Two ways of Playing

[Flynny]

I'd just rememebered I'd meant to post a topic on this on Saturday night but didn't bothered. Oops.

But yeah, for me the most interesting thing about Saturday was that, despite Howard having a good game, we looked better once he was off against a side playing some genuinely nice football. Once he was gone we started playing some nice stuff on the floor as well, and post importantly were able to commit more men forward.

I can't decide if this is a positive or a warning, though. We will always suffer with Howard in the team once we go forward because if he's playing link-up he simply won't get into the box in time. This hasn't mattered yet, or at least not enough for people to suggest it's a problem. but it's half the reason Holloway demanding "crosses into the box" didn't work last season because by the time Howard had passed it to a winger, it took him 75.29 seconds on average to reach the edge of the 18 yard box.

Against lots of teams his physicality is vital, and the bloke's playing well so it'd be harsh to drop him, but I'm just wondering whether in some games maybe he should come off the bench as a game-changer rather than starting and us not playing the football we're capable of?

[Munzie]

I'd just rememebered I'd meant to post a topic on this on Saturday night but didn't bothered. Oops.

But yeah, for me the most interesting thing about Saturday was that, despite Howard having a good game, we looked better once he was off against a side playing some genuinely nice football. Once he was gone we started playing some nice stuff on the floor as well, and post importantly were able to commit more men forward.

I can't decide if this is a positive or a warning, though. We will always suffer with Howard in the team once we go forward because if he's playing link-up he simply won't get into the box in time. This hasn't mattered yet, or at least not enough for people to suggest it's a problem. but it's half the reason Holloway demanding "crosses into the box" didn't work last season because by the time Howard had passed it to a winger, it took him 75.29 seconds on average to reach the edge of the 18 yard box.

Against lots of teams his physicality is vital, and the bloke's playing well so it'd be harsh to drop him, but I'm just wondering whether in some games maybe he should come off the bench as a game-changer rather than starting and us not playing the football we're capable of?

Some of us were having the exact same conversation on the train home (having consumed serveral more beers than the recommended daily allowance!)

You are right in that the game changes when he leaves the pitch. With him, we have a good link-up player, someone to play the high/long ball to who should win it more often than not and set Fryatt (or whoever) on their way. I take your point in that this sometimes leaves us with just the one advancing striker. Maybe 4-3-3 could be more effective

The introduction of DJ on Saturday gave us some much needed pace at a time when players were flagging and the game seemed to be slipping away into a draw or even (dare I say it) a home win. I think Nigel Pearson sees this as a "come off the bench game-changer".

What I would like to see is matches like the one tomorrow night used as an oppertunity to tweak the system, not just with those that have spent the last few weeks warming the bench but the shape as well. This way, we might find an effective comprimise of height, strength and pace. I appreciate that we have got off to a winning start and it can be sometimes perceived as not the done thing to change winning formulas, but Saturday's performance (and the one against Millwall) was hardly convincing.

[surrifox]

I'd just rememebered I'd meant to post a topic on this on Saturday night but didn't bothered. Oops.

But yeah, for me the most interesting thing about Saturday was that, despite Howard having a good game, we looked better once he was off against a side playing some genuinely nice football. Once he was gone we started playing some nice stuff on the floor as well, and post importantly were able to commit more men forward.

I can't decide if this is a positive or a warning, though. We will always suffer with Howard in the team once we go forward because if he's playing link-up he simply won't get into the box in time. This hasn't mattered yet, or at least not enough for people to suggest it's a problem. but it's half the reason Holloway demanding "crosses into the box" didn't work last season because by the time Howard had passed it to a winger, it took him 75.29 seconds on average to reach the edge of the 18 yard box.

Against lots of teams his physicality is vital, and the bloke's playing well so it'd be harsh to drop him, but I'm just wondering whether in some games maybe he should come off the bench as a game-changer rather than starting and us not playing the football we're capable of?

Watching on Saturday it became apparent that the hoof to Howard's head is the default attacking move albeit that the playing surface was superb for passing . Howard won plenty of flick ons and the chance that fryatt knocked on to the bar came from Howard pressurising the defender to head it to him .Fryatt would almost certainly have been offside otherwise. There is no problem in using the ball to Howard as an occasional attacking option but even League 1 defences would be able to organise to deal with the non stop route 1 stuff. I guess the issue becomes one of finding a role for Howard not related to leading the line- perhaps a bench impact player as you suggest might be the answer.

Credit by the way to NP for changing things on Saturday in time to make a difference - Adams gave some much - needed width on the right and DJ some pace up front so perhaps deprived of head-fest with Howard the defenders had not found a new role for themselves.NP was quite animated on the touchline towards the end of the first half and someone was clearly not following instructions.

[The Blur]

I'd just rememebered I'd meant to post a topic on this on Saturday night but didn't bothered. Oops.

