield/hole is dangerous away from home because one of our flanks is always exposed if their full backs push on[/quote']

 

Although Guly's preferred position might be in the hole, I actually think at this level he is more effective upfront where his physicality can be used to better effect.

 

If we are going to play someone in the hole I would rather it was Oxo or Lallana.

 

I would prefer it if we go back to a 4-4-2 next weekend. Now Lambert is looking dangerous in front of goal again let's keep it simple and get the ball into him. With Chaplow getting forward like he does we are bound to score a few. N'Guessan on the left and Oxo or Lallana on the right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree until you mentioned Jaidi ' date=' their forwards would have been 10 yards passed him before he turned. The experiment of playing Guly in midfield/hole is dangerous away from home because one of our flanks is always exposed if their full backs push on[/quote']

 

How's that work then ? The issue is playing a narrow diamond which allows the full-backs forward, not the fact we've got a holding midfielder - especially as we ALWAYS play with at least two central midfielders, it's the width of the other two that would cause opposing full-backs to have space. Also, why does it only expose ONE of our flanks, what if both full backs push on ?

 

I'd also point out that in the first half against Man U they entirely failed to get Fabio or O'Shea down the wings, mainly because Lambert and Barnard were slogging their guts out to close them down.

 

I agree that Peterborough would have torn Jaidi to pieces, but I suggest Mackail-Smith may not have had as much luck shoving him off the ball...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good words anyway, glad he's annoyed with them despite the positives.

 

Good words, but wish they could be transcribed into grammatical English, or maybe he was on the juice at the time, which would explain it.

 

 

 

 

Second thought: can we ban the posting of "This". Or at least award the "This" posters a nob award, with the nob-of-the-week (i.e. most "This"-es getting a golden nob award.

 

They just waste people's bandwidth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good words, but wish they could be transcribed into grammatical English, or maybe he was on the juice at the time, which would explain it.

 

 

 

 

Second thought: can we ban the posting of "This". Or at least award the "This" posters a nob award, with the nob-of-the-week (i.e. most "This"-es getting a golden nob award.

 

They just waste people's bandwidth.

 

This

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...