Gallowgate Toon

Too philosophy-focused, imo, we've had to tighten up after the opening minutes in 4 of the 6 games. Had too much faith in their ability and mental strength to cope. Haidara has been dispossessed in his own third 9 times this season, only Glen Johnson has more. Think that says it all. This playing out from the back stuff might be starting to look better but there's a time and a place. In the opening minutes against confident, direct opposition isn't that time

Get the team he wants to play against Chelsea out there and try and work out as many kinks as possible before the weekend. This lot need to play together.

Hmm. This could be a good thing but not if they go too knee jerk. Don't think they need to ditch everything they've done and start again, after watching the other game back, but they do need tighten the side up and realise deficiencies in the middle. We conceded two opportunities (one was the goal) in the first 10 from full backs trying to play it out and we're too brittle for that. Persist with Wijnaldum in the middle and hope to fuck he adapts to the defensive side quickly and focus on growing into games, we simply must stop conceding early, it's the worst case scenario for our players.

It's almost like they've had solid foundations to work off and have backed the manager with what he needed.

Colback's positioning was actually OK on Saturday, tbf, better than before. I agree that the positioning for a DM that can handle himself is really important but when they're someone that gets run through so easily and struggles to get close to players (and doesn't really get any support from other midfielders), I don't think it makes much of a difference Basically, stick Anita in for Colback on Saturday and you get the same problems. Neither of those two is going to change how those goals were conceded. If you want to institute a passing game from the back then choosing Colback over Anita is f***ing idiotic seeing as we all agree they're both not very good DM's. Why are you so hyperbolic about this, man? It'd be 'idiotic' if Colback was a much worse passer than Anita and lacked any technical ability, but he doesn't, that's about all he's good at. He's a slightly worse short passer but probably has a bit more range in him. The movements the DM needs to make are incredibly simple, they're hardly the main man in splitting the centre halves the way we try to, not when our centre backs seem to be better on the ball. Once again, Anita is the better choice but the difference between the two is marginal. Which is my original point, you're making out like playing Colback over Anita is some sort of terrible decision, when, in reality, the difference between the two is really quite small.

Colback's positioning was actually OK on Saturday, tbf, better than before. I agree that the positioning for a DM that can handle himself is really important but when they're someone that gets run through so easily and struggles to get close to players (and doesn't really get any support from other midfielders), I don't think it makes much of a difference Basically, stick Anita in for Colback on Saturday and you get the same problems. Neither of those two is going to change how those goals were conceded.

Aye, but he just lost his bottle and f***ed another decision by dropping Anita for Colback Playing Colback over Anita isn't some catastrophic decision. They offer the exact same thing. they really don't EDIT: and the point is more that anita was clearly central to his 'playing from the back' style and he dropped it at the first sign of trouble for colback who simply isn't as good in that role They really do. They offer very little consistent presence and very little in the way of passing range, they're both a bit pointless. If anything, the best thing they do when they drop back is allow more space for Colo and Mbemba to distribute. The latter has more zip in his passing than Colback and Anita combined. i disagree, anita was brought up in the ajax academy and clearly understands the role much, much better than colback...bear in mind we're talking about what parky was saying about playing out from the back, not their ability to physically dominate opponents or create in attack (which they're both s*** at aye) if you think about of all the things mclaren has or has not done since coming in imo anita playing that role is the only one that might even come close to being deemed a success - to clarify again i'm talking about him dropping deep with the CB's, taking the ball, moving it on, showing for a pass...basically being asked to be the fulcrum for starting a deep possession game nothing else mclaren has tried has worked to date the fact that it makes anita a 5th defender and there's a huge gap between midfield and attack, and that the front 5 are totally disfunctional is not relevant to him playing that role well enough....the fact the role itself is probably a massive detriment to the overall team shape is another matter, but that's not anita's fault If we're talking strictly about splitting the centre halves, I don't think we missed Anita much for it on Saturday. The first meaningful attack we've had from trying it this season (de Jong's chance) came without Anita on the pitch. I'd play Anita over Colback, like, my point is that one really doesn't offer much more than the other.

Aye, but he just lost his bottle and f***ed another decision by dropping Anita for Colback Playing Colback over Anita isn't some catastrophic decision. They offer the exact same thing. they really don't EDIT: and the point is more that anita was clearly central to his 'playing from the back' style and he dropped it at the first sign of trouble for colback who simply isn't as good in that role They really do. They offer very little consistent presence and very little in the way of passing range, they're both a bit pointless. If anything, the best thing they do when they drop back is allow more space for Colo and Mbemba to distribute. The latter has more zip in his passing than Colback and Anita combined. Don't know why you completely ignore the fact Colback has absolutely no positional sense what so ever, Anita may not be great but at least he knows how to position himself unlike Colback who leaves absolutely massive gaps. Anita is better with that, I agree, but I don't think it really makes much difference at all in our side, he still gets swatted aside/run through/run past very easily and struggles to keep up. So his better positioning is generally counteracted, hence why he's also a bit pointless. Perhaps if he had a more combative b2b next to him, things would be different, but Wijnaldum doesn't quite look that player yet and Sissoko has very little defensive appetite for the game.

Aye, but he just lost his bottle and f***ed another decision by dropping Anita for Colback Playing Colback over Anita isn't some catastrophic decision. They offer the exact same thing. they really don't EDIT: and the point is more that anita was clearly central to his 'playing from the back' style and he dropped it at the first sign of trouble for colback who simply isn't as good in that role They really do. They offer very little consistent presence and very little in the way of passing range, they're both a bit pointless. If anything, the best thing they do when they drop back is allow more space for Colo and Mbemba to distribute. The latter has more zip in his passing than Colback and Anita combined.

It actually worked really well on one occasion against Watford that led to de Jong's chance. Mbemba carried it out and they pressed up 4 attackers. He played an incisive ball to Wijnaldum who took it on the turn and immediately ran at the gaps left. 3 passes and we were in a great position.

Aye, but he just lost his bottle and f***ed another decision by dropping Anita for Colback Playing Colback over Anita isn't some catastrophic decision. They offer the exact same thing.

I'd play what we had second half, tbh. Thought we looked better in a 4-2-3-1 than 4-3-3 and would keep it that way to get something going between these lads, they need to play together as much as possible now. Anita in for Colback and, if Taylor's fit, sack Captain Fantastic off.

We have defenders that can't handle being left to defend against strikers on their own, midfielders that can't tackle or get a grip of a game and 2 strikers - one of which has gone mentally, the other an unproven, currently unreliable kid. It'd take a seriously, seriously good manager to get this rabble to finish 10th. We might have some talented footballers but that doesn't count for much when you have what is probably the least balanced squad in the league. HTT nailed what's wrong, too many are mentally fucked which is a symptom of the way the club has been run for years.

I think this is a brilliant post. Disagree about the crosses and bodies in the box thing, but everything else is just about spot on. I do think McClaren will turn it around, somewhat, but we're no match made in heaven at all. Steve Black has got a hell of a job on to get these players mentally right.

Watson and Capoue attempted 10 tackles against us. Wijnaldum and Sissoko, the two they were directly playing against for half the game, attempted 1 between themselves.

To be fair, Thauvin and Perez were a rubbish wide combo on Saturday. Both did exactly the same thing, got the ball and turned inside almost every time. They never tried to take the full back on, instead choosing to pass it inside or wait for an overlap. Sissoko made a difference in the second half by being more direct. Maybe things might be different for them with a focal point to play off but I doubt that'd really work unless we're playing teams that defend a bit more openly.

They were the only two willing to go at players with any consistency - they weren't scared if things didn't come off etc. Wijnaldum started to do similar in the second half, I hope that's a sign he's really started to adapt and understand what the league's about.