But yeah, for me the most interesting thing about Saturday was that, despite Howard having a good game, we looked better once he was off against a side playing some genuinely nice football. Once he was gone we started playing some nice stuff on the floor as well, and post importantly were able to commit more men forward.

I can't decide if this is a positive or a warning, though. We will always suffer with Howard in the team once we go forward because if he's playing link-up he simply won't get into the box in time. This hasn't mattered yet, or at least not enough for people to suggest it's a problem. but it's half the reason Holloway demanding "crosses into the box" didn't work last season because by the time Howard had passed it to a winger, it took him 75.29 seconds on average to reach the edge of the 18 yard box.

Against lots of teams his physicality is vital, and the bloke's playing well so it'd be harsh to drop him, but I'm just wondering whether in some games maybe he should come off the bench as a game-changer rather than starting and us not playing the football we're capable of?

NP could simply do his homework on the oppistion and adapt how we play against them depending on their defending's weakness or strengths.

If we was playing Portsmouth for an example and judging by their hammering by Man City then its better if DJ start and we play on the floor stuff and exploit Campbell.s lack of mobility

But generally I believe on the floor stuff is better because modern day centre backs espically at our level are like a brick wall and are made to manhandle players and pressure them in the air but when it comes to speed they would struggle

[Munzie]

NP could simply do his homework on the oppistion and adapt how we play against them depending on their defending's weakness or strengths.

If we was playing Portsmouth for an example and judging by their hammering by Man City then its better if DJ start and we play on the floor stuff and exploit Campbell.s lack of mobility

But generally I believe on the floor stuff is better because modern day centre backs espically at our level are like a brick wall and are made to manhandle players and pressure them in the air but when it comes to speed they would struggle

Don't think there's much hope of playing Portsmouth just yet

You would hope to think that Pearson is doing his howework on every side that we play. As for adjusting the starting line-up to suit, I haven't really seen much evidence of this just yet. No doubt tactical switches occur in most games but we have yet to see DJ or any other player bought into the side in order to deal with or exploit a strength/weakness in our opponents.

Despite what many think, Steve Howard is currently fulfilling an effective role of winning long/high balls and creating chances for his striking partner. It may not be the prettiest style of football to watch but effective nonethelless (on most occasions). I, like so many others, doubted his ability last season, but so far so good.

DJ, Dickov and co offer another style of play. Increased tempo and, perhaps, easier on the eye and more exciting. I do believe that this is best utilised towards the later stages of a match when an injection of pace will beat tired defensive legs.

[Simi]

NP could simply do his homework on the oppistion and adapt how we play against them depending on their defending's weakness or strengths.

If we was playing Portsmouth for an example and judging by their hammering by Man City then its better if DJ start and we play on the floor stuff and exploit Campbell.s lack of mobility

But generally I believe on the floor stuff is better because modern day centre backs espically at our level are like a brick wall and are made to manhandle players and pressure them in the air but when it comes to speed they would struggle

Yeah, that's a valid point. However not always best practice.

Putting pace up against big shit house defenders who aren't as mobile will not always work. At times on Saturday, after Howard had flicked on to Fryatt, he was getting outmuscled by the other centre half. More often than not this resulted in play breaking down and us having to win the ball back and start again. Also, DJ seems to have problems using is pace for his own benefit as we've seen only to often his willingness to run offside which really holds no benefit for anyone in the team.

At the moment I think Howard's place is more than justified. He's chipped in with a couple of goals and his hold up play has drastically improved since last season.

I do agree though that having him on the pitch does intice a different type of play, but as has been mentioned, it's worked so far.

[The Blur]

Don't think there's much hope of playing Portsmouth just yet

You would hope to think that Pearson is doing his howework on every side that we play. As for adjusting the starting line-up to suit, I haven't really seen much evidence of this just yet. No doubt tactical switches occur in most games but we have yet to see DJ or any other player bought into the side in order to deal with or exploit a strength/weakness in our opponents.

Despite what many think, Steve Howard is currently fulfilling an effective role of winning long/high balls and creating chances for his striking partner. It may not be the prettiest style of football to watch but effective nonethelless (on most occasions). I, like so many others, doubted his ability last season, but so far so good.

DJ, Dickov and co offer another style of play. Increased tempo and, perhaps, easier on the eye and more exciting. I do believe that this is best utilised towards the later stages of a match when an injection of pace will beat tired defensive legs.

I only used them because I watched them on MOTD last night and they was best example that I could remember

There are always good old FA Cup for playing them though!

[Munzie]

Yeah, that's a valid point. However not always best practice.

Putting pace up against big shit house defenders who aren't as mobile will not always work. At times on Saturday, after Howard had flicked on to Fryatt, he was getting outmuscled by the other centre half. More often than not this resulted in play breaking down and us having to win the ball back and start again. Also, DJ seems to have problems using is pace for his own benefit as we've seen only to often his willingness to run offside which really holds no benefit for anyone in the team.

