The Wall - stick or twist?

[TheBigIguana]

You dont know how football works.

Everything in your post is wrong.

Very insulting to call us & Carlo Burnley with money and Dyche.
But hey ho lets ditch a winning formula & get beat like today .

Well what's your take? It's easy to say I'm wrong.

 

[catcherintherye]

The Wilson one is the counter I mentioned. We put a lot of crosses in too. Was it coming for us? Is that lots of chances too?

I just feel like we aren't on the same page with what constitutes a chance. Because to me defensively we were similar to how we usually are for about 75 minutes.

We haven't played a team as poor as Newcastle, and conceded 2 goals (which were pretty easy goals to score) as well as
1- Free header from 6 yards off the bar
2- 1 open goal-1-1 chance off the post
3- One free strike at goal for Wilson, 12 yards out that went just wide.

Sorry it's just not been happening. And we have been playing against much better opponents than Newcastle. If we'd have done that against Leciester, Arsenal, Chelsea, Wolves etc it would have been a cricket score. Aubamyeang woud have scored 4 today.

As for us, I am struggling to think of a good chance we made in open play. Mina's header off a set play was our best chance I think.

 

[Connor]

Bring back the Wall

 

[TheBigIguana]

If you give a team corner after corner and lots of free kicks around the box, it shows you have no control of the game and will likely be punished.

I agree it isn't a good thing to do but I also don't really see it as the end of the world if you can score up their end. Set pieces on the whole tend to be low percentage things.

 

[catcherintherye]

If you give a team corner after corner and lots of free kicks around the box, it shows you have no control of the game and will likely be punished.

And a lot of that, was because they kept getting in down the channels as well.

I don't know how we can credibly defend that performance

 

[Dymak]

Only the worst form of absolute melt gives two hoots about nonsense shouts such as ‘Burnley with money’. Both Godfrey and Holgate are both known to play fullback, and they do it much better than the tarts on show today.

Nobody else, apart from maybe the morons at West Ham, are so bothered by what other fans may think of their style of play, that they bend over and choose to play a weakened defence just so they don’t get ‘accused’ of playing defensive football, but inevitably end up losing.

That Wan Bissaka is a defensive full back at Manchester United. Nobody gives a toss, they certainly wouldn’t be replacing him with crap defensive fullbacks like Digne and Coleman!

 

[Bedfordblue]

Must admit I voted for conventional full backs due to wanting more attacking threat, but after that today I think I’d happily take defensive counter attacking with this shower...

 

[catcherintherye]

I agree it isn't a good thing to do but I also don't really see it as the end of the world if you can score up their end. Set pieces on the whole tend to be low percentage things.

The key issue though, is that we looked less likely to score with the changes made. I mean we need to do better, but nothing was gained from that today, and thats being generous.

 

[catcherintherye]

Only the worst form of absolute melt gives two hoots about nonsense shouts such as ‘Burnley with money’. Both Godfrey and Holgate are both known to play fullback, and they do it much better than the tarts on show today.

Nobody else, apart from maybe the morons at West Ham, are so bothered by what other fans may think of their style of play, that they bend over and choose to a weakened defence just so they don’t get ‘accused’ of playing defensive football, but inevitably end up losing.

That Wan Bissaka is a defensive full back at Manchester United. Nobody gives a toss, they certainly wouldn’t be replacing him with crap defensive fullbacks like Digne and Coleman!

Nobody would even call us Burnley with money either.

The dogs of war thing was an insult, we we all loved because we achieved something. I reckon if we won the league and were labelled as that, we would probably sing it every for a laugh.

WHo cares what the aesthetics are when you're winning.

 

[blulouie]

Everyone has a different view. The idea though, that things only started going wrong after the 1st goal just doesn't compute with me and what I saw. And I say that as generally quite a positive poster who tends to avoid being overly critical of performances.

They had a lot of chances throughout the game. Our fullbacks coudn't handle Wilson in the channels, and Almiron/Manquillo also seemed to get a lot of joy on both sides.

Wilson & Almiron where a definate handful today .
I very much doubt they would have that sort of luxury agst Holgate & Godfrey.
The system was changed to obviously be more fluent going forward particularly to accomodate the likes of Iwobi ( who was rubbish again) all it did in reality was leave the back gate open for them.
Should have stuck with that back 4.

 

[TheBigIguana]

We haven't played a team as poor as Newcastle, and conceded 2 goals (which were pretty easy goals to score) as well as
1- Free header from 6 yards off the bar
2- 1 open goal-1-1 chance off the post
3- One free strike at goal for Wilson, 12 yards out that went just wide.

Sorry it's just not been happening. And we have been playing against much better opponents than Newcastle. If we'd have done that against Leciester, Arsenal, Chelsea, Wolves etc it would have been a cricket score. Aubamyeang woud have scored 4 today.

As for us, I am struggling to think of a good chance we made in open play. Mina's header off a set play was our best chance I think.

I keep asking for before we chased the game because yes obviously the last 10 minutes is not a good way to play. So what you're telling me is with our chosen setup to start they had two decentish chances and a really low percentage header that happened to go in. For me that isn't bad.

And I don't care who the striker is for them to score 4 they'd have had to have every decent shot go in and that rarely happens.

The first goal also was not easy to score, imo.

We didn't make any good chances in open play which for me says the correct response is to find ways to attack better and not to give up on attacking and just trying to bunker in and play for 0-0s and 1-0s. That's a Big Sam or Dyche reaction to the problem. It is inherently negative and unlikely to get us where we ultimately want to be at the end of this year or any other.

 

[The binman chronicles]

Dale knows the score

 

[blulouie]

Well what's your take? It's easy to say I'm wrong.

Youve read my take about not changing the back 4 .
But you think differently .

 

[TheBigIguana]

I think the big thing people are missing in this entire conversation is if we do start those four and they do keep a clean sheet we've still drawn 0-0 at home to Newcastle and that is still really bad!

 

[Dymak]

Nobody would even call us Burnley with money either.

The dogs of war thing was an insult, we we all loved because we achieved something. I reckon if we won the league and were labelled as that, we would probably sing it every for a laugh.

WHo cares what the aesthetics are when you're winning.

They’re all FIFA gimps that don’t even recognise the art of defending. In their view, attacking football is a more superior form of football, and it really isn’t!

Further, you don’t get any more points for ‘attacking’ football. All you do is end up losing... all the bloody time!

It makes me sick, the way we are afraid of what other fans will say to us.

And if they’re calling you ‘Burnley with money’, you can almost guarantee that it’s because they haven’t got their own way. We aren’t being called Burnley with money today are we? What are we being called today? Losers! Bottlers! That’s what we are being called today!