Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
The Last 15, was it really necessary to be sooo negative....
- Thread starter Gazz15
- Start date
AmexRuislip
Trainee Spy 🕵️♂️
Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
I was going to ask if he had a nice time abroad on the pittance of his pension you and I are paying for
Well he was no doubt paying some other old codgers pension himself when he was working. One day the youngsters will be paying yours too
GT49er
Well-known member
Couldn't agree more. The possible option would have been Izquierdo on for Gross (we had one unused substitution) for 10 or 15 minutes, to keep a couple of their defenders busy - in their own half rather than freely marauding round ours, and ramping up the pressure. Didn't happen - we won - so no problem.
GreersElbow
New member
Agreed about Gross
It was the way we always do it though wasn't it ? We won't change under Hughton although I totally understand your sentiments. We would have done the same at 2-0 and then it would have been tense. Sometimes the best form of defence is attack because there was a 4th there for a while for us. Mustn't grumble though.
SIMMO SAYS
Well-known member
Well he was no doubt paying some other old codgers pension himself when he was working. One day the youngsters will be paying yours too
I'm sixty one so shut the feck up about my paying tax.
My first weeks wages in 1974 was £10.00 a week.
Suggest you stick to Albion threads.
I thought Burke was very effective for them. Strong and direct.
Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
Mine was less than that and I was living in London and I'm older than you so no chance of me shutting the feck up. Pensions have been earned by us old codgers and I've paid in way more than I'll ever get back unless I live to be over 100
I won't be paying a penny of your pension though
BensGrandad
New member
I was going to ask if he had a nice time abroad on the pittance of his pension you and I are paying for
I was paying tax from 1961 so you have hardly paid anything towards my pension and just as an added point wife and I were earning £14 per week joint wages to run a pub in East London in 1968 and paying tax on that. So I should stick to your conex fittings if I was you although most of that has now changed I believe.
GT49er
Well-known member
Just a few years to go before the youngsters start paying for you, then. Like they're paying for your free prescriptions already.
WHA 2 - 0 HTFC,
what comes around goes around.
what comes around goes around.
supaseagull
Well-known member
Did you not watch us at all last season? We played no differently
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
mreprice
Active member
There are two problems and yes it has been going on since CH joined. Firstly the midfield bank of four drop back ten yards and are only about ten yards in front of the 18 yard box. Allowing possession there is always scary eg Villa in the 89th last season.
Secondly we make no attempt to stop the wide men getting possession. Burke looked so dangerous because we let him get the ball and get a run at Sutter every time. Earlier on the fullbacks are wider and actually pick up there men.
Basically we drop eight men back deep and narrow and let them have a lot of the ball on the edge of dangerous areas. One slip or piece of brilliance and a chance is created.
Secondly we make no attempt to stop the wide men getting possession. Burke looked so dangerous because we let him get the ball and get a run at Sutter every time. Earlier on the fullbacks are wider and actually pick up there men.
Basically we drop eight men back deep and narrow and let them have a lot of the ball on the edge of dangerous areas. One slip or piece of brilliance and a chance is created.
Bold Seagull
strong and stable with me, or...
It must be remembered, since CH joined, we've probably been ahead going into the last 15mins of games more times than in our history. It didn't happen as much before CH arrived, because we simply weren't ahead as much before he arrived! How many games have we won by 2 goals or more in the last 2 seasons? Hardly evidence of a side that sits back when ahead.
If you are ahead going into the last 15 mins of games, unless you are noticeably better than the opposition, or they've thrown in the towel, then they are going to go wider themselves, take more risks, and commit more people forward toward the end of games.
Wasn't like he took off attacking players on Saturday, or changed the formation, I doubt there were any instructions, the players just succumbed to a bit of pressure at the end as WBA took risks and pressed. One thing I would say about CH's management style is he gives the players a lot of responsibility to shape the game. Sure he prepares them tactically etc. and has his plans, but once they cross the line, the game is a fluid entity and he's not trying to control everything they are doing.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
I'm a bit surprised by this thread, given that we've been doing this since CH has been in charge. This is not so easy to remember for his first half season, because we weren't in front for much of it. We have been subsequently and, if it's been just a one goal margin which has has in the majority of cases, we will sit back for the last ten or 15 minutes to protect that lead. This involves a back four and, usually, a midfield five sitting back, very close to us, conceding possession and very little respite. It works more often than not, I'd estimate that about 90% of our leads are protected, and we win. This seems like a good return to me.
The guys behind me took a rare break from moaning to wet themselves about the team sitting 'too deep' towards the end. It was 'just like Man City all over again' apparently, as we had to hear them bleating about non-stop. Except of course West Brom still needed 3 goals - and by no stretch of the imagination have Man City's attacking talent. As City took 3/4 of the match to break us down before they got 1 goal, all a bit of a fuss over nothing.
It'd be great if we could be on the attack for 90 minutes but it's just not realistic - and not really advisable either if you're 2 goals to the good with the clock running down....
It'd be great if we could be on the attack for 90 minutes but it's just not realistic - and not really advisable either if you're 2 goals to the good with the clock running down....
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
If the other team are have clearly switched to "plan B" which involves:
Putting their centre back up front.
Hitting it long to them
Looking for the knock down
then I would also make my team sit back. West Brom were bypassing the midfield. It is COMPLETELY pointless losing numbers in the middle of the pitch in that scenario.
If Murray had seen the 3 players bombing down the right of the pitch and played one of them in, we would have almost certainly scored a 4th and this thread wouldn't exist.
West Brom have arguably 2 or the best headers' of the ball in the league. When they decide to put them up front then crowding the box is the best way to stop this.
Putting their centre back up front.
Hitting it long to them
Looking for the knock down
then I would also make my team sit back. West Brom were bypassing the midfield. It is COMPLETELY pointless losing numbers in the middle of the pitch in that scenario.
If Murray had seen the 3 players bombing down the right of the pitch and played one of them in, we would have almost certainly scored a 4th and this thread wouldn't exist.
West Brom have arguably 2 or the best headers' of the ball in the league. When they decide to put them up front then crowding the box is the best way to stop this.