dayday Posted 15 February 2015 Author Posted 15 February 2015 IT WAS NOT AN EXPERIMENT WE HAD EVIDENCE THAT IT COULD WORK ALREADY DID YOU NOT SEE THE FVCKING ARSENAL GAME? Nothing to do with Arsenal Mr Cap Lock,we were playing a side that he scored 11 goals all season,they are not Arsenal ,who attack at every opportunity we were playing a totally different side that cannot score for toffee. Yet we set up and gave them the confidence to do so,so I am sorry if you think 3 centre backs would work,when it plainly didn't. Just because it nearly worked for one side;Arsenal)doesn't mean it's the right tactics for another match,that's what makes a good tactician.
Ricey Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 It worked against Arsenal, but the Arsenal and Villa attacks are two oppopsite ends of the scale. 5 at the back will be useful at times, but not against one of the worst attacks in Premier League history! We didn't concede 2 goals because we went to 442, we did due to a good goal and a terrible bit of goalkeeping. The problem with 5 at the back today was that we let Villa control the game and there was no space to exploit on the counter, like there was against Arsenal. His tactics today were unforgiveble. He isn't learning. I've had it with him.
dayday Posted 15 February 2015 Author Posted 15 February 2015 It worked against Arsenal, but the Arsenal and Villa attacks are two oppopsite ends of the scale. 5 at the back will be useful at times, but not against one of the worst attacks in Premier League history! We didn't concede 2 goals because we went to 442, we did due to a good goal and a terrible bit of goalkeeping. The problem with 5 at the back today was that we let Villa control the game and there was no space to exploit on the counter, like there was against Arsenal. His tactics today were unforgiveble. He isn't learning. I've had it with him. Spot on!
Harry - LCFC Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 Nothing to do with Arsenal Mr Cap Lock,we were playing a side that he scored 11 goals all season,they are not Arsenal ,who attack at every opportunity we were playing a totally different side that cannot score for toffee. Yet we set up and gave them the confidence to do so,so I am sorry if you think 3 centre backs would work,when it plainly didn't. Just because it nearly worked for one side;Arsenal)doesn't mean it's the right tactics for another match,that's what makes a good tactician. I don't accept the idea that a system can perform so much poorer purely as a result of playing against a lesser team. There must be something else playing a part for that to happen.
NotTheMarketLeader Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 That isn't a response. I know, just a bit tired over going over the same ground. More attack minded approach required as when we beat Villa at home. We had a template there for beating them. The 1-0 didn't do our actual supremacy justice. Today Kramaric isolated - bad to start with, but no changes until too late. Clearly given chances he will score , but none created for him due to set up. Ulloa needs crosses - he will score of he gets them. No Albrighton for games on end would be the source for that. To name but a few Is that enough?
Finn Claw II Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 First half we were much the better side. We just are not clinical enough and we are prone to errors (not just Morgan).
cc_star Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 Damned if he does, dawned if he doesn't. Moat people wanted same formation as it did work well, away at a very good Arsenal side Where NP went wrong however (apart from Schwarzer) was not using the fullbacks in a more attacking fashion, Konchesky is Mr steady going back, but offers nothing of note going forward and Simpson is just a poor man's Konchesky This game was crying out for RDL & Schlupp to be used as RWB and LWB His next mistake was not subbing players and mixing it up once Villa got the better of us after the break, Mahrez and Cambiasso were embarrassing People are saying Sherwood won Villa the game with a halftime confidence boost, but it's obvious to even the NP fans among us that today... NP cost us the game If he persists with players as disastrous as Schwarzer, limited as Simpson and doesn't change things when it's obvious it's not working by playing big man, Ulloa and crosser Albrighton from the bench then there is no hope at all even for those of us holding out marginal hope NP has it somewhere in him to get the results we need
EGBFitness Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 He'd have been ripped apart on here for changing the side that did so brilliantly against Arsenal. Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't. Wish these knobs would shut up and educate themselves before they inflict these threads on us. Nothing wrong with the tactics against Arsenal. Playing 5 at the back against a strong Arsenal team away was a good decision. Playing 5 against a team who has scored 12 goals all season is poor. Keeping a lot tighter at the back is something we need to do so is good to see more cover there but I think if we were to play 5 at the back against Villa then I think we needed to be playing RDL & Schlupp as wing backs to provide more support attacking.
EGBFitness Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 Damned if he does, dawned if he doesn't. Moat people wanted same formation as it did work well, away at a very good Arsenal side Where NP went wrong however (apart from Schwarzer) was not using the fullbacks in a more attacking fashion, Konchesky is Mr steady going back, but offers nothing of note going forward and Simpson is just a poor man's Konchesky This game was crying out for RDL & Schlupp to be used as RWB and LWB His next mistake was not subbing players and mixing it up once Villa got the better of us after the break, Mahrez and Cambiasso were embarrassing People are saying Sherwood won Villa the game with a halftime confidence boost, but it's obvious to even the NP fans among us that today... NP cost us the game Great post, everything I have been posting too
l444ry Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 Don't think 5-4-1 was the problem today. It worked at Arsenal as many have said. But Pearson seemed to send the team out with virtually no intention to get forward in numbers. For the first 25 minutes every forward ball was lumped up "towards" Kramaric. Any system can be attacking or negative. Today our 5-4-1 was ultra negative.
Fox92 Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 He wouldn't have been criticised for changing the team. 5 at the back/1 up front against Arsenal, I understand, but Aston Villa? The lowest scoring team in the division? Don't get it, and certainly didn't like it. Kramaric has no just chance, he's basically chasing the ball for 80 minutes. Then we have the great idea to just lump the ball forward and Kramaric, a small forward, doesn't win a ball - what a shock!
NotTheMarketLeader Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 Damned if he does, dawned if he doesn't. Moat people wanted same formation as it did work well, away at a very good Arsenal side Where NP went wrong however (apart from Schwarzer) was not using the fullbacks in a more attacking fashion, Konchesky is Mr steady going back, but offers nothing of note going forward and Simpson is just a poor man's Konchesky This game was crying out for RDL & Schlupp to be used as RWB and LWB His next mistake was not subbing players and mixing it up once Villa got the better of us after the break, Mahrez and Cambiasso were embarrassing People are saying Sherwood won Villa the game with a halftime confidence boost, but it's obvious to even the NP fans among us that today... NP cost us the game If he persists with players as disastrous as Schwarzer, limited as Simpson and doesn't change things when it's obvious it's not working by playing big man, Ulloa and crosser Albrighton from the bench then there is no hope at all even for those of us holding out marginal hope NP has it somewhere in him to get the results we need Apart from the 1st sentance, spot on CC Saves me typing much the same from IPhone - Cheers
Guest Col city fan Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 Damned if he does, dawned if he doesn't. Moat people wanted same formation as it did work well, away at a very good Arsenal side Where NP went wrong however (apart from Schwarzer) was not using the fullbacks in a more attacking fashion, Konchesky is Mr steady going back, but offers nothing of note going forward and Simpson is just a poor man's Konchesky This game was crying out for RDL & Schlupp to be used as RWB and LWB His next mistake was not subbing players and mixing it up once Villa got the better of us after the break, Mahrez and Cambiasso were embarrassing People are saying Sherwood won Villa the game with a halftime confidence boost, but it's obvious to even the NP fans among us that today... NP cost us the game If he persists with players as disastrous as Schwarzer, limited as Simpson and doesn't change things when it's obvious it's not working by playing big man, Ulloa and crosser Albrighton from the bench then there is no hope at all even for those of us holding out marginal hope NP has it somewhere in him to get the results we need Where he went wrong today was by changing it at exactly the wrong time. When we went 4-4-2 we were carved open.
dayday Posted 15 February 2015 Author Posted 15 February 2015 Where he went wrong today was by changing it at exactly the wrong time. When we went 4-4-2 we were carved open. I disagree the moment that second half whistle went,we were on the back foot. When the sub was made,it would have been a more logical choice in bringing a midfielder on for one of the centre backs.
splinterdream Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 Where he went wrong today was by changing it at exactly the wrong time. When we went 4-4-2 we were carved open. They had chances a better side would have took before the change, the 5-4-1 system drained the confidence out of the side. You can tell the players don't like it and Cambiasso was the player making it work against Arsenal because the space was there to be had which today we didn't have. To play this system against a side low on confidence was ridiculous, Villa knew what we'd do, set the system up and beat us. He insists on playing Ulloa with Kramaric which is a mistake because its quite clear neither forwards can hold up the ball. Why did we score the goal if the system was wrong? I supported Pearson till now but I think our success till this season has been our ability to scout talent rather than managerial tactics
Legend_in_blue Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 Pearson is tactically inept at this level, just as he was at Championship level. His all out attack approach last season saw him through but there was little to no variation in the way we played. This season he's dismantled all of that with a continuous set of bizarre selection decisions that have left me baffled and confused. He hasn't got a clue what he's doing and it showed today in the performance. The players haven't got a clue either. It's such a shame because we looked the real deal last season but Pearson saw fit to tear us apart.
MIAMI_FOX Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 First half we were much the better side. We just are not clinical enough and we are prone to errors (not just Morgan). Much the better side????? You're joking right. Both sides were shocking. At least villa could retain the ball .... Our passing was disgusting. Villa were there for the taking and we go and play 3 slow center backs against a team who struggle to score
Fox92 Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 We weren't the much better side. Both halves we were poor. Villa had chances, especially first half, it was only a matter of time before they scored. I knew if we went 1-0 down we wouldn't equalise.
