Huddersfield H post match thread 3-1

[Captain...]

Biggest positive for me is that we looked to attack quickly and down the middle not just go wide and push all our attacks through our full backs. Controlling possession is pointless if you have no cutting edge and attacking full backs is only effective if you do something with the ball in wide positions. 

 

A 3 pronged attack of Maddison, Vardy, Nacho looked very effective but it is not clear yet how best to set up to support them. I would love Puel to set up with a 3412 against Wolves.

[surrifox]

2 hours ago, Wolfox said:

Mmmhhh…. The application of logic…. You’re on a hide into nothing on FT…. But, god loves a trier…!

That's like a hiding to nothing , right ?

[Bunyip]

5 hours ago, Vardinio'sCat said:

 

Ok, I'll start this argument over the result for you.

 

We won 3-1.

 

Your turn.

No argument we did. Against the worst side, I have seen down here for a very long time. It's all about perspective. Your turn, please.

[Babylon]

2 hours ago, HighPeakFox said:

If people are validating their case against by saying 'we could have lost that if...;, presumably that means they will listen to the counter argument that 'we could have won that if...' after the Bournemouth match.

You are talking about people who say it's about results and not performances if we play well and lose... until we get a result and then it's about performances.

[reynard]

3 minutes ago, FOXSE said:

Apart from our three goals, which were top quality.....

Yes indeed but they were the exception to the rule in what was a low quality match, especially the first half which was poor from both teams. We were far better than them but let's judge progress when we play the next 2 games which will be a proper test of were we are.

[lennybhoy]

15 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

 

I have to laugh when I see some of the points being made on here.Usually it’s Amartey is rubbish but now he’s becoming flavour of the week so who will we pick on ...I know Morgan..oh sugar..he was not playing..ok so..let’s pick on Ghezzal...fickle to say the least...give players the time to settle and support..that’s what we are .....supporters.

p.s. Morgan was at fault for Huddersfield goal ??

Edited 23 September 2018 by lennybhoy

[ithuriel]

11 minutes ago, reynard said:

If you were a neutral observer you would say you had just seen one distinctly average team comfortably beat an extememly poor team which is surely destined for relegation.

There were some decent performances yesterday but what stands out is that our two goals from open play were very reminiscent of the type of goals we scored when we won the title. Fast breaks using our pace advantage, one or two passes only, followed by a clinical finish.

When we tried to pass and pass and pass our attacks largely broke down without getting anywhere. For me we move the ball far far too slowly and time after time they were able to get all 11 men behind the ball. We are also too stationary in possession. Maddison, a cut above  the rest,and often wanted the ball playing early to him but, our other midfielders, especially Mendy, were just too slow to pass it or don't have the instinctive football brain to see the early passes.

Considering their limited attacking options, there were times when our defence was close to a shambles and had they had anything resembling a premier league qulaity striker we would almost certainly been 2-1 down. He also missed a free header later in the game.

 

Not sure how much we can read into a game where the opponents were so poor but it was good to get three points and the goals were all top quality. Ghezzal was totally inept and could use a spell on loan. On the positive side Amartey really played quite well and was possibly our best defender on the day. If we are on a journey with Puel it feels like we have only just got in the car and not yet turned on the engine, a long way to go but some positive signs.

Perfect summary and was not surprised Ghezzal was subbed, though if we have only just got into the car after a year it is going to take a long time to get to where we are wanting to go

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Captain... said:

Biggest positive for me is that we looked to attack quickly and down the middle not just go wide and push all our attacks through our full backs. Controlling possession is pointless if you have no cutting edge and attacking full backs is only effective if you do something with the ball in wide positions. 

 

A 3 pronged attack of Maddison, Vardy, Nacho looked very effective but it is not clear yet how best to set up to support them. I would love Puel to set up with a 3412 against Wolves.

It felt like we were trying to do that too often though. A mixture of the two would be nice. Far too often the front three were within about 10m of each other and we are trying to thread balls into them when surrounded by double the amount of oppo players and we'd just lose the ball. You need the width to stretch them to make those passes easier.

 

Biggest concern for me was the fact we don't have a CM who can dictate a game or who takes responsibility. They just get it and lay it off for someone else to do the hard work and that's a worry. Neither of them are prodding or probing them with passes, creating chances or controlling the centre of the park.

[StanSP]

9 minutes ago, FoxNotFox said:

When teams defend in numbers and deep, as Huddersfield did, you often need to play the "ponderous tappy tappy stuff" to try and pull defenders out of position and create the space for the attacking pass. You don't want to give the ball away with a hopeful, speculative pass into a packed defence. 

 

Tbh, I was impressed with the amount of clever, one-touch passing we were attempting around their box - stuff that looked slick and close to paying off. It bodes well IMHO. I think we have players capable of doing it, and I reckon we'll get better at it, given time.

Agreed.

