Swansea City 3 - 0 Newcastle United - 04/12/13 - post-match reaction from p37

[Interpolic]

We were playing a team who had won 1 of their last 11 at home (IIRC?), I wonder if the other 10 teams that got a result there aimed simply to nullify the opposition, soak up the pressure of excessive possession and play on the counter attack in the hope of getting a goal.

 

They might have done, I don't watch all of Swansea's matches (I watch all of ours instead ) - I doubt they did though.

 

There's also the point that approaching a game against a team that has such a poor recent home record with such a fearful and overly respectful approach is fucking nuts and actually pretty pathetic, especially off the back of 4 wins for ourselves.

[Wullie]

Of the XI that played for Swansea in that 2-0 game, only Ashley Williams and the goalkeeper started tonight (and Dyer came on in the first half). Of our players, there were five - Krul, Santon, Williamson, Tiote, Cabaye, so only one attacker. Our team is chalk and cheese compared to that 4-3-3 being used at that time which was all about a pacy and clinical front three bang in form, no Shola in sight, whilst the Swansea team is almost completely different with a different manager.

 

Some people seem to think "well it worked two years ago" is a good enough reason for us to play like that. I really really REALLY hope that wasn't what we were trying to do because honestly, that would be an absolutely embarrassing approach for a Premier League team to take into a game - "ok lads, let's sit and watch how some other lads won against a completely different team with a different manager. Don't worry, I reckon it'll work because the opposition will be wearing similar shirts to the players on that day"

 

Cringe. It terrifies me that he might have given Swansea that much respect. That's the sort of preparation I'd expect for Celtic playing against Barcelona in the Champions League, not a mid-table Premier League clash with a team in poor form.

[Interpolic]

The different manager bit is key as well, Swansea aren't the same side they were under Rodgers that would pass the ball to death whether an opening came or not.

[Mick]

 

 

Going to Swansea with a counter approach is not s***, it's what got us the win there 2 years ago. We've got players that are well-suited to it and it can lead to some excellent and effective football. Executing it is a different matter, both on the attacking and defending fronts, we were poor, especially the latter.

 

Tonight wasn't 2 years ago, we played against a team who had won once at home in the league this season and had no threat.

[Interpolic]

It does seem to be a case of overly simplistic arguments claiming to cancel out apparently overly negative viewpoints on here like, same as it ever was.

 

We won, what else do you want?

It worked 2 years ago in completely different circumstances - why not try the same again?  And after all, only one approach ever works (because that's the only approach we ever see work, because that's the only approach we ever adopt).

All teams get mauled when they go in front, we're not Brazil.

 

Etc etc.  Until the end of time.

[Dave]

Not sure what was so flukey about their second, Shelvey was clean through and should have put it in without help anyway. You see those bobble in all the time.

[Yorkie]

Not sure what was so flukey about their second, Shelvey was clean through and should have put it in without help anyway. You see those bobble in all the time.

 

It was pretty fluky, it wasn't even like it deflected in. The shot was actually saved.

 

Incidentally I thought Debuchy was comfortably our best player tonight.

[Interpolic]

Didn't think it was lucky at all really, we thought we'd got away with them having the clearest of chances but we didn't.

[mrmojorisin75]

There goes the fear again?

[Gallowgate Toon]

It does seem to be a case of overly simplistic arguments claiming to cancel out apparently overly negative viewpoints on here like, same as it ever was.

 

We won, what else do you want?

It worked 2 years ago in completely different circumstances - why not try the same again?  And after all, only one approach ever works (because that's the only approach we ever see work, because that's the only approach we ever adopt).

All teams get mauled when they go in front, we're not Brazil.

 

Etc etc.  Until the end of time.

 

As opposed to your over-simplification in that post and your extremely simplistic view that counter-attacking football is automatically negative?

 

Robson made an absolutely fantastic countering team here, with the right players, organisation and energy, it's a bloody excellent way to play against teams that have a possession-based style. It's not at all negative if done right and it can lead to some really exciting football.

[Mick]

 

 

As opposed to your over-simplification in that post and your extremely simplistic view that counter-attacking football is automatically negative?

 

Robson made an absolutely fantastic countering team here, with the right players, organisation and energy, it's a bloody excellent way to play against teams that have a possession-based style. It's not at all negative if done right and it can lead to some really exciting football.