You'd think a supporting 4 of Perez, Wijnaldum, Sissoko and Thauvin would be enough in that department. Some good pace and technical ability in there. There's not much of a focal point for them to play off... Needs to stop leaving 3 back when we attack against good counter sides, mind, as we're too soft for it. If Janmaat bombs on, just leave Haidara back and get the 4 covering in a diamond shape to have a higher chance of getting second balls. It's hard to say what's going on up front. Even when we get more numbers forward, the final ball is poor, something's lacking etc. I remember him saying a while back that he changed his approach to giving instructions in Holland, letting players think about things more. Perhaps he thinks our attackers are better than they are and is giving them too much decision-making freedom and not enough clarity. We had 40 crosses on Saturday and I can only remember 2 actually being decent, that's also a huge problem, even with Mitrovic in the team. It really can't be that hard to whip a ball in, at least 1 in 10, none of this floated rubbish.

Martial looks a good player. Quick, strong and skilful is a pretty decent combo for a striker.

Good skill from Depay. Perez tried that yesterday and nearly pulled it off, IIRC.

Don't disagree with you at all. The reason I made the point more towards the fullbacks is we need to stay in games longer and currently we are playing with two defenders with one of them being long past his best. From his quotes yesterday I reckon we'll be playing a lot more defensively against Chelsea and Man City. Wouldn't be surprised to see Anita back in the team either. The only problem is we have very little pace up front to counter attack. His aim in the next two games will be to keep the scores down, and rightly so. It's literally the only area he's not copied Pardew so far getting utterly bummed. What? He's clearly set us up to play on the deck rather than Pardew's hoofball. howay man Look, we've been s****, but this "McCarvdew" bollocks is just lazy. We've clearly tried to play it out from the back. Hasn't worked, mind. Explain to me how other than us getting a 4/5/6-0 bumming he's differed from Pardew so far. Eh, I just told you. We've tried to keep the ball on the deck to a greater extent rather than hoofing it at every opportunity. We've also tried different systems and approaches to games too, rather than just one plan every single time. We started last season with a 'new approach' as well if you recall. Knocked it about on the ground without any aim or purpose. Sound familiar? I don't remember Pardew trying to tailor different plans for different games, no. He tried one thing for a few matches and retreated to what he knew. You say it like it's working though It's clearly not working. But that wasn't what you were saying. What I said was other than avoiding bummings he's so far done nothing different to Pardew and I stand by it. It was countered with but we've passed it a bit more, to which I replied that's what we did last season too, just as aimlessly. Pardew even dropped little Vurn and kept Colback So the only positive or thing he's done differently is try different systems, which is only partially true, and none of the changes have worked either. Therefore in conclusion, from what I can see, he's tried different systems that don't work. That's it. That's what sets him apart from Pardew at this point. Good stuff. Well, trying different systems and approaches is quite a big part of the game, like. Edit: I'm curious as to where you think this more incisive play is going to come from, by the way. Ignoring some of the deficiencies in our squad, you need confidence for players to play riskier, more incisive football. It's not as simple as just telling them to do it, they've got to have the character to actually go and perform like that.

I think I read we had 30 crosses and only 4 connected. How embarrassing.

Interesting comments about him on Supplement. Of course, the North East shite is bollocks, but I can imagine the stuff about him not wanting to play may well be true. Probably got a deal close for January and is desperate to not get injured again. I think we've brought some good characters into the club, over the Summer, and the quicker they put their stamp on the dressing room, the better.

We've been really bad at getting players in the box for years now. That is going to take time to put right, assuming McClaren thinks it needs putting right. We had 4/5 players in the box on numerous occasions yesterday. Their positioning and deliveries, on the other hand, were shit.

Don't disagree with you at all. The reason I made the point more towards the fullbacks is we need to stay in games longer and currently we are playing with two defenders with one of them being long past his best. From his quotes yesterday I reckon we'll be playing a lot more defensively against Chelsea and Man City. Wouldn't be surprised to see Anita back in the team either. The only problem is we have very little pace up front to counter attack. His aim in the next two games will be to keep the scores down, and rightly so. It's literally the only area he's not copied Pardew so far getting utterly bummed. What? He's clearly set us up to play on the deck rather than Pardew's hoofball. Still defensive. Still turgid. Turgid, yes, but not always defensive. What? We've had the least shots on target in the league. That doesn't necessarily mean it's always defensive. That could signal many things. Swansea was defensive, Arsenal was defensive, Man U second half was. I don't think the other 3 games have been, though. We were just poor.