HastingsSeagull
Well-known member
Vardy so early was the reason we retreated back. Shame we hadn't got a 2nd while on top.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Albion] What was the half time team talk?
- Thread starter Mellotron
- Start date
It’s not harsh. History has a habit of repeating itself and we are operating week in and week out without a plan B. Every week it’s either squeaky bum time , trying to protect a one goal lead, or a war of attrition, trying to steal a point. Watching the Albion is like being under anaesthetic. We offer virtually zero goal threat. Chess isn’t a spectator sport, and neither is the fare on offer every week. Exactly what do we have to offer this league, apart from unmitigated boredom?
He needs a mirror
Why is it we repeat fail repeat fail. Hughton has a stock routine for every interview. Similar to his stock routine for tactics.
Perkino
Well-known member
- Dec 11, 2009
- 5,986
Leicester hardly threatened in the 2nd half, they had more of the ball but we didn't allow them many spaces to use it. I don't remember Ryan needing to make a save or feeling nervous that they were in a dangerous position prior to the penalty.
I'm most disappointed we didn't push on during the 1st half and try and kill the game by half time so we could then rest a few players and give others a run out
Whatever he said it didn't work. When was the last time we saw off a team playing creative, attacking football?
Sadly Hughton never, ever seems to learn from his mistakes. I wish I knew why.
Kneon Light
Well-known member
Agree and having watched MOTD Gross' goal was onside and should have put us 2-0 up
Napier's Knee
New member
"We've got our equalizer in early today - well done Glenn. Now don't let Leicester get a second"
Brighton Mod
Its All Too Beautiful
Well, he's hardly going to slag himself off, is he?
This is a good thread. There is clearly a disconnect between what Hughton SAYS he wanted (in the post match interviews) , and what was delivered. If individual players are not responding to his messages, at either HT or during the second half arm wavings, then CH should sub them early and bring on someone who gets it.
Ⓩ-Ⓐ-Ⓜ-Ⓞ-Ⓡ-Ⓐ
Hove / Παρος
I'd like to think that our manager has more tactical nous than simply shouting "Get Forward" or "Away"
Bladders
Twats everywhere
I think you could clearly see the players got a right bollocking at half time for being far too attacking and playing expansive football.
It was probably reiterated to the players that only Glenn is allowed in the oppositions half, and if he does make it to the box then maybe one of the wingers and Pascal can join him.
It was probably reiterated to the players that only Glenn is allowed in the oppositions half, and if he does make it to the box then maybe one of the wingers and Pascal can join him.
portlock seagull
Why? Why us?
- Jul 28, 2003
- 17,071
“Lads, MOTD editor just called asking if we can concede one so he can keep us in our usual slot at the end and knock off early for their Xmas party”
Cadiz Seagull
Grey bearded old man
It wasn't the second half that I thought was the problem, it was the second half of the first half.
We were one nil up, they were a player down, we were playing well and they were all over the place. They were there for the taking.
Im a big CH fan and I completely understand (even if I don't agree with him) why he doesn't leave someone up when we defend a corner but yesterday was a perfect opportunity to do that. Instead of all 10 outfield players going back to defend we should have left Iziquerdo in the centre circle. This would have meant they would need to have someone marking which would still have meant we would outnumber them in our defence 9 - 8 and it would have given us an outlet. A big header from D or D or a clearance from someone else and Izzy would have had a one on one. OK he might still cock it up but at least he's going to beat whover was marking him for speed.
If CH's priorty is defend, and I don't have a problem with that, it's been working - we HAVE to improve our breakaways. And even if he's not back defending Glen Murray is not the answer to this. He doesn't have the pace so all he can really do is either flick it on or look for a foul, or hold it up.
If he flicks it on there is noone there to flick on to.
If he looks for a foul and gets it their defence has time to get back and regroup.
If he holds it up the likes of Izquierdo, Knocky, Gross and March are all deep defending and have to make up 30 - 40 yards before they can attack.
Breakaways need by definition to be quick. This was one of the things Leicester did well in the season they won the league.
If yesterday had been an away game I think it would probably have been a good enough perfomance, we got a point and nearly got all three. But if we are going to do this at home, especially as we are not exactly prolific at scoring anyway, we run the risk of too many draws and not enough wins.
And too many draws and not enough wins at home means only one thing.
Relegation.
We are good enough to be dangerous on breakaways but we aren't set up that way and when we do get a chance we don't take advantage. I just wonder if CH doesn't have enough confidence in his players to go for it now and again when we get the opportunity? It's not as if a two or three defeats might cost him his job; he has the safest job in football!
We were one nil up, they were a player down, we were playing well and they were all over the place. They were there for the taking.
Im a big CH fan and I completely understand (even if I don't agree with him) why he doesn't leave someone up when we defend a corner but yesterday was a perfect opportunity to do that. Instead of all 10 outfield players going back to defend we should have left Iziquerdo in the centre circle. This would have meant they would need to have someone marking which would still have meant we would outnumber them in our defence 9 - 8 and it would have given us an outlet. A big header from D or D or a clearance from someone else and Izzy would have had a one on one. OK he might still cock it up but at least he's going to beat whover was marking him for speed.
If CH's priorty is defend, and I don't have a problem with that, it's been working - we HAVE to improve our breakaways. And even if he's not back defending Glen Murray is not the answer to this. He doesn't have the pace so all he can really do is either flick it on or look for a foul, or hold it up.
If he flicks it on there is noone there to flick on to.
If he looks for a foul and gets it their defence has time to get back and regroup.
If he holds it up the likes of Izquierdo, Knocky, Gross and March are all deep defending and have to make up 30 - 40 yards before they can attack.
Breakaways need by definition to be quick. This was one of the things Leicester did well in the season they won the league.
If yesterday had been an away game I think it would probably have been a good enough perfomance, we got a point and nearly got all three. But if we are going to do this at home, especially as we are not exactly prolific at scoring anyway, we run the risk of too many draws and not enough wins.
And too many draws and not enough wins at home means only one thing.
Relegation.
We are good enough to be dangerous on breakaways but we aren't set up that way and when we do get a chance we don't take advantage. I just wonder if CH doesn't have enough confidence in his players to go for it now and again when we get the opportunity? It's not as if a two or three defeats might cost him his job; he has the safest job in football!
- Jun 27, 2012
- 13,881
I've no idea. I'm responding to some comments on here that in public he was complacent about how disappointing yesterday was or that he had said "nothing" in his post match interviews..
He didn't and he wasn't.