Mark_w Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I admire your patience Mark I truly do. Can you tell me how he has learnt from his mistakes so far this season? For me he hasn't so I fail to see why he will learn anything over the remaining games. I'm all for playing 3 at the back, I think it can work with Upson, Was and Huth (I don't want to see Morgan again) but it must be with De Laet and Schlupp instead of Simson and Konch I'm not saying I expect him to instantly learn from his mistakes (though we have looked a lot stronger over the last two months or so if you ask me). I don't think he can instantly fix them because I think the vast majority of the important mistakes were made in the summer. So I want to see if he can takes us back up next year and then give him another Premier League campaign from the get go after a year of reflection and experience, to see if he can approach the campaign with a wiser strategy. As he did in the Championship in 2012/13-2013/14.
1993fox Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 tbh i backed pearson but i think his stubbornness will be his demise sooner than later nothing we can do about it, all good things unfortunately come to an end
Guest Col city fan Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I think Pearson got his tactics spot on yesterday UNTIL the barmy change he made (lots of people have swerved the fact that they were calling for that change..). Here's why: 1. Going away from home is never an easy fixture in the Premiership or in the FA cup. Villa had just as much reason to win that game as we did. Maybe more so. They were at home, in front of an expectant crowd and playing in front of a new boss. It was never going to be a walk in the park. 2. Despite lots of piss-taking (surprise surprise), we WERE the better side in the first half. The formation limited them to sod-all chances whilst we made two good ones. James' shot was a goal all the way until a world - class save from Shay Given. I remarked in the match thread..I was content at our first half performance because I could see what Pearson was trying to do. And it very very nearly worked. If we had come off that field a goal up at half time, the mood would have been different. We would have been seen as grinding out a result. I'm surprised people couldn't see that. Then again...nah, I'm not. 3. The second half...anyone who knows a bit about football knew that the Villa had been rubbish first half, they would get a volley at half time and would come out all guns blazing. And so it proved. HOWEVER..We still limited them to very few clear cut chances. It was highly likely that if we could see this out, they would lose spirit and from about 70 mins on, we could possibly hit on the counter. So....given that scenario, what did Nigel do? Sit it out, wait, continue to frustrate? No, Pearson did exactly what 95% of the forum vehemently wanted him to do..he went 4-4-2. I was shouting at the TV.."don't do it Nigel..have courage in your initial formation..and posting on here too as it happened". Within what? A couple of mins..The floodgates opened. The first went in, the Villans KNEW the game was opened up and went for it. Pearson had made this change, might I add, without replacing Cambiasso (who's legs by then had completely gone). Thus, James was pretty much isolated against an oncoming onslaught. It was tactical naivety at the most basic level, it cost us the game and, I believe, a very good shout of reaching Wembley this season. But again, this tactical change was demanded, mid game, by some of the very same people who are now slating Pearson for doing it. That's hypocrisy... make your decision and stick with it.