 

Maddison being at the centre of all those kinds of moves is promising too. As the game went on the quick passing moves seemed to become more successful. Obviously would be nice if it happened sooner but this is still a work in progress and I also believe it will get better as each game goes on. Especially if there's consistency with personnel. 

Plus the amount of free kicks we got yesterday around the box is equally encouraging. When you have players like Maddison who can win and then take free kicks like he does - shooting or clever routines - it adds another part to our game and more opportunities to score. It also means there's more unpredictability about what we'll do from it. It's not always going to be a shot. It's not always going to be loop it to Maguire. 

[adam95581]

21 minutes ago, reynard said:

If you were a neutral observer you would say you had just seen one distinctly average team comfortably beat an extememly poor team which is surely destined for relegation.

There were some decent performances yesterday but what stands out is that our two goals from open play were very reminiscent of the type of goals we scored when we won the title. Fast breaks using our pace advantage, one or two passes only, followed by a clinical finish.

When we tried to pass and pass and pass our attacks largely broke down without getting anywhere. For me we move the ball far far too slowly and time after time they were able to get all 11 men behind the ball. We are also too stationary in possession. Maddison, a cut above  the rest,and often wanted the ball playing early to him but, our other midfielders, especially Mendy, were just too slow to pass it or don't have the instinctive football brain to see the early passes.

Considering their limited attacking options, there were times when our defence was close to a shambles and had they had anything resembling a premier league qulaity striker we would almost certainly been 2-1 down. He also missed a free header later in the game.

 

Not sure how much we can read into a game where the opponents were so poor but it was good to get three points and the goals were all top quality. Ghezzal was totally inept and could use a spell on loan. On the positive side Amartey really played quite well and was possibly our best defender on the day. If we are on a journey with Puel it feels like we have only just got in the car and not yet turned on the engine, a long way to go but some positive signs.

 

This is unfair. When Amartey refuses to go past him on the overlap there’s really not much else he can do than to come inside and play the ball to Mad/Nacho/Vards. 

 

Weve been spoilt on that side side but can’t expect him to go and take it past 2/3 defenders on his own

[Bunyip]

16 hours ago, FIF said:

Game we should win, we won.

 

Story of the season so far.

 

Iheanacho was great

 

Maddison and Vardy very good

 

Mendy, Amartey  and Chilwell good.

 

Puel made the changes and we won.

Yes, but look at the qualiteeeeee of the opposition. I'll be happier when we do it to a much better side. I just don't think we can get to over the moon with this particular result.

[reynard]

2 minutes ago, adam95581 said:

 

This is unfair. When Amartey refuses to go past him on the overlap there’s really not much else he can do than to come inside and play the ball to Mad/Nacho/Vards. 

 

Weve been spoilt on that side side but can’t expect him to go and take it past 2/3 defenders on his own

It is not meant to be unfair but he looked lost yesterday even when he switched to the left. Not saying he won't make it but he's off the pace required at present. A couple of months at the top of the Championship would be good for him and we may get a better player back.

[Bert]

5 minutes ago, Bunyip said:

Yes, but look at the qualiteeeeee of the opposition. I'll be happier when we do it to a much better side. I just don't think we can get to over the moon with this particular result.

You can only play what’s in front of you. We’ve only lost game where you’d expect us to get a result so far this season. Even then, they’re a bogey team for us. 

[pazzerfox]

The methodical passing style is quite effective when you're 2-1 up, but when you're 0-1 down and chasing the game, it does little to inspire the crowd and force any consistent pressure in the opposition box!

 

I think we slightly got out of jail slightly yesterday as they were so poor.  Also, coincidentally 2 of our goals came from the very tactic that won us the Premier League and have rarely seen us carve any team open with this patient style Puel has employed.

 

Not convinced!!

[Bob666]

Thought we were poor in first half until Huddersfield allowed us to get Nacho's breakaway goal - good finish though.  That relaxed the players (& the crowd).  Huddersfield were very poor second half & our play/control of the game was much better. It was great to see one of Madder's free kicks go in (for once but hopefully many more) + Vardy's finish was excellent.  The final result glosses over the first 20 mins & it will be interesting to see how the team perform at Newcastle. 

 

I was was also surprised that Wilf didn't get sent off.  The Huddersfield players were going down very easy with his post yellow tackles but luckily the ref wasn't Pawson or Dean. 

[smr]

The amount of tinkering is starting to get annoying now. We really need to be settling on a team but at the moment i have no idea who will be playing from one week to the next... albrightons in, then out, iborras in, then out the squad, silvas in, then on the bench. Nacho is in out in out. 

 

Its a bit frustrating because if we did play with a regular team the players would be able to gel better, individually confidence would rise, match fitness would get sharper. Understanding each other, all the link up plays etc. would all improve.

 

You cant expect that when three or four changes are made every week. Puels got to start thinking about his best team and formation and stick to it.

 

I think vardy nacho and madders played well yesterday. Great link up play. At times nacho gave the ball away but so did most of the other players. But a great goal and lovely weighted ball to vardy for that superb dink over the keeper.