At the moment I think Howard's place is more than justified. He's chipped in with a couple of goals and his hold up play has drastically improved since last season.

I do agree though that having him on the pitch does intice a different type of play, but as has been mentioned, it's worked so far.

Absolutley! Lack of confidence, trying too hard, whatever it is, it's not helping the team. Ever since he arrived, I've been wanting him to do well (not sure what it is about him but he is likeable ). He needs to nick a goal as an impact player to help revive his game.

If fit, Dickov would have been a better alternative (as he has proved to be in Pearson's eyes in other matches) as he is more tenacious and aware of his surroundings in relation to staying onside.

Howard also serves to wear the defence down with the job they have to do in trying to shut him out. This also helps the injection of pace late on in the game become more effective. Running at brickwalls isn't a good idea!

[The Blur]

Yeah, that's a valid point. However not always best practice.

Putting pace up against big shit house defenders who aren't as mobile will not always work. At times on Saturday, after Howard had flicked on to Fryatt, he was getting outmuscled by the other centre half. More often than not this resulted in play breaking down and us having to win the ball back and start again. Also, DJ seems to have problems using is pace for his own benefit as we've seen only to often his willingness to run offside which really holds no benefit for anyone in the team.

At the moment I think Howard's place is more than justified. He's chipped in with a couple of goals and his hold up play has drastically improved since last season.

I do agree though that having him on the pitch does intice a different type of play, but as has been mentioned, it's worked so far.

Fair enough and I also want to let it known that my views are not entirely justifed because I haven't attend a single match this season!

[Munzie]

Fair enough and I also want to let it known that my views are not entirely justifed because I haven't attend a single match this season!

Still plenty of time (and empty seats) to catch a match

[The Blur]

Still plenty of time (and empty seats) to catch a match

I'm going tomorrow anyway!

Then my views would be justified and I would actually have a decent opinon for once!

[Simi]

Absolutley! Lack of confidence, trying too hard, whatever it is, it's not helping the team. Ever since he arrived, I've been wanting him to do well (not sure what it is about him but he is likeable ). He needs to nick a goal as an impact player to help revive his game.

If fit, Dickov would have been a better alternative (as he has proved to be in Pearson's eyes in other matches) as he is more tenacious and aware of his surroundings in relation to staying onside.

Howard also serves to wear the defence down with the job they have to do in trying to shut him out. This also helps the injection of pace late on in the game become more effective. Running at brickwalls isn't a good idea!

Yeah, I'm agreed on all accounts really.

I want it to work out for Campbell, as many did for Fryatt last season. But the fact is, he's not really done a lot to justify a start in a league match as of yet. Perhaps tomorrow he can take his chance and show people he deserves it. But as with Fryatt and Howard, he will have to show he is worthy.

I think Dickov is a better player to accompany Howard, especially away from home as he charges players down left right and centre, which neither Howard or Fryatt do. Dickov is fairly inteligent and is a better player to hold up Howard's flick ons. But when Fryatt is scoring, who cares?

It is nice though to have several options of how we can play depending on the situation of the game.

[Corky]

Howard is more suited to the home matches, where teams will be physical and not give us much space. Away from home teams back off and some play football, so Campbell would be more useful.

Whatever decision Pearson makes, I'll trust him. He hasn't got a lot wrong so far.

[clazkel]

I'd just rememebered I'd meant to post a topic on this on Saturday night but didn't bothered. Oops.

But yeah, for me the most interesting thing about Saturday was that, despite Howard having a good game, we looked better once he was off against a side playing some genuinely nice football. Once he was gone we started playing some nice stuff on the floor as well, and post importantly were able to commit more men forward.

I can't decide if this is a positive or a warning, though. We will always suffer with Howard in the team once we go forward because if he's playing link-up he simply won't get into the box in time. This hasn't mattered yet, or at least not enough for people to suggest it's a problem. but it's half the reason Holloway demanding "crosses into the box" didn't work last season because by the time Howard had passed it to a winger, it took him 75.29 seconds on average to reach the edge of the 18 yard box.

Against lots of teams his physicality is vital, and the bloke's playing well so it'd be harsh to drop him, but I'm just wondering whether in some games maybe he should come off the bench as a game-changer rather than starting and us not playing the football we're capable of?

I'm glad you have posted this, as i thought this all season. Howard is playing well and has improved no end since last season, but i feel we would be more of a threat to teams if we had Fryatt and DJ or Dickov or Chambers (when fit) up front. Sometimes we look static when Howard plays and we don't test defences enough. Howard does well knocking the ball on but to have 2 players creating runs up front, i think we could rip defences apart, especially if Dyer is pushing forward aswell. Our goals seem to be coming from playing the ball on the ground, not from set pieces and headers, so i think (as i have thought for afew games) that its time to try something different. I think Fryatt needs a player with pace up front with him, to bring the best out of him and link up with him. Howard is a great player to come on if we seem to be getting muscled out of a game, and his effort can't be knocked this season