ScouseFox Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 We weren't the much better side. Both halves we were poor. Villa had chances, especially first half, it was only a matter of time before they scored. I knew if we went 1-0 down we wouldn't equalise. we were the better side in the first half (not that it was hard, both sides were poor). in the first half they only had one shot and zero shots on target according to the bbc. we were denied the lead by one of the saves of the season, and by a post. none of that excuses the fact that i'd put my neck on the line and say we didn't cross the half way line between 45 and 70 minutes.
NotTheMarketLeader Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 They had chances a better side would have took before the change, the 5-4-1 system drained the confidence out of the side. You can tell the players don't like it and Cambiasso was the player making it work against Arsenal because the space was there to be had which today we didn't have. To play this system against a side low on confidence was ridiculous, Villa knew what we'd do, set the system up and beat us. He insists on playing Ulloa with Kramaric which is a mistake because its quite clear neither forwards can hold up the ball. Why did we score the goal if the system was wrong? I supported Pearson till now but I think our success till this season has been our ability to scout talent rather than managerial tactics The last sentance may have hit the nail on the head here. Consider
Dan Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 I won't slag him off for his set-up today. Regardless of their lack of goals, they were always going to come at us today and I felt that in the 5-2-3 we actually didn't look like conceding. We didn't look like scoring either but I don't think a replay's the disaster some portray it as. No surprise as soon as we go to 4 at the back we concede within about two minutes. Morgan & Simpson aren't good enough for this level I'm afraid.
splinterdream Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 I won't slag him off for his set-up today. Regardless of their lack of goals, they were always going to come at us today and I felt that in the 5-2-3 we actually didn't look like conceding. We didn't look like scoring either but I don't think a replay's the disaster some portray it as. No surprise as soon as we go to 4 at the back we concede within about two minutes. Morgan & Simpson aren't good enough for this level I'm afraid. There are teams you need to go at and there are teams you need to play defensive play on the break type football. We have players itching at the bit to play both styles of play so why didn't we play them? For example RDL, we could have tried a 3-5-2 with Schlupp and RDL as wing backs. Managers need an element of surprise as part of their arsenal, everybody knew what Pearson was going to do. I won't slag him off for his set-up today. Regardless of their lack of goals, they were always going to come at us today and I felt that in the 5-2-3 we actually didn't look like conceding. We didn't look like scoring either but I don't think a replay's the disaster some portray it as. No surprise as soon as we go to 4 at the back we concede within about two minutes. Morgan & Simpson aren't good enough for this level I'm afraid. There are teams you need to go at and there are teams you need to play defensive play on the break type football. We have players itching at the bit to play both styles of play so why didn't we play them? For example RDL, we could have tried a 3-5-2 with Schlupp and RDL as wing backs. Managers need an element of surprise as part of their arsenal, everybody knew what Pearson was going to do.
Callabinho Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 I've given up now, you just can't defend him at times and today he insulted the club, fans and the owners....one ****ing sub? One? Mahrez was ****ing wank all game and he leaves him on? It appears that the shower of shit that is Wes cannot be dropped either, I was embarrassed to walk out of that ground today, Villa fans telling you that you're shit is possibly a new low. Ten years of painful viewing and a year of hard work is set to be pissed down the toilet because "I shall not be questioned, reasoned with or saked" can't be arsed to drop his favourites for the good of the team. I've never previously been a Pearson out person, but today felt like a giant **** you to the club, I couldn't even bring myself to cheer Krama's goal.
STUHILL Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 Worked at Arsenal but soon as I saw he was going with same system again I feared for the worse. We played like we were defending a 1-0 lead for most of the match. Everyone so deep and just Kramaric upfront and trying to latch on to hopeful hoof balls. Decision not to bring on fresh legs too was a very odd choice I just can't get my head around. I do like how he is constantly trying new things, new formations and players all in a bid to get us to win but unfortunately at this level, we can't stick to the same system each week in hope that we can match the performances. We need to adapt and adjust to each opposition we play and whereas playing 5 at the back for Arsenal was a logical choice, doing the same today unfortunately cost us the game I believe, as we invited a very poor, low scoring team, to keep coming at us. I mean they were bloody awful, how they scored two goals against us I will never know. Pearson out?! Is it too late now? Are we already half thinking about the Championship next year? I personally think, he still has the players backing and it is too late now to change and also, I can't see anyone I would want here, other than MON (who wont come). Shoot me down for saying it..... but keep him and give him 10-15 games in Championship to prove we can bounce back.... OR, we start winning again and stay up! Simple.
SeattleShane Posted 15 February 2015 Posted 15 February 2015 tactics were again not the problem, it's the personnel. huth in for morgan, probably de laet for simpson and this is a formation that will work. no formation would've worked with the amount of times we needlessly gave the ball away. Pearson is too stubborn to do what everyone else can see.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.