Collage Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Just Alan Pardew with a Geordie Accent. no better at all Nah, seems to be a difference in approach/playing style actually. Still utter garbage, although giving Cabella more of a role is nice to see and he has looked much better, pity Carver won't pick him ever again Agree it's still not looking good, just saying he seems more attacking minded. Cabella has enjoyed a revival as well as Haidara. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Bringing on Obertan is always going to get the manager stick, but the fact is he did alright when he came on and played a key part in the goal. One embarrassing situation when he was through on goal aside. Leaving on Perez was also a positive move. I didn't like to see Cabella go off, but overall I thought the subs were absolutely fine. I don't like Carver but he doesn't deserve much stick for the subs. Don't agree personally. Gouffran or Riviere would and always will be better sub options than Obertan. There's never a reason to bring him as he can offer nothing constructive beyond what anyone else on the books could do. I don't really care about this debate because I don't rate the three of them, but what can the other two offer? Gouffran, nothing, Riviere, nobody knows but he's not a midfielder. IMO there's little between them in terms of ability or potential to affect the game, just Obertan is more of a figure of ridicule. tactically subs should have been: sammy off, cisse on (perez wide left forward, cisse middle, cabella right) colback off, abeid on (straight swap) the end Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 I agree, ideally. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozy Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Are people forgetting that Obertan did create our goal? Anyway, it clearly should have been Sammy to come off with Cabella sliding over. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueStar Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Carver does seem to want to start out well by getting at teams, rather than feeling the game out, it's just his utter incompetence means he looks clueless as fuck when we run out of ideas and/or teams make changes to shut down some of our dangerous players. Well luckily for him, he only has to reach the rank of mediocre to be given the job. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest John Carvery Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Bringing on Obertan is always going to get the manager stick, but the fact is he did alright when he came on and played a key part in the goal. One embarrassing situation when he was through on goal aside. Leaving on Perez was also a positive move. I didn't like to see Cabella go off, but overall I thought the subs were absolutely fine. I don't like Carver but he doesn't deserve much stick for the subs. Don't agree personally. Gouffran or Riviere would and always will be better sub options than Obertan. There's never a reason to bring him as he can offer nothing constructive beyond what anyone else on the books could do. I don't really care about this debate because I don't rate the three of them, but what can the other two offer? Gouffran, nothing, Riviere, nobody knows but he's not a midfielder. IMO there's little between them in terms of ability or potential to affect the game, just Obertan is more of a figure of ridicule. tactically subs should have been: sammy off, cisse on (perez wide left forward, cisse middle, cabella right) colback off, abeid on (straight swap) the end Yup. Feel sorry for Perez he's essentially feeding off scraps, created his only chance for himself which he blazed over. Your forgetting the other one where he missed narrowly created by cabella iirc. Thought it was in all the way. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 people were defending those subs yesterday aye? we look a bit more inclined to attack under this prick, and he's giving cabella and anita a chance so there's that but we look just as shit at attacking as we were under pardew....nothing has really changed, he's just got more attacking players in the right places so sometimes it's going to pay off (hull) looks full of wrong decisions/indecision to me...genuinely fear for this horrific run we're about to embark on On the face of it he's picking a more attacking line up, but when you watch them the lack of direction and coaching becomes apparent. As with Pardew, we might get into good wide positions, but when the cross comes in there's rarely any players making runs into the box. That will probably change with De Jong coming back but that just highlights that it's down to the players to make a difference as the coaches are absolutely clueless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallowgate Toon Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Watching Perez is sad, like. Most of his service comes from him chasing things down. He and Cabella obviously have a bit of a connection but they're often too far apart to really hurt teams. That 1-2 in the box they played in the second half could've been good, it might also have helped if we'd have had someone else in the area to create a bit more space for them Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 people were defending those subs yesterday aye? we look a bit more inclined to attack under this prick, and he's giving cabella and anita a chance so there's that but we look just as shit at attacking as we were under pardew....nothing has really changed, he's just got more attacking players in the right places so sometimes it's going to pay off (hull) looks full of wrong decisions/indecision to me...genuinely fear for this horrific run we're about to embark on On the face of it he's picking a more attacking line up, but when you watch them the lack of direction and coaching becomes apparent. As with Pardew, we might get into good wide positions, but when the cross comes in there's rarely any players making runs into the box. That will probably change with De Jong coming back but that just highlights that it's down to the players to make a difference as the coaches are absolutely clueless. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Are people forgetting that Obertan did create our goal? Anyway, it clearly should have been Sammy to come off with Cabella sliding over. but that goal wasn't created as a result of some great tactical managerial masterstroke, it was right out of the pardew school of "throw bodies on and hope something will change", and as we've spent 4 years finding out it works sometimes but more often than not it will not work the better solution would have been abeid in to control the midfield and stick with the formation and tactics we'd played the last few games instead of totally upsetting the tiny bit of rhythm they did have Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozy Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Are people forgetting that Obertan did create our goal? Anyway, it clearly should have been Sammy to come off with Cabella sliding over. but that goal wasn't created as a result of some great tactical managerial masterstroke, it was right out of the pardew school of "throw bodies on and hope something will change", and as we've spent 4 years finding out it works sometimes but more often than not it will not work the better solution would have been abeid in to control the midfield and stick with the formation and tactics we'd played the last few games instead of totally upsetting the tiny bit of rhythm they did have Carver's never going to produce anything approacing intelligent, let alone a masterstroke (which he showed by taking off Cabella). But Obertan has useful qualities and I think it would have made sense to take off Sammy, switch Cabella and then have Obertan on the right. Different challenge for each of the tired fullbacks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Are people forgetting that Obertan did create our goal? Anyway, it clearly should have been Sammy to come off with Cabella sliding over. but that goal wasn't created as a result of some great tactical managerial masterstroke, it was right out of the pardew school of "throw bodies on and hope something will change", and as we've spent 4 years finding out it works sometimes but more often than not it will not work the better solution would have been abeid in to control the midfield and stick with the formation and tactics we'd played the last few games instead of totally upsetting the tiny bit of rhythm they did have Carver's never going to produce anything approacing intelligent, let alone a masterstroke (which he showed by taking off Cabella). But Obertan has useful qualities and I think it would have made sense to take off Sammy, switch Cabella and then have Obertan on the right. Different challenge for each of the tired fullbacks. Cisse had to come on up front with Perez dropping deeper/wider. That should have happened at half time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Are people forgetting that Obertan did create our goal? Anyway, it clearly should have been Sammy to come off with Cabella sliding over. but that goal wasn't created as a result of some great tactical managerial masterstroke, it was right out of the pardew school of "throw bodies on and hope something will change", and as we've spent 4 years finding out it works sometimes but more often than not it will not work the better solution would have been abeid in to control the midfield and stick with the formation and tactics we'd played the last few games instead of totally upsetting the tiny bit of rhythm they did have Carver's never going to produce anything approacing intelligent, let alone a masterstroke (which he showed by taking off Cabella). But Obertan has useful qualities and I think it would have made sense to take off Sammy, switch Cabella and then have Obertan on the right. Different challenge for each of the tired fullbacks. Cisse had to come on up front with Perez dropping deeper/wider. That should have happened at half time. Especially as Cisse is one of the few players who will attack the box when the ball comes in from wide. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
arnonel Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 what really bugged me about the cabella sub is that not only is he a threat, but he has more tackles per min than any other player, and his pressing is brilliant, so i dont get any argument about brining on the big forehead. Also, in 1 single game Perez played lone striker, number 10 and left wing due to the subs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lush Vlad Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 I'm not sure why I am surprised. But I actually paid full attention for once yesterday, so clearly noticed it a lot more. I really am shocked that a team like Stoke, can come to SJP and play us off the park for long periods. They actually managed to string a lot of passes together and had good movement off the ball. For long spells, we were chasing shadows in the middle of the park. We're so ragtag it's unreal. Players are miles apart, we only look dangerous on the counter attack, due to the likes of Cabella and Perez, or Sissoko being used as a battering ram. Sammy conjurs up the odd bit of magic or gets tangled up and skins someone what else do we have? Apart from the long punt up to nobody? Even when Janmaat and Haidara get forward. There is never really an option for them. We just whip in crosses and get a corner (which invariably comes to nothing) if we're lucky The football is turgid and we have no clue what we're doing 9/10 when attacking. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozy Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Stoke kept the ball like that because they never tried to actively take any kind of risk. Defensive posession football is the worst kind to watch. Swansea under Rodgers were the worst, constantly passing it around the defenders like you do to wind someone up on FIFA. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallowgate Toon Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 I'm not sure why I am surprised. But I actually paid full attention for once yesterday, so clearly noticed it a lot more. I really am shocked that a team like Stoke, can come to SJP and play us off the park for long periods. They actually managed to string a lot of passes together and had good movement off the ball. For long spells, we were chasing shadows in the middle of the park. We're so ragtag it's unreal. Players are miles apart, we only look dangerous on the counter attack, due to the likes of Cabella and Perez, or Sissoko being used as a battering ram. Sammy conjurs up the odd bit of magic or gets tangled up and skins someone what else do we have? Apart from the long punt up to nobody? Even when Janmaat and Haidara get forward. There is never really an option for them. We just whip in crosses and get a corner (which invariably comes to nothing) if we're lucky The football is turgid and we have no clue what we're doing 9/10 when attacking. That second paragraph is just spot on. Our movement on the break is decent, but the majority of our players' instincts when we're trying to build moves is just terrible as too many just want the ball to feet. It gets worse when we get towards the box too, often slow to get there, no attempt to speed play up in key wide areas and a lack of bodies and movement when it comes to delivering. We spent large periods of yesterday going at Stoke with 2 or 3 players. Starting Cisse, especially at home, would really help matters. It'd give Ayoze some more room to both play in and attack off the ball, whether he starts at AM or on the left. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Stoke kept the ball like that because they never tried to actively take any kind of risk. Defensive posession football is the worst kind to watch. Swansea under Rodgers were the worst, constantly passing it around the defenders like you do to wind someone up on FIFA. Said it in the match thread, but that Stoke possession stat was very misleading. Like you said, a lot of it was just passing it around not taking any risks whatsoever, and especially in the first half it felt like they took a minute or two for every fucking throw in, which I assume counts as possession for them. It did annoy me that in the second half we didn't do more to break up their possession because I thought we looked like a threat when we had the ball, so bringing Abeid on to help control the midfield more would have been ideal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 I'm not sure why I am surprised. But I actually paid full attention for once yesterday, so clearly noticed it a lot more. I really am shocked that a team like Stoke, can come to SJP and play us off the park for long periods. They actually managed to string a lot of passes together and had good movement off the ball. For long spells, we were chasing shadows in the middle of the park. We're so ragtag it's unreal. Players are miles apart, we only look dangerous on the counter attack, due to the likes of Cabella and Perez, or Sissoko being used as a battering ram. Sammy conjurs up the odd bit of magic or gets tangled up and skins someone what else do we have? Apart from the long punt up to nobody? Even when Janmaat and Haidara get forward. There is never really an option for them. We just whip in crosses and get a corner (which invariably comes to nothing) if we're lucky The football is turgid and we have no clue what we're doing 9/10 when attacking. Utter lack of coaching for the past 4 years has led to this, and anyone who thinks Geordie boy Charver is going to change that is in for a rude shock. With nothing between his ears, lambasting Cabella for lack of respect is probably the best he can come up with. Followed by a tribute to Bobby Robson and Gary Speed and a chip butty. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallowgate Toon Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Stoke kept the ball like that because they never tried to actively take any kind of risk. Defensive posession football is the worst kind to watch. Swansea under Rodgers were the worst, constantly passing it around the defenders like you do to wind someone up on FIFA. Said it in the match thread, but that Stoke possession stat was very misleading. Like you said, a lot of it was just passing it around not taking any risks whatsoever, and especially in the first half it felt like they took a minute or two for every f***ing throw in, which I assume counts as possession for them. It did annoy me that in the second half we didn't do more to break up their possession because I thought we looked like a threat when we had the ball, so bringing Abeid on to help control the midfield more would have been ideal. This was my biggest gripe. It was almost as if Carver decided he knew they wanted to keep possession (to kill the tempo) so he just let them have it until we got the opportunity for a break. No attempt to push them up a bit higher so we could get on the ball (and in potentially better areas) and control the pace of the game. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Stoke kept the ball like that because they never tried to actively take any kind of risk. Defensive posession football is the worst kind to watch. Swansea under Rodgers were the worst, constantly passing it around the defenders like you do to wind someone up on FIFA. Said it in the match thread, but that Stoke possession stat was very misleading. Like you said, a lot of it was just passing it around not taking any risks whatsoever, and especially in the first half it felt like they took a minute or two for every f***ing throw in, which I assume counts as possession for them. It did annoy me that in the second half we didn't do more to break up their possession because I thought we looked like a threat when we had the ball, so bringing Abeid on to help control the midfield more would have been ideal. This was my biggest gripe. It was almost as if Carver decided he knew they wanted to keep possession (to kill the tempo) so he just let them have it until we got the opportunity for a break. No attempt to push them up a bit higher so we could get on the ball (and in potentially better areas) and control the pace of the game. Couldn't help but think of the "we're more dangerous without possession" quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lush Vlad Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Stoke kept the ball like that because they never tried to actively take any kind of risk. Defensive posession football is the worst kind to watch. Swansea under Rodgers were the worst, constantly passing it around the defenders like you do to wind someone up on FIFA. Disagree. They actually maintained possession in the middle of the pitch and approaching our goal at times. It's a far cry from our misleading possession stats where we pass it across the back 4 for ages, then punt it forward. Why do teams need to high press against us, when we do fuck all with the ball and just try to go back to front all the while? I'd much rather hang onto the ball and look to exploit an opening or drag someone out of position and capitalise on a moment of indiscipline. Than just play the percentages. All of that, whilst at the same time keeping the ball away from the opposition. It reminded me of the Allardyce days watching yesterday. It was also quite similar to England v Wales in the 6 Nations we seem to kick for territory an awful lot. Most average to decent teams at this level can manage to hold onto the ball for long spells surely? It's not as if our team is littered with cloggers either. We have a few of course. But it has to start with coaching and I don't think any of the fans have confidence in the current bunch of jokers. I doubt the players do either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozy Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 Stoke kept the ball like that because they never tried to actively take any kind of risk. Defensive posession football is the worst kind to watch. Swansea under Rodgers were the worst, constantly passing it around the defenders like you do to wind someone up on FIFA. Disagree. They actually maintained possession in the middle of the pitch and approaching our goal at times. It's a far cry from our misleading possession stats where we pass it across the back 4 for ages, then punt it forward. Why do teams need to high press against us, when we do fuck all with the ball and just try to go back to front all the while? I'd much rather hang onto the ball and look to exploit an opening or drag someone out of position and capitalise on a moment of indiscipline. Than just play the percentages. All of that, whilst at the same time keeping the ball away from the opposition. It reminded me of the Allardyce days watching yesterday. It was also quite similar to England v Wales in the 6 Nations we seem to kick for territory an awful lot. Most average to decent teams at this level can manage to hold onto the ball for long spells surely? It's not as if our team is littered with cloggers either. We have a few of course. But it has to start with coaching and I don't think any of the fans have confidence in the current bunch of jokers. I doubt the players do either. See I'd say we let them have the ball as a conscious tactic as they were doing so little with it. We set up like an away side yesterday and our reliance on the counter attack to create chances speaks volumes about the people in charge, as you say. But do I want to see us keep the ball like that? Hell no. It's so easy to defend against a team that is so one dimensional with the ball and just cycles the ball between the fullbacks on the halfway line. To me, the best teams are varied in their style, have the ability to keep the ball, play more direct, know when to hold the ball and know when to press. Jupp Heynckes' Bayern side before Pep were fantastic at that, the way they destroyed Barca was brilliant. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrenBartonCentrePartin Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/alan-pardew-par-sir-bobby-8607937?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter The two aren't even comparable, you utter muppet. EDIT: Just actually read it. Another one of Ryder's stories where there is no quote in the article to directly back up the headline. Never mind. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 9, 2015 Share Posted February 9, 2015 That headline is cray. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now