Fox92 Posted 2 September 2009 Posted 2 September 2009 For what reason?Hobbs has done nothing wrong to be dropped, especially for someone lacking match practice. Agreed, there is no need to change the back what so ever. Remember last season when Pearson brought Kisnorbo back and we started conceding more goals? ~ or it felt like it. The current back line; Weale, Nielson, Hobbs, Brown and Berner have played together 4 times and we have conceded 2 goals so whats the point in changing the defence? It may only disrupt things as these 5 players may have got to know each other now and understand and talk to each other, I think changing it and bringing whoever in, whether it be Tunchev or not may disrupt things in the defence.
Radovan's Caravan Posted 2 September 2009 Posted 2 September 2009 Was talking to my mate who's a newcastle fan and was there last night, he though it was pretty even and said that we'd got a good team on the go, and was impressed with Wayne BrownApparently it's half a mile from the highest seat up there to the centre spot. Random fact of the day If that were true St James' Park would have a capacity of 520,000 and you need high powered binoculars to see the ball. Simple geometry tells you the actual distance is somewhere around 1/4 of that figure. But simple geometry, I am reliably informed, disappeared from the English Maths curriculum around about 1066.
Fox You Forest Posted 3 September 2009 Posted 3 September 2009 If that were true St James' Park would have a capacity of 520,000 and you need high powered binoculars to see the ball. Simple geometry tells you the actual distance is somewhere around 1/4 of that figure. But simple geometry, I am reliably informed, disappeared from the English Maths curriculum around about 1066. Yeah, all I was thinking about scaling those stairs was the geometry.
Radovan's Caravan Posted 3 September 2009 Posted 3 September 2009 Yeah, all I was thinking about scaling those stairs was the geometry. The old Strahov stadium (behind the football in the foreground) in Praha was almost a kilometre corner to corner: And you'll need a sherpa and your own oxygen supply to get to the top tiers if this refurbishment is approved: More than FOUR times the capacity of St James' Park, largest stadium ever constructed and few outside the Czech Republic have ever heard of it. Modest lot those Czechs...
Alexikokopops Posted 3 September 2009 Posted 3 September 2009 The old Strahov stadium (behind the football in the foreground) in Praha was almost a kilometre corner to corner: And you'll need a sherpa and your own oxygen supply to get to the top tiers if this refurbishment is approved: More than FOUR times the capacity of St James' Park, largest stadium ever constructed and few outside the Czech Republic have ever heard of it. Modest lot those Czechs... She's a beast
Thracian Posted 3 September 2009 Posted 3 September 2009 Reading the Mercury reports and some of the comments on here I cannot believe how we continue to delude ourselves. At least Pearson sounded as if he genuinely set out to win the game but what worries me is that he didn't seem to know how and that he hadn't really got the players to do it anyway - at least he didn't pick them for one reason or another. City were crying out for a Tony Cottee on Monday. Or a DJ if he's the best we've got. Someone quick enough and impish enough to produce a final threat at the end of some impressive passing movements. As attackers we were so woeful in so many ways it was disheartening, partiularly when we were obliged to try and pull a goal back and our ideas basket seemed empty. We'll get nowhere playing journeymen full-backs. I cannot remember either full-back overlapping once which contributed to the ease with which Newcastle were able to contain us. Times we won free kicks in dangerous locations but it was just like the days of Rob Kelly...we didn't look like anyone had planned or practised anything. Schoolkids could have shown more accuracy and imagination. King and Gradel are off the radar, DJ's not wanted, Porter's been forgotten and we looked like a passing team with no end product nor the sort of imagination that might give us one. We've tried Howard/Fryatt many times in this Championship season and previously and it has never really been a pairing to savour. Individualy they have their points but together they don't have the pace to trouble good defenders. Maybe it wouldn't matter much if our wingers were asking endless questions and our midfielders were charging through to rain shots on goal. But they're not and they didn't on Monday. In fact our lack of width made life easy for Newcastle's backline. Gallagher was hardly noticed, N'Guessan looked too easily disheartened and seriously suspect in deciding whether to pass or take people on. Yes he started well but he faded. With Gradel he can fail, fail and fail again but nothing stops him trying and eventually, somehow, he so often makes something happen through his persistence alone. It seemed to me that Pearson was so keen to play his chosen men that he sacrificed the balance of the side and its potential to score goals. Our fans always like new players over old but playing them all meant so many areas fell out of sync on Monday. Our pedestrian defence was shown up, we lacked sufficient threat in the box or coming through, we lost self-belief in the second half as shown by us dropping deeper and inviting Newcastle to take the initiative when there was never any need to. But mostly we lacked pace and the ability to stretch the home defence. We also lacked cunning and players with cool enough heads to deliver either an imaginative free kick, an instant reaction, a clever run to the near post or a last second burst into the box. Instead we were always grasping at straws and treating their penalty box like sacred ground. Oh yes we passed the ball well enough in phases. And we ruffled Newcastle enough to make them grateful for their victory. But we lacked the collective conviction, specialisation and attention to detail needed to win. Yes, we showed ourselves a better team than when we were last in the Championship. But also that we're a long way from being a team who play the game on our terms. * PS - As for the trip itself what a day out. Sam Jacks was something else for atmosphere and the banter with the locals something it's a pity the likes of Millwall can't learn from. Had a trip out to the coast, a few jars overlooking the river and a cracking meal in the local casino where they were happy to let us park for as long as we wished. It was just a pity the M1 and A1 seemed to have more roadworks than Leicester City centre and so many speed restrictions it might have been as quick by horse and carriage.