cc_star Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I think Pearson got his tactics spot on yesterday UNTIL the barmy change he made (lots of people have swerved the fact that they were calling for that change..). Here's why: 1. Going away from home is never an easy fixture in the Premiership or in the FA cup. Villa had just as much reason to win that game as we did. Maybe more so. They were at home, in front of an expectant crowd and playing in front of a new boss. It was never going to be a walk in the park. 2. Despite lots of piss-taking (surprise surprise), we WERE the better side in the first half. The formation limited them to sod-all chances whilst we made two good ones. James' shot was a goal all the way until a world - class save from Shay Given. I remarked in the match thread..I was content at our first half performance because I could see what Pearson was trying to do. And it very very nearly worked. If we had come off that field a goal up at half time, the mood would have been different. We would have been seen as grinding out a result. I'm surprised people couldn't see that. Then again...nah, I'm not. 3. The second half...anyone who knows a bit about football knew that the Villa had been rubbish first half, they would get a volley at half time and would come out all guns blazing. And so it proved. HOWEVER..We still limited them to very few clear cut chances. It was highly likely that if we could see this out, they would lose spirit and from about 70 mins on, we could possibly hit on the counter. So....given that scenario, what did Nigel do? Sit it out, wait, continue to frustrate? No, Pearson did exactly what 95% of the forum vehemently wanted him to do..he went 4-4-2. I was shouting at the TV.."don't do it Nigel..have courage in your initial formation..and posting on here too as it happened". Within what? A couple of mins..The floodgates opened. The first went in, the Villans KNEW the game was opened up and went for it. Pearson had made this change, might I add, without replacing Cambiasso (who's legs by then had completely gone). Thus, James was pretty much isolated against an oncoming onslaught. It was tactical naivety at the most basic level, it cost us the game and, I believe, a very good shout of reaching Wembley this season. But again, this tactical change was demanded, mid game, by some of the very same people who are now slating Pearson for doing it. That's hypocrisy... make your decision and stick with it. Regardless of what I may have said elsewhere, I agree. Although having made that change, but then choosing to leave 2 subs unused was the biggest crime of all
5waller5 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I think Pearson got his tactics spot on yesterday UNTIL the barmy change he made (lots of people have swerved the fact that they were calling for that change..). Here's why: 1. Going away from home is never an easy fixture in the Premiership or in the FA cup. Villa had just as much reason to win that game as we did. Maybe more so. They were at home, in front of an expectant crowd and playing in front of a new boss. It was never going to be a walk in the park. 2. Despite lots of piss-taking (surprise surprise), we WERE the better side in the first half. The formation limited them to sod-all chances whilst we made two good ones. James' shot was a goal all the way until a world - class save from Shay Given. I remarked in the match thread..I was content at our first half performance because I could see what Pearson was trying to do. And it very very nearly worked. If we had come off that field a goal up at half time, the mood would have been different. We would have been seen as grinding out a result. I'm surprised people couldn't see that. Then again...nah, I'm not. 3. The second half...anyone who knows a bit about football knew that the Villa had been rubbish first half, they would get a volley at half time and would come out all guns blazing. And so it proved. HOWEVER..We still limited them to very few clear cut chances. It was highly likely that if we could see this out, they would lose spirit and from about 70 mins on, we could possibly hit on the counter. So....given that scenario, what did Nigel do? Sit it out, wait, continue to frustrate? No, Pearson did exactly what 95% of the forum vehemently wanted him to do..he went 4-4-2. I was shouting at the TV.."don't do it Nigel..have courage in your initial formation..and posting on here too as it happened". Within what? A couple of mins..The floodgates opened. The first went in, the Villans KNEW the game was opened up and went for it. Pearson had made this change, might I add, without replacing Cambiasso (who's legs by then had completely gone). Thus, James was pretty much isolated against an oncoming onslaught. It was tactical naivety at the most basic level, it cost us the game and, I believe, a very good shout of reaching Wembley this season. But again, this tactical change was demanded, mid game, by some of the very same people who are now slating Pearson for doing it. That's hypocrisy... make your decision and stick with it. Why don't you just admit that at half time you stated that was a good half and that we played well???? You don't need to be embarrassed about it..... even though it was pretty clear to anyone that had ever watched a football match that we had been shocking. You keep trying to twist it though and make out we were great with a 541 against a side thats scored once in 8 hours of football. You're as deluded as NP himself. Which although different formation was exactly the same downfall at Newcastle earlier in the season Spot on ... I forgot about that ... It was exactly the same.