 

Nice to have a player that is a threat from set pieces too. Madders reminds me of beckham, just the same sort of swagger, but that free kick really reminded me of beckham in the technique.

 

Wilf and Mendy are great. Thought gray looked sharp when he came on.

 

The thing we have to sort the most is our defence though. I'd like to see maguire and soyuncu playing.

 

Thought amartey played well yesterday too tbf.

[funkyrobot]

40 minutes ago, reynard said:

If you were a neutral observer you would say you had just seen one distinctly average team comfortably beat an extememly poor team which is surely destined for relegation.

There were some decent performances yesterday but what stands out is that our two goals from open play were very reminiscent of the type of goals we scored when we won the title. Fast breaks using our pace advantage, one or two passes only, followed by a clinical finish.

When we tried to pass and pass and pass our attacks largely broke down without getting anywhere. For me we move the ball far far too slowly and time after time they were able to get all 11 men behind the ball. We are also too stationary in possession. Maddison, a cut above  the rest,and often wanted the ball playing early to him but, our other midfielders, especially Mendy, were just too slow to pass it or don't have the instinctive football brain to see the early passes.

Considering their limited attacking options, there were times when our defence was close to a shambles and had they had anything resembling a premier league qulaity striker we would almost certainly been 2-1 down. He also missed a free header later in the game.

 

Not sure how much we can read into a game where the opponents were so poor but it was good to get three points and the goals were all top quality. Ghezzal was totally inept and could use a spell on loan. On the positive side Amartey really played quite well and was possibly our best defender on the day. If we are on a journey with Puel it feels like we have only just got in the car and not yet turned on the engine, a long way to go but some positive signs.

Distinctly average is very harsh, considering the financial chasm between the top 6 and the rest we are well above average. I agree about Amartey but I think your assessment of Mendy is harsh too. Ghezzal was definitely our weakest player in the first half, but that doesn’t mean we should just loan him out (we can’t anyway)

[Abs-Fox]

Good result but we should be putting them away like we did. Its hudderfield... not scored more than 1 goal a game since Feb !

 

Bring on Wolves !!!

[foxfanazer]

At least we found a way of getting Vardy involved. Considering when we signed Iheanacho everyone said he was just a finisher and didn’t have much else to his game I thought he linked the midfield and attack nicely. Huddersfield did play into our hands tbf by leaving us space in behind but it was positive to see our attackers linking nonetheless 

[Guest Markyblue]

23 minutes ago, Bunyip said:

Yes, but look at the qualiteeeeee of the opposition. I'll be happier when we do it to a much better side. I just don't think we can get to over the moon with this particular result.

We have a strange tendency to rubbish anybody who we beat, these drew at Everton and should have got at least a point against palace, who realistically are the sort of teams we should be battling for europa places.

[bfox]

12 hours ago, Sol thewall Bamba said:

When will the moaners concede that Amartey is actually decent. 

He's ok thats about it

[surrifox]

1 hour ago, FOXSE said:

Apart from our three goals, which were top quality.....

Maddison's well crafted set pieces too 

[Guest MattP]

Decent result, thought Puel got it right aside from Ghezzal who I'd play Albrighton instead of.

 

Amartey had a great game, was important to make sure we looked solid defensively after last week. 

 

Huddersfield were terrible, surely them and Cardiff are certs for the drop.

[murphy]

14 hours ago, NaijaFox said:

Not sure we are disagreeing on that (albeit “much better” is a tad bit hyperbolic) as I pointed same out to the poster criticizing Mendy earlier.

 

Nonetheless, both bring different attributes to the game (even though they seem to reprise same role) and I personally think that many on FT have now become  pre-conditioned to exaggerating Wilf’s errant passing (not that he helps his own case, but in reality it’s barely a couple per game), particularly given that he often gets the most touches per game (and in today’s game, tried more passes than Mendy), and seemingly takes his other attributes for granted (when as the stats show, passing aside Mendy shows little of none of those attributes in the same measure). Accordingly, while some may moan about Wilf in “general play”, suffice it to note that we would probably see considerably less of said general play without him. Just saying.

I've ran out of reps, but this is spot on.  I agree that Wilf's defensive attributes are taken for granted and an 89% pass completion is pretty good.  And he's only 21!  We would miss him if he wasn't there.

 

I keep reading that Wilf and Mendy are too similar but really their job is also similiar.  They are there to win the ball, cover the defence and supply the front three.  It would be nice if they had a bit of Pirlo about them too, but they are both holding midfielders.  The creativity should come from the front three behind Vardy.

[nwl fox]

People moaning about us playing tippy tappy stuff and suggesting we should just stick to the counter attack. Did you not see how many players they put behind the ball after they went one up??? The only reason we were able to score two quick counters was because we'd spent the rest of the time playing the tippy tappy stuff trying to draw them out. Its a great tool to have in our locker but it can no longer be our default tactic, we got sussed out on that 2 years ago!