clazkel Posted 3 September 2009 Posted 3 September 2009 I understand why people are annoyed with Fryatt not even hitting the target with the chance he had, and not bothering to pass the ball when there were 2 players in the box, but what needs to be remembered is that Fryatt created the chance. We dont have another striker who creates as many chances as Fryatt. I do understand the frustration though as i felt it aswell. He should've passed the ball. Hobbs didnt have his best game against Newcastle but to suggest dropping him for Tunchev is ridiculous. I think Hobbs has been our best player soo far this season. I thought we weren't balanced against Newcastle like we had been in previous games, whether that was due to Gallagher playing on the wing, i dont know. It was weird seeing the game from such a height as you can see the space, and i thought Berner was isolated quite alot which gave them alot of space down the right.
Thracian Posted 3 September 2009 Posted 3 September 2009 I thought we weren't balanced against Newcastle like we had been in previous games, whether that was due to Gallagher playing on the wing, i dont know. It was weird seeing the game from such a height as you can see the space, and i thought Berner was isolated quite alot which gave them alot of space down the right. I'd love to know why Pearson chose Gallagher instead of Dyer/Adams cos it didn't work in any way I could recognise.
shen Posted 3 September 2009 Posted 3 September 2009 We'll get nowhere playing journeymen full-backs. I cannot remember either full-back overlapping once which contributed to the ease with which Newcastle were able to contain us. No offence, but you need to check your memory then
Thracian Posted 3 September 2009 Posted 3 September 2009 No offence, but you need to check your memory then There were three of us in the stand and we all commentated on the lack of support from full-back. If you're going to get sufficient passing options and movement around the box - especially when playing what was effectively a 4-3-3 system - then its a must to have full-back who are fast enough and athletic enough to keep supporting and offering the wide player(s) passing options. Seems to me that Pearson was so concerned with Newcastle's inclination and ability to counter-attack in numbers that we didn't have that support. Neilson tried to support while stlll less than fit against Ipswich but was too often caught out and desperate to recover when Ipswich used the space behind him. I didn't see him leaving that space against Newcastle but it just meant N'Guessan and the team in general had insufficient options and penetration when approaching the box. For me fast, energetic full-backs are a vital component of good sides.
shen Posted 3 September 2009 Posted 3 September 2009 There were three of us in the stand and we all commentated on the lack of support from full-back. If you're going to get sufficient passing options and movement around the box - especially when playing what was effectively a 4-3-3 system - then its a must to have full-back who are fast enough and athletic enough to keep supporting and offering the wide player(s) passing options. Seems to me that Pearson was so concerned with Newcastle's inclination and ability to counter-attack in numbers that we didn't have that support. Neilson tried to support while stlll less than fit against Ipswich but was too often caught out and desperate to recover when Ipswich used the space behind him. I didn't see him leaving that space against Newcastle but it just meant N'Guessan and the team in general had insufficient options and penetration when approaching the box. For me fast, energetic full-backs are a vital component of good sides. Well I recall at least three overlapping runs by Neilson (2 in the first half, one in the second) and I remember Berner making a couple toward the end of the game, one leading to a freekick. N'Guessan failed to spot one of those runs when he ran inwards, ultimately losing possession because he didn't look over his shoulder. THAT said, I agree that there wasn't enough penetration over the flanks, and that our current fullbacks don't look like being more potent than they were on Monday with crosses rarely beating the first man.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.