Same Old Problems?

[kingfox]

Before I start, I don't want Pearson sacked, I don't think we will get relegated and I do think the team is good enough.

Though it seems the same problems are occurring in our losses this season, going by comments today it seems people are starting to see the light when it comes to playing against physical sides. We have won 11 games this season, and in probably all of those games, Drinkwater and King have controlled the midfield, and when this happens we tend to play well and win. Against the more physical sides in the division, Drinkwater and King always tend to struggle, and when this happens we usually lose games. Even though the game against Wolves opened up in the second half, they were all over us in the first, and Henry and Doumbia dominated. Crystal Palace as we all know absolutely tore us apart in that area of the pitch, Jedinak and Dikgacoi outplayed Drinkwater and King(James), we struggled all game and ended up losing. Watford had more possession than us, we went down to 10 men, they controlled things and won. Same applies to today, it seemed we sounded absolutely shit, got our tactics all wrong, and Millwall overpowered us in midfield, were the better side and they won. Probably the only losses this season, where a team hasn't dominated us came against Blackburn and Leeds.

It's the same old problem, whenever we come up against a physical side we always struggle and end up losing. King and Drinkwater are like two scared little boys, who get pissed on and are scared to make a challenge. We can't let this happen to us, something needs to change and bringing back Danns or Wellens isn't the answer, forget about them, they aren't good enough, they aren't in Pearson's plans and will probably go in January. Matty James to me is not a pointless signing; however I have noticed that in all his home game appearances he has done pretty well, when it comes to playing away from home though, he has struggled and basically been pretty woeful.

In January we really need to address this physicality problem, get in a stronger midfielder for these certain types of games, because in my opinion it will help us. King and Drinkwater are not good enough against physical midfields, they need help or one needs to be dropped in place for a more physical unit. Whether that means this "defensive midfielder" I have raved about for most of the season so be it, today is really the final straw, and people are starting to realise the midfield isn't good enough against physical sides.

Also the strikers, Waghorn has been showing some good form recently which is positive, we all know Nugent is our main goalscorer but apart from those two on a strikers front, where do our goals come from? Vardy in my opinion needs time whether that takes most of the season so be it, he is clearly showing that he isn't good enough at this moment in time, but I believe he can come good, but I certainly wouldn't sell him, but using him more as a bench player is understandable. Today's game was ideal for Futacs, it's not rocket science to figure out that Vardy would struggle today against the presence of Danny Shittu, for all sensible reasons why didn't Pearson put Futacs up against him, at least he could cause more of a threat; however it also seems he may be going in January - what has he done wrong...NOTHING!

Finally our defence has been pretty stable this season, hence our awesome goal difference; however people are still moaning about Whitbread and Konchesky being a liability, would you get in players to replace them in January, or would you give Schlupp another chance at left-back instead of Konchesky.

To me these three problems need addressing, or automatic promotion will be clearly out the window.

[peterborofox]

Honestly think we'll be waiting a long time for Vardy to come good, he's just so clueless at this level, his first touch is woeful and every chance he does gets he needs too much time to think or take another touch. Hardly a youngster with potential either, don't think he'll ever be good enough.

Spot on about midfield and out of all of them Drinkwater was the worst today, was shocking and should have come off. King isn't so bad and does get stuck in but needs a stronger partner and DD isn't it. We miss physically big players in games like today.

Futacs is clearly a plan b. But when he comes on we end up playing even more clueless balls towards anyone not him which he's there for. Like to see him start with Nugent.

All in all NP has a lot of work on his hands to get us better than just top 6.

[Mark_w]

Starting Futacs would have only lead to us being sucked into playing the way Millwall wanted us to even earlier. The defence have been strong enough. I don't completely disagree with your assesment of the midfield, I would like to see a bit more of James though before I make my mind up.

[dannythefox]

Vardy is a great squad player and hes doing ok for his first season but he shouldn't be starting a game like today. Marko should of got the nod and Marshall ahead of dyer or knockeart. I think we have the players to win today but we set up the same away as we do at home. Why not play 4-5-1 or 5 at the back when away, Pearson had the chance to change it but never took it then they scored I dont want him sacked but he has alot to answer for today.