5waller5 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Martin Jol would be the perfect replacement for me. Available to start immediately, knows the game inside out, has a fantastic record with younger players, has a decent record bar fulham where injuries plagued him for 2 seasons, no excuse the club didn't suit him, but they've certainly fallen from grace without him that's for sure, and alot of players he had there have been picked up by other clubs. He's a confident manager who lets players play their game and loves a Number 10 playing a free role, 2 strikers would suit him also. The Majority of Spurs fans still love him, having players bought and sold under his nose, he's respected in the football world. I'm beginning to think all we need now is fresh ideas, Watching Tim sherwood's interviews and he spoke about his half time team talk, telling players to flood the box more, be creative, get out of this by throwing their own punches. something Pearson has NOT been able to instill in 20 odd games.. We need change and a fresh face, fresh ideas and fresh bloody tactics, Someone who can try to get the best out of these players. Agree entirely. And a decent shout for manager.
Mark_w Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Why don't you just admit that at half time you stated that was a good half and that we played well???? You don't need to be embarrassed about it..... even though it was pretty clear to anyone that had ever watched a football match that we had been shocking. You keep trying to twist it though and make out we were great with a 541 against a side thats scored once in 8 hours of football. You're as deluded as NP himself. It was a good first half, we did play well.
5waller5 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 It was a good first half, we did play well. Jeez. I'm as speechless today as i was yesterday when ColCity said it.
Guest Col city fan Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Why don't you just admit that at half time you stated that was a good half and that we played well???? You don't need to be embarrassed about it..... even though it was pretty clear to anyone that had ever watched a football match that we had been shocking. You keep trying to twist it though and make out we were great with a 541 against a side thats scored once in 8 hours of football. You're as deluded as NP himself. Spot on ... I forgot about that ... It was exactly the same. You really are being offensive Waller..starting yesterday, continuing today so this will be my final response to you. You know you called for the change after half time, you got it, we lost. You're hostility thereafter indicates your embarrassment. For evidence, if people need it, go back through the match thread. Get over it..Genuinely...We all get stuff wrong. It was a shame that Nigel thought to go more offensive, exactly as you did yesterday, and that we are now out the cup. Over and out.
Fox92 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 It was a good first half, we did play well. I don't think we did. Two poor teams. Then Villa wanted it more second half. Our performance was a joke, both halves. A good header from a corner and a shot from James in between us just lumping the ball to our small and lone striker who did his best to chase the ball but had no support.
The Horse's Mouth Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Why don't you just admit that at half time you stated that was a good half and that we played well???? You don't need to be embarrassed about it..... even though it was pretty clear to anyone that had ever watched a football match that we had been shocking. You keep trying to twist it though and make out we were great with a 541 against a side thats scored once in 8 hours of football. You're as deluded as NP himself. we played well in the first half, Mahrez was doing well on the wings and we were creating plenty of chances. We were unlucky to be going in at half time on level terms.
Mark_w Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I don't think we did. Two poor teams. Then Villa wanted it more second half. Our performance was a joke, both halves. A good header from a corner and a shot from James in between us just lumping the ball to our small and lone striker who did his best to chase the ball but had no support. They didn't look like scoring in the first half and we had a couple of great chances. I'm not saying it was pretty, I'm not saying we were dominant, but away from home against Premier League opposition looking to impress their new manager, yeah I think that was a good half.
Guest Col city fan Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 They didn't look like scoring in the first half and we had a couple of great chances. I'm not saying it was pretty, I'm not saying we were dominant, but away from home against Premier League opposition looking to impress their new manager, yeah I think that was a good half. So did I Mark. Because it was. Hence, at half time I was content.
Brooksy Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 We were good for about 10 minutes near the end of the first half, the rest of the game was laughable.
5waller5 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 we played well in the first half, Mahrez was doing well on the wings and we were creating plenty of chances. We were unlucky to be going in at half time on level terms. Our expectations are just very different ..... Playing one of the poorest sides I've seen for years I expect us to be winning not scraping a draw at half time, defending our bad luck that we are only 1-0 down. We've really stopped believing that LCFC can ever win .... That's from the manager. Stop listening to him. Football is a game to win not be second best week in week out.
Chelve84 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I think something is happening behind the scenes and will all come out in the open within the next 48 hrs but I ain't in the itk
5waller5 Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I think something is happening behind the scenes and will all come out in the open within the next 48 hrs but I ain't in the itk Why do you think that?
