CliveWalkerWingWizard
Well-known member
Ch made a call that most managers would have made, hemed was knackered so had to be subbed, 3 central midfielder s was logical. It was poor defending that led to the goal.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Tactical mistake today?
- Thread starter Aspinal's Body Double
- Start date
London Irish
Well-known member
I thought we looked more secure earlier in the season with the height of Bong but that didn't help us today. Greer would be more streetwise but then you'd lose Goldson's commendable speed. So you move to plug this weakness but then make us more vulnerable elsewhere. I do think there is a question mark over how dominant Stockdale is at claiming 50-50 balls.
We have a group of defending players with some weaknesses whereas Burnley, Boro and Hull have fewer chinks in their armour there, albeit we edge them in midfield class.
Seagull1989
Well-known member
- Oct 31, 2011
- 1,197
I think we were unlucky as all 3 changes were forced. Baldock and Bruno injured and Hemed was knackered . I wouldn't have put Sidwell on . As others have mentioned Kaz on the left and Murphy behind may have worked better.
If Hemed could have played a bit longer then I would have put Greer on for him to keep it tight but at that point it may have been too early and we would have invited pressure
If Hemed could have played a bit longer then I would have put Greer on for him to keep it tight but at that point it may have been too early and we would have invited pressure
D
Deleted member 2719
Guest
For a lot of people this was not hindsight it was obvious.
But offensive tactics would have made the game so much more comfortable for our defence which had to deal with far too many crosses into the box in the last 20 mins which I believe we are not great at.
I said it all season if Hughton get a reason to be defensive....he will, the question is did he have to try and defend that lead in our half of the pitch?
Caveman
Well-known member
- Jul 14, 2003
- 9,926
Definitely, the goal that crossed the line that wasn't allowed the impediment was shocking! Not sure how any of the officials did not pick up on this today.
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
I've just watched the recording & we wouldn't have lost the game if Dunk hadn't given away a silly free kick which led to the corner. It wasn't needed.
London Irish
Well-known member
It is - which is why Hughton and Albion's video review teams will probably spend days watching the tapes
Caveman
Well-known member
- Jul 14, 2003
- 9,926
Or we had scored if Murphy had crossed in front of Wilson, if Barton had been sent off!
We should have dealt with the free kick.
In general, I'm in favour of someone who can keep possession of the ball (possession football is the best form of defence). But in this case Burnley were playing for fouls (Wednesday did the same) and set pieces (their main form of attack 60% of the time). This is non-football (expected of relegation teams) and we needed a player with height to defend from free kicks or clear the ball out of the goal mouth.
Kick into the corner is a last few minutes tactic. Keep hold of the ball.
One thing against taking off a big striker (like Hemed) is they can help out aerially in defence. But also liable to give away a penalty.
I hope we get Rohan Ince back as if he plays to his talents, he can (might not?) fulfill the role. Not keeping possession but his height and ball winning help, even of his passing is telegraphed (intercepted).
I would have brought on Lualua (well I would have started him for Baldock) to run at Barton. Wilson lost the ball too often. Not hindsight.
Cheese Rolls
I asked a referee about this. He said if the player is fit enough to roll around he is not badly injured.
He played the ball. Who would have expected Barton to roll around like that
I asked a referee about this. He said if the player is fit enough to roll around he is not badly injured.
dejavuatbtn
Well-known member
I always reckon the best defensive method is to attack.
I am also of the opinion that had their "over the line" goal been allowed, we would have had a better opportinity to win the match as I think we would have had time and enough in us to get back at them.
I am also of the opinion that had their "over the line" goal been allowed, we would have had a better opportinity to win the match as I think we would have had time and enough in us to get back at them.
On Hughton, no. On Stockdale, yes, very much so.
Here's an observation.
87 minutes. Burnley corner. Free header for Keane - goal averted by the combined efforts of Murphy and Sidwell, stationed on BOTH posts.
92 minutes. Burnley corner. Free header for Keane - scored down low, 2 feet from the vacant near post.
87 minutes. Burnley corner. Free header for Keane - goal averted by the combined efforts of Murphy and Sidwell, stationed on BOTH posts.
92 minutes. Burnley corner. Free header for Keane - scored down low, 2 feet from the vacant near post.
origigull
Well-known member
- Jun 29, 2009
- 1,167
This is just it. We had no hold-up striker when Hemed went off. Zamora is out so no one else to call on. We tried to get GM from Bournemouth and maybe no one was available who would be any better. Every time Hemed is taken off and there is no Zamora to replace him we are under the cosh in the last 15 minutes.
Arkwright
Arkwright
So Burnley like most sides did there homework on Stockdale and put a man on him at corners. It really isn't rocket science, he does not come for crosses and puts pressure on the centre halves.
What cost us was we were not clinical enough in the end and poor defending from set peices not the subs we should have been home and dry before bruno went off not CH fault if he d put an attacking option on and we d conceded everyone would have been saying he should have sured it up.
He complained loudly at their very first corner. Unfortunately 'Burnley Pawson' is either bent, useless, or both.
drew
Drew
I think most managers in the country would have done what Hughton did. Problem was we kept giving the ball away. Should have played keep ball for as long as possible to see out the game.
Other factors, Murphy's failure to pass to Wilson which would have made it 3-1. Hemed missing in front of goal.
Inept officiating.
Other factors, Murphy's failure to pass to Wilson which would have made it 3-1. Hemed missing in front of goal.
Inept officiating.
Meade's Ball
Well-known member
The mistake seemed certainly to welcome a team, already reasonably confident in the knowledge that they can put crosses into dangerous areas, into attack, whilst we play them on the break. The more chances they heave into the box, with enough brutes looking to maraud and approach with a vacant glee, one or more will be met by an onrushing monster without guilt or regret. When knowing your enemy, you combat them knowingly, and sitting back for close to half an hour never seemed the right move. It made me a tad riled, that result, when it was very much ours for the taking.