[cc_star]

Playing like Millwall or Leeds won't get us into the playoffs or above.

Playing fast football will, when we've been at our best this season it's been the fast pace of Schlupp & Dyer on the left or one touch football through Kingy, Knocky & De Laet. Matched by the hardwork of Nuge, Vardy & Waghorn

We're not going to play fast football with a clogger in midfield.

So the question is - how can we play fast football that sees us win more often than not & also sees us restrict opposition to fewest shits against in the whole division when we're up against 'spoiling' scrappy teams like Leeds & Millwall

How?

[kristianity77]

Its becoming a bit of a recurring theme again for me. Against sides that sit and let us play, we are pretty much always going to win games in this division. Against sides that get in our faces and bully us, we lose.

The annoying thing is, is that teams are getting wise to that now and are adopting tactics so almost all games now we are facing sides set out to play this way. And as of yet, we dont seem to have an answer to it.

We didnt play for the win today in anyway shape or form. Pearson says after match that its a missed opportunity but yet we never set out to win. No urgency, no battling and the goal from Millwall was inevitable after about the first 15 minutes when we were slightly on top.

Then it was a case of ride it out until Millwall scored the inevitable goal by which time Pearson might try and switch it around. My point is, if there was only going to be one winner from the way we were playing, why did Nigel not change things at 0-0 rather than when we are behind? Id rather go for it and lose than try hold on for 0-0. If we win one, lose one this way its a damn site better than playing how we are at the minute which results in either narrow defeats or occasional draws.

[Corky]

Before I start, I don't want Pearson sacked, I don't think we will get relegated and I do think the team is good enough.

That has reassured me, was concerned about the gap to the bottom three and them all being physical sides.

[Guest ttfn]

Not this again.

It's not physicality, it's a lack of composure.

Busquets is not exactly an enforcer and Barcelona seem to be doing ok. Manchester United are 6 points clear at the top of the Premier League without a big, strong midfielder.

I didn't particularly rate Wellens when he was in the side as I felt that he slowed the game down too much, but one thing he was was composed. For that reason alone I think he may have been of some use today.

[Corky]

Not this again.

It's not physicality, it's a lack of composure.

Busquets is not exactly an enforcer and Barcelona seem to be doing ok. Manchester United are 6 points clear at the top of the Premier League without a big, strong midfielder.

I didn't particularly rate Wellens when he was in the side as I felt that he slowed the game down too much, but one thing he was was composed. For that reason alone I think he may have been of some use today.

Exactly. If we kept the ball better, away from the opposition, then this "physical" argument and worries wouldn't really be such an issue that is raised every time we don't get the right result.

[theessexfox]

I don't think we were outbattled or outmuscled today, in fact I don't even believe we truly lost the midfield battle.

[Lineker's Left Foot]

Before I start, I don't want Pearson sacked, I don't think we will get relegated and I do think the team is good enough.

Though it seems the same problems are occurring in our losses this season, going by comments today it seems people are starting to see the light when it comes to playing against physical sides. We have won 11 games this season, and in probably all of those games, Drinkwater and King have controlled the midfield, and when this happens we tend to play well and win. Against the more physical sides in the division, Drinkwater and King always tend to struggle, and when this happens we usually lose games. Even though the game against Wolves opened up in the second half, they were all over us in the first, and Henry and Doumbia dominated. Crystal Palace as we all know absolutely tore us apart in that area of the pitch, Jedinak and Dikgacoi outplayed Drinkwater and King(James), we struggled all game and ended up losing. Watford had more possession than us, we went down to 10 men, they controlled things and won. Same applies to today, it seemed we sounded absolutely shit, got our tactics all wrong, and Millwall overpowered us in midfield, were the better side and they won. Probably the only losses this season, where a team hasn't dominated us came against Blackburn and Leeds.

It's the same old problem, whenever we come up against a physical side we always struggle and end up losing. King and Drinkwater are like two scared little boys, who get pissed on and are scared to make a challenge. We can't let this happen to us, something needs to change and bringing back Danns or Wellens isn't the answer, forget about them, they aren't good enough, they aren't in Pearson's plans and will probably go in January. Matty James to me is not a pointless signing; however I have noticed that in all his home game appearances he has done pretty well, when it comes to playing away from home though, he has struggled and basically been pretty woeful.

In January we really need to address this physicality problem, get in a stronger midfielder for these certain types of games, because in my opinion it will help us. King and Drinkwater are not good enough against physical midfields, they need help or one needs to be dropped in place for a more physical unit. Whether that means this "defensive midfielder" I have raved about for most of the season so be it, today is really the final straw, and people are starting to realise the midfield isn't good enough against physical sides.

Also the strikers, Waghorn has been showing some good form recently which is positive, we all know Nugent is our main goalscorer but apart from those two on a strikers front, where do our goals come from? Vardy in my opinion needs time whether that takes most of the season so be it, he is clearly showing that he isn't good enough at this moment in time, but I believe he can come good, but I certainly wouldn't sell him, but using him more as a bench player is understandable. Today's game was ideal for Futacs, it's not rocket science to figure out that Vardy would struggle today against the presence of Danny Shittu, for all sensible reasons why didn't Pearson put Futacs up against him, at least he could cause more of a threat; however it also seems he may be going in January - what has he done wrong...NOTHING!

Finally our defence has been pretty stable this season, hence our awesome goal difference; however people are still moaning about Whitbread and Konchesky being a liability, would you get in players to replace them in January, or would you give Schlupp another chance at left-back instead of Konchesky.

To me these three problems need addressing, or automatic promotion will be clearly out the window.

Sometimes don't always agree with your posts mate, but that is spot on. Wonder how Liam Trotter got on as he is always somebody I've rated

[theessexfox]

Liam Trotter was dreadful I thought.

[dmayne7]

I don't think we were outbattled or outmuscled today, in fact I don't even believe we truly lost the midfield battle.

We won most of the 50/50's today. We were so slow in possesion though and kept resorting to the long ball and Shittu won every single header. We've got the tools at our disposal, we just need to find a way of using them for 95% of matches

[Harry - LCFC]

I don't think we necessarily need another CM but I would've liked to see us play three in the middle today in order to counter Millwall's style. Also, I don't think you're entirely correct when you say we got ripped apart by Palace all game, when James came on and we had 3 in CM we looked a lot more stable thus proving we may not actually need to buy a tough guy to sort teams out. I actually think Danns would do a good job but he doesn't seem to be in Pearson's plans so that option is probably out the window.

[_Fatboyslow_]

And what was Dyer up to today ?

[theessexfox]

Dyer was up to not a lot, didn't do much with the ball when he got it, which was rarely.

[Guest ttfn]

Liam Trotter was dreadful I thought.

I certainly couldn't see what all the fuss was about.

[_Fatboyslow_]

Dyer was up to not a lot, didn't do much with the ball when he got it, which was rarely.

Thanks for that, sounds like the Dyer we love and hate and others get the blame

[dog_4]

andros townsend, kenwyne jones and wilson palacois are the players needed to kick start our season.

[daddylonglegs]

i stopped reading when you said 'it sounded like'

[Thracian]

We didnt play for the win today in anyway shape or form. Pearson says after match that its a missed opportunity but yet we never set out to win. No urgency, no battling and the goal from Millwall was inevitable after about the first 15 minutes when we were slightly on top.

Then it was a case of ride it out until Millwall scored the inevitable goal by which time Pearson might try and switch it around. My point is, if there was only going to be one winner from the way we were playing, why did Nigel not change things at 0-0 rather than when we are behind? Id rather go for it and lose than try hold on for 0-0. If we win one, lose one this way its a damn site better than playing how we are at the minute which results in either narrow defeats or occasional draws.

And that sums Pearson up. Whenever it's a tough away game he takes the "get something out of it,"

line which means he'd be happy with a point. It's not good enough and while I was delighted he'd seemed to have a change of philosophy at the start of the season, performances against the likes of Watford, Leeds and Millwall only show that he's reverted to type.

Bottom line is I don't think he's got the imagination, nerve or tactical acumen to make us top two material or, indeed, anything particularly special at all despite his early-season adventure.

I didn't travel to Millwall. But I'd bet we reverted to being ordinary from free-kicks and corners. With Waghorn being out we just wouldn't have had anyone else to deliver crosses with accuracy, pace and spin...a weakness that should never exist because it's a given that we should have a decent option given the importance of dead ball kicks.

I appreciate Millwall is an intimidating place and that chances are likely to be limited. But surely that's all the more reason to make sure your set-pieces are good enough to hurt.

It's only one thing - and an observation made over months rather than with today in mind specifically - but it serves to illustrate just one of several strengths we're missing.

And unless we start to include those missing strengths in our team as a matter of course we're almost bound to come up short. No goals - whether home or away - is a recipe for disaster and something of a condemnation of all the socalled work on the training ground.

We're not good enough just to sit back and soak up pressure. As has often been demonstrated.

[theessexfox]

And that sums Pearson up. Whenever it's a tough away game he takes the "get something out of it,"

line which means he'd be happy with a point. It's not good enough and while I was delighted he'd seemed to have a change of philosophy at the start of the season, performances against the likes of Watford, Leeds and Millwall only show that he's reverted to type.

Bottom line is I don't think he's got the imagination, nerve or tactical acumen to make us top two material or, indeed, anything particularly special at all despite his early-season adventure.

I didn't travel to Millwall. But I'd bet we reverted to being ordinary from free-kicks and corners. With Waghorn being out we just wouldn't have had anyone else to deliver crosses with accuracy, pace and spin...a weakness that should never exist because it's a given that we should have a decent option given the importance of dead ball kicks.

I appreciate Millwall is an intimidating place and that chances are likely to be limited. But surely that's all the more reason to make sure your set-pieces are good enough to hurt.

It's only one thing - and an observation made over months rather than with today in mind specifically - but it serves to illustrate just one of several strengths we're missing.

And unless we start to include those missing strengths in our team as a matter of course we're almost bound to come up short. No goals - whether home or away - is a recipe for disaster and something of a condemnation of all the socalled work on the training ground.

We're not good enough just to sit back and soak up pressure. As has often been demonstrated.

I'd like to bring that up. Today from set-pieces was not good enough. The delivery was consistently below the standard required at this level, and out of the dozens of balls pumped into the box from them, I cannot recall one header being won. We showed no signs of invention or adapation, and it was cringeworthy and dreadful to watch.

[Bettsj2]

Playing badly and being 'out muscled' are not the same thing. The physical battle issue to me is a non issue and just some weak excuse when we lose.

Palace were not an overly physical side, they passed it around us, Leeds are not physical, we were just particularly shit that night as we were today. Middlesborough and Sheff Wed very much rely on a physical approach and we beat both on their own patch.

We're a good team and if we play well, we'll win. If we dont we'll lose. Physicality isnt really an issue for me. We're 5th without playing with a midfield bruiser or big man up front and even if we did, we would still lose games so what would be the excuse then?

[Col city fan]

Playing badly and being 'out muscled' are not the same thing. The physical battle issue to me is a non issue and just some weak excuse when we lose.

Palace were not an overly physical side, they passed it around us, Leeds are not physical, we were just particularly shit that night as we were today. Middlesborough and Sheff Wed very much rely on a physical approach and we beat both on their own patch.

We're a good team and if we play well, we'll win. If we dont we'll lose. Physicality isnt really an issue for me. We're 5th without playing with a midfield bruiser or big man up front and even if we did, we would still lose games so what would be the excuse then?

If this is true, explain our home form vis a vis our away form?

Why so strong at home, so poor away, in terms of results?

If you are right and it's not due to physicality, Pearson's tactics away from home seem to be poor. Or can he not motivate the lads on the road?

You explain.....

[crisp packet]

i stopped reading when you said 'it sounded like'

This!!!