 

Robson built a team that could counter-attack, it wasn't our only tactic, it was an option.

[Gallowgate Toon]

 

 

As opposed to your over-simplification in that post and your extremely simplistic view that counter-attacking football is automatically negative?

 

Robson made an absolutely fantastic countering team here, with the right players, organisation and energy, it's a bloody excellent way to play against teams that have a possession-based style. It's not at all negative if done right and it can lead to some really exciting football.

 

Robson built a team that could counter-attack, it wasn't our only tactic, it was an option.

 

Of course, but it was a heavily-used option and the team was at its best, in my opinion, when hitting someone on the break.

[Ronaldo]

We actually defended from the front under SBR far more than we did from the back. Counterattacking was, as Mick says, an option. It wasn't plan A.

[Gallowgate Toon]

Of the XI that played for Swansea in that 2-0 game, only Ashley Williams and the goalkeeper started tonight (and Dyer came on in the first half). Of our players, there were five - Krul, Santon, Williamson, Tiote, Cabaye, so only one attacker. Our team is chalk and cheese compared to that 4-3-3 being used at that time which was all about a pacy and clinical front three bang in form, no Shola in sight, whilst the Swansea team is almost completely different with a different manager.

 

Some people seem to think "well it worked two years ago" is a good enough reason for us to play like that. I really really REALLY hope that wasn't what we were trying to do because honestly, that would be an absolutely embarrassing approach for a Premier League team to take into a game - "ok lads, let's sit and watch how some other lads won against a completely different team with a different manager. Don't worry, I reckon it'll work because the opposition will be wearing similar shirts to the players on that day"

 

Cringe. It terrifies me that he might have given Swansea that much respect. That's the sort of preparation I'd expect for Celtic playing against Barcelona in the Champions League, not a mid-table Premier League clash with a team in poor form.

 

I don't believe countering is necessarily showing someone respect, I think you play to your strengths. I thought it was a reasonable approach to go with considering their players and philosophy compared to ours. I think our starters are at their most effective when on the break, they naturally suit that type of game. That doesn't mean I advocated sitting back as much as we did in those opening stages, or surrendering as much possession as we did. I wanted us to have a lot more control, hence why I said we executed it badly.

[Neil]

Was this is a fair scoreline? Heard/read a couple of updates and seemed Swansea were pretty toothless in large parts. More a case of you not turning up as opposed to Swansea playing brilliantly?

 

 

[Yorkie]

Was this is a fair scoreline? Heard/read a couple of updates and seemed Swansea were pretty toothless in large parts. More a case of you not turning up as opposed to Swansea playing brilliantly?

 

 

 

Yes to all.

[Ikon]

Watching us being so fluid and full of movement spraying the ball around last night makes me fel content today. A lot of positives, we're going places.

[Benwell Lad]

We just need to get over this as it was coming sometime. If there's a single positive to be taken out of it, and I'm scraping the barrel here, maybe a reality check isn't a bad thing as certain parties may have been starting to get a wee bit ahead of themselves.

We laboured and over elaborated at times when we should have moved the ball and Krul was very poor for two of the goals. Webb is a joke, nuff said.

I find Swansea's brand of football pretty boring, it's good to see the game played properly but the old Wimbledon team were more exciting to watch than the sterile Swans.

[Unbelievable]

I don't think we played that badly. Scoreline flatters them. Krul had a mare mind.

[Wullie]

Weird coincidence how we never seem to win by a "flattering" scoreline, unless you count narrow wins where we've actually been battered.

[Guest palnese]

The first half is one of the most boring halves I've ever witnessed.

 

Swansea passing it about for 45 minutes, and then Krul makes a silly mistake - 1-0.

 

[Barnes23]

I find Swansea's brand of football pretty boring, it's good to see the game played properly but the old Wimbledon team were more exciting to watch than the sterile Swans.

 

Fucking hell. No wonder you defend Pardew.

[Guest icemanblue]

Weird coincidence how we never seem to win by a "flattering" scoreline, unless you count narrow wins where we've actually been battered.

 

Alreet, Wullie? Good to have you back, mate.

[mrmojorisin75]

I find Swansea's brand of football pretty boring, it's good to see the game played properly but the old Wimbledon team were more exciting to watch than the sterile Swans.

 

Fucking hell. No wonder you defend Pardew.

 

this place is melting down

[Guest palnese]

I agree with Benwell Lad.