Webbo Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I think something is happening behind the scenes and will all come out in the open within the next 48 hrs but I ain't in the itk So you're just guessing?
The Horse's Mouth Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Our expectations are just very different ..... Playing one of the poorest sides I've seen for years I expect us to be winning not scraping a draw at half time, defending our bad luck that we are only 1-0 down. We've really stopped believing that LCFC can ever win .... That's from the manager. Stop listening to him. Football is a game to win not be second best week in week out. I was expecting a win until Lambert was sacked. You can say they're poor w/e but we're the ones at the bottom of the league. We had the game in our control (not so much second half, but I didn't think we were going to concede) while we had the 5 atb. I'm not blaming luck for the overall result because the tactical change was ultimately what cost us. In fact, I'd even argue that the change might have worked if it wasn't Ulloa
Webbo Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 I was expecting a win until Lambert was sacked. You can say they're poor w/e but we're the ones at the bottom of the league. We had the game in our control (not so much second half, but I didn't think we were going to concede) while we had the 5 atb. I'm not blaming luck for the overall result because the tactical change was ultimately what cost us. In fact, I'd even argue that the change might have worked if it wasn't Ulloa Ulloa was brought on to hold the ball up in their half and it did work a bit.
Bob Weasel Fox Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Don't some people take things literally My 'dark days' comment was relative to the success of last season. .hence the hero to zero comment and the unbelievable swing of opinion on Nigel after two bloody games. 'Dark days' in relation to what could have been, how everyone felt pre season and the adoration of the manager. Blimey...I wasn't comparing it to the days of Alan Maybury and dare I say the name..Lee Marshall! Get a grip peeps.... This, well said ColThere are some real keyboard freaks on this forum, take things way too literal
Alf Bentley Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 Ulloa was brought on to hold the ball up in their half and it did work a bit. Agree with that. Ulloa played quite a good 25-minute cameo, I thought. He has the odd bad game, but contributes well more often than not and is getting a lot of unfair stick recently. People blaming the substitution / reversion to 4-4-2 for the defeat are barking up the wrong tree. It was pure coincidence that we were punished for a poor clearance (and then a goalkeeping blunder) after that change was made. We could easily have been punished on any of the many occasions that we made unforced passing errors while we were still playing 5-4-1. If Pearson deserves any criticism for substitutions, it would be for not bringing Albrighton on for Mahrez, as Riyad was having a shocker (unusually for him). I hope we see more of Ulloa and Kramaric playing together soon - that could be a devastating partnership if it clicks, particularly as they both have the ability to drop deep or play as front man, so could easily swap around during the match, creating problems for the opposition. It does raises questions about the formation that would play behind them, admittedly.
st albans fox Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 STATEMENT: Ulloa and krama cannot play together. We cannot supply quality passes to ulloa unless we have three in midfield and that means no room for krama to play behind or with him. Play both and we only have two in midfield and then its just aimless lumping to ulloa which gets us nowhere. Vardy (poss nuge) could probably play with him as they could chase balls played long down the channels. Leo cannot do that. He doesn't have the pace. Alternatively - 3-5-2 with proper wing backs would enable 3 in the middle and then Leo and krama can play together. However, no room for riyad in that set up as he cannot be a wing back or a central midfielder. (Not the sort we need there anyway).
the messenger Posted 16 February 2015 Posted 16 February 2015 17 points from 25 games. People are deluded if they think we can get another 18 to 20 points from 13 games. This season will be a massive missed opportunity, with the increased revenues to establish us in the prem, the pearsonites seem to think it will be easy to get promotion, lets not kid ourselves the better players will leave mahrez, james, cambiasso and kramaric etc etc plus some players that have been given a proper run they should have the proper ump . It's been a farce from last summer with an inept transfer policy, inept tactical know how from pearson, not getting rid of him before christmas was another poor niave decision from the thais.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.