colinmk Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Let's think about the alternative that we go more attacking the first half, score and concede on the break, we'd be fucking raging. After he first leg it wasn't the right approach and I honestly think Pardew had the right idea. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 So we go out of both domestic cups early, out of the Europa at a respectable QF stage, not exactly a tough group but two decent knockout wins. Battling to stay up......, the style of play, the set penises, good enough ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lovejoy Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Going against the grain here it would seem, but I thought he got it pretty much spot on tonight. The plan was for them not to score first half, it had to be that way otherwise its game over early doors. Around the hour mark he changes it and we go for the game, and we nearly got it to be fair to him. No complaints from me tonight. Precisely. Canny obvious really. Being 3-1 down is misleading because it suggests we have to go for it but the away goals rule turns that completely on its head. It was absolutely imperative we got to half time with them at nil - that was the only priority in the first half and rightly so. If that means killing the game, and it did, so be it. Agreed. People mentioning how suspect they were in defence, forget how strong they looked on counter. We go for it first half, they can counter, game over early on. Like I say, no complaints from me tonight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Some seem to be forgetting that we attacked them in the first leg and could have quite easily brought a lead back to SJP if it wasn't for two massive ricks the likes of which were nowhere to be seen tonight. They simply aren't that good at the back and didn't like pressure. So let's not put them under any pressure until our own time is limited. Against a team that are evidently adept at time-wasting. Nice one. I'm no statto but for a team not that good at the back they don't seem to concede many. They panicked when we piled on the pressure but that isn't going to happen for 90 minutes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
powellnufc Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 I think the problem in the first half was more the final ball rather than not attacking them. We often got the ball into wide positions well but the final cross was terrible, even cabaye was un-characteristicly smashing the ball out of play. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Let's think about the alternative that we go more attacking the first half, score and concede on the break, we'd be fucking raging. After he first leg it wasn't the right approach and I honestly think Pardew had the right idea. this is true, somebody mentioned the law of averages- well when we did attack for 20mins - they did score , so on that average if we had attacked all night they would have got 4 and we would have needed , erm....loads to go through. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashley17 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 When you've got Williamson and Simpson in your back 4, you don't really want to be giving them a long time to attack you. this is the point I've been trying to make. We played them to their strengths and us to our weaknesses. If anything they didn't score because they were shocked at our tactics. Maybe that was Pardews plan? ...by keeping it tight, it meant they weren't so exposed as our weaknesses. If you play to attack them early on you end up conceding. See the last 10 minutes when they got in behind about 5 times down the right, and eventually scored. Pardew isn't the best manager nor will he ever be but I think he got it right tonight, except maybe somebody more experienced for Bigirimana. Our best chance of going through was to win 2-0, whilst we'd all love to have scored two in the opening 10 minutes it wasn't likely to happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Who do people think Benfica are anyway, that they are simply too great to be beaten 2-0 away from home in Europe? They are a very good team, but it's not like they're world class. They are not incapable of being beaten. They looked shaky defensively every time we attacked them, but unfortunately that's not saying much given we barely even f***ing tried to attack them. This. We beat Man U 3-0 at home why wouldn't we be able to beat them 2-0? You laughing? Read the last pages, people make it out like it was impossible to beat Benfica 2-0 ffs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Let's think about the alternative that we go more attacking the first half, score and concede on the break, we'd be fucking raging. After he first leg it wasn't the right approach and I honestly think Pardew had the right idea. this is true, somebody mentioned the law of averages- well when we did atatck for 20mins - they did score , so on that average if we had attacked all night they would have got 4 and we would have needed , erm....loads to go through. Now I know you're messing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Let's think about the alternative that we go more attacking the first half, score and concede on the break, we'd be fucking raging. After he first leg it wasn't the right approach and I honestly think Pardew had the right idea. this is true, somebody mentioned the law of averages- well when we did atatck for 20mins - they did score , so on that average if we had attacked all night they would have got 4 and we would have needed , erm....loads to go through. They were set up with pace to hit us if we stretched too much, it was a fine line and I can see why people are saying what they are saying but yeah I think he made the right choice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Icke - Son of God Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 After being absolutely aghast at the line up prematch I have to say I think he played this relatively well. It could've been so much different if they'd scored early on but they didn't. Cool, when are the semi's? Sorry, you said you weren't happy about it before the game so presumably you think we'd have done worse than that if we had some semblance of an attacking plan for the first 70 minutes? It seemingly nearly worked but it didn't, we gave ourselves 20 minutes to win it when we could have played it over 90. Shit scared of the opposition. I was more annoyed at the inclusion of Mike Williamson to be honest. I didn't think we could contain them for as long as required with him on the pitch. It is obvious that we are not a good enough side to do what half the posters on here wanted us to do, which was go out and attack them like we did from the 70th minute onwards from the first. We would've been out of the tie long before Savio tapped in their equaliser in stoppage time. You saw how easy they scored when we were pushing up. To go through tonight would've required us to do something only Barca have done to them this season and Pardew's tactic of containing them, frustrating them and tiring them out before throwing HBA and Marv on almost paid off. I honestly cannot fathom how anyone can have any genuine complaints about the performance or tactics after seeing the way we played it tonight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TJM Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 How man, there is a huge difference between playing a tactically intelligent game, with controlled possession, not getting caught on the counter attack and that complete dross that was served up in the first half. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flip Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 How man, there is a huge difference between playing a tactically intelligent game, with controlled possession, not getting caught on the counter attack and that complete dross that was served up in the first half. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 How man, there is a huge difference between playing a tactically intelligent game, with controlled possession, not getting caught on the counter attack and that complete dross that was served up in the first half. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Let's think about the alternative that we go more attacking the first half, score and concede on the break, we'd be fucking raging. After he first leg it wasn't the right approach and I honestly think Pardew had the right idea. No one is saying we should have gone all guns blazing though. But we should at least have put out a side that could cause them some problems in the first half. He could have put Sissoko on the right and had Shola up front with Cisse instead of Bigi for example. His over-cautious line ups kill our self belief IMO. You could see the team and crowd came alive once we brought on our quality attackers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Don't think he did a lot wrong other than starting Bigi today. We were only really out of this tie in the 180th minute. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skirge Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 I don't think anyone wanted 90 mins like the last 20 mins but had we been a bit more attacking in the first 45 then we may not have needed to be so gung-ho in the final 20. Yes if you fly at them all guns blazing then you leave yourself pen as we did, so had we been more measured in our attack in the first half we had more of a chance of scoring twice in the 90 mins instead of trying to do it all in 20 mins. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Icke - Son of God Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Who do people think Benfica are anyway, that they are simply too great to be beaten 2-0 away from home in Europe? They are a very good team, but it's not like they're world class. They are not incapable of being beaten. They looked shaky defensively every time we attacked them, but unfortunately that's not saying much given we barely even f***ing tried to attack them. This. We beat Man U 3-0 at home why wouldn't we be able to beat them 2-0? You laughing? Read the last pages, people make it out like it was impossible to beat Benfica 2-0 ffs. Only Barcelona have done that this season. Barcelona for fucks sake. One of the best club teams to grace the game. You're fucking mental Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Let's think about the alternative that we go more attacking the first half, score and concede on the break, we'd be fucking raging. After he first leg it wasn't the right approach and I honestly think Pardew had the right idea. No one is saying we should have gone all guns blazing though. But we should at least have put out a side that could cause them some problems in the first half. He could have put Sissoko on the right and had Shola up front with Cisse instead of Bigi for example. His over-cautious line ups kill our self belief IMO. You could see the team and crowd came alive once we brought on our quality attackers. Well like I said a while ago the main decision I would have liked was Marveaux in from the start. So I agree in the most part. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 we set out to stop them scoring in the 70 mins, and we did it. so close ,a real proud effort. Did you forget that we had to score at least 2 goals? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Icke - Son of God Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Let's think about the alternative that we go more attacking the first half, score and concede on the break, we'd be fucking raging. After he first leg it wasn't the right approach and I honestly think Pardew had the right idea. No one is saying we should have gone all guns blazing though. But we should at least have put out a side that could cause them some problems in the first half. He could have put Sissoko on the right and had Shola up front with Cisse instead of Bigi for example. His over-cautious line ups kill our self belief IMO. You could see the team and crowd came alive once we brought on our quality attackers. And he'd have had the brain trust on here that he was playing Sissoko out wide (I can see it now, "he's not a winger man!") and Shola was getting a game at all (choose your variation on "useless plank"). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cp40 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 we set out to stop them scoring in the 70 mins, and we did it. so close ,a real proud effort. Did you forget that we had to score at least 2 goals? no- we came close to that also- only barcelona have managed that and we came close. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashley17 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Pretty sure we conceded when we were knackered, surprising after chasing the game for 60 minutes Sissoko was knackered, he could barely run and therefore didn't go to clear the ball. Wouldn't be surprised if he missed Sunday Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 We're not as good as Barcelona, so we had no chance. With this logic we wouldn't go out of the cups to lower league opposition every fucking year. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bimpy474 Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Pretty sure we conceded when we were knackered, surprising after chasing the game for 60 minutes Sissoko was knackered, he could barely run and therefore didn't go to clear the ball. Wouldn't be surprised if he missed Sunday Nah that was just rank bad defending, you never wait for a ball, Saying that though, he isn't a LB which was were he found himself at the time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts