[Albion] Potter's subs today

[Badger Boy]

I think we really need to address the mentality of the team in the first half. Playing like we're 3-0 up at 1-0 is a mistake we have repeated again, and again, and again. There's no urgency to try and get a second goal, no desire to kill off a game and it's been like that for the last two seasons already so it's clearly something coming across from Potter. All posession, no penetration.

Two points casually thrown away because there's absolutely no killer intent in this team at all.

 

[portslade seagull]

Having had more time to reflect on Saturday, everytime we looked to go forward it always seemed to be 5 or 6 against 1 in the box with no one making the runs to support hence the ball going backwards and giving Newcastle ample time to to saunter into position. We are missing Welbeck who at least gives us presence

 

[Bold Seagull]

Having had more time to reflect on Saturday, everytime we looked to go forward it always seemed to be 5 or 6 against 1 in the box with no one making the runs to support hence the ball going backwards and giving Newcastle ample time to to saunter into position. We are missing Welbeck who at least gives us presence

I haven't seen a team as negative as Newcastle for a long time. When you say 'saunter into position' they barely ventured out of position in the first place, they didn't really commit to closing down until we were well inside their half.

2nd half I thought we intentionally looked to draw them out, however where that failed is that despite being 1 nil down, Newcastle still weren't prepared to be drawn out. So we ended up with 10 passes across our backline and to and forth into midfield, they just comfortably held their shape. Frustrating as it was, we still should have scored a second, with the best chance falling to Lallana who I would bank on hitting the target from inside the box unchallenged.

Against any PL team, everyone has quality enough to score a goal with a chance. If Chelsea can be held to a draw at Stamford Bridge to Burnley, we shouldn't beat ourselves up too much that we were held to an equally frustrating draw to Newcastle, I know stats are often meaningless, but the two games are comparable in that respect.

I remember we did the same under Hughton, especially at the end of his reign away to Wolves and Arsenal. The park the bus, low block, whatever you want to call it, dull as dishwater but can earn you a big point when you need it, and arguably it was more important for Newcastle not to lose rather than have to win.

 

[B-right-on]

Webster for Lamptey was understandable and Webster was ok when he came on.

I thought that was totally bizarre taking Lamptey off, one of the players who seemed occasionally to try and run at their defence and leave on Veltman who was having a nightmare. I lost count of how many wayward passes he made, bringing any forward motion and attack, to nothing.

Veltman for Webbo would have made more sense to me.

 

[Right Back]

Lamptey off was totally understandable as he has been injured for 9 months. Was never going to play 90 minutes.

 

[Jim D]

It looked to me that Newcastle had identified the two players they wanted to take out of the game - Mwepu and Lamptey.. Sure enough, both took big hits in the first half. While Lamptey was able to carry on without too much of a problem, it was clear that Mwepu wasn't able to play to his usual level.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I thought that was totally bizarre taking Lamptey off, one of the players who seemed occasionally to try and run at their defence and leave on Veltman who was having a nightmare. I lost count of how many wayward passes he made, bringing any forward motion and attack, to nothing.

Veltman for Webbo would have made more sense to me.

Bizarre is a bit strong isn't it? He hasn't played 90mins in the PL since December 2020, that is Lamptey's first start this season, and after 75mins and a couple of whacks he took as well, think it was sensible caution on the club's part in nursing him back to full match fitness. Previously he played 24 mins against Liverpool, 33 v City, 31 v Norwich and a half v Swansea in the cup.

Strikes me that it's a sensible approach to a super quick young player who may well be susceptible to injuries.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Lamptey off was totally understandable as he has been injured for 9 months. Was never going to play 90 minutes.

Didn't see your post, but I thought it was fairly clear why he went off.

 

[Farehamseagull]

I thought that was totally bizarre taking Lamptey off, one of the players who seemed occasionally to try and run at their defence and leave on Veltman who was having a nightmare. I lost count of how many wayward passes he made, bringing any forward motion and attack, to nothing.

Veltman for Webbo would have made more sense to me.

Lamptey coming off was the change that made most sense to me. This was his first PL start since coming back don't forget and he was visibly tiring, he wasn't making the runs he was in the first half and you could see he didn't have the same energy. We just cannot take a risk with him at the moment, for his long term career and how crucial he is to us. Taking proper care of him is more important in the long run than that individual result.

Veltman didn't have his best game but he did also play the best pass/cross of the match that we should have scored from.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Forget the subs for a moment - why did Maupay not start on Saturday?

With Lamptey and MC providing the width, March was 'lost'

I know Trossard played well - but IMO he should have started behind Maupay - not playing your best striker (or any real striker) at home to the bottom of the league doesn't sit right with me.

 

[Fran Sandaza 8 my hamster]

Potter knew in advance that Lamptey would be coming off. So the bizarre change with Webster coming on was not to have kept March on to play right wing back.
Veltman and Burn are great pros and good back up but not technically good enough for are passing game.

Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[Icy Gull]

Potter knew in advance that Lamptey would be coming off. So the bizarre change with Webster coming on was not to have kept March on to play right wing back.
Veltman and Burn are great pros and good back up but not technically good enough for are passing game.

Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk

A Dutch International and ex Ajax player not technically good enough for Brighton? I never thought I’d see a comment like that

 

[Badger Boy]

Veltman and Burn are great pros and good back up but not technically good enough for are passing game.

And you're presumably a great native English speaker, but you're not good enough at it to know the difference between "are" and "our".

 

[Farehamseagull]

Potter knew in advance that Lamptey would be coming off. So the bizarre change with Webster coming on was not to have kept March on to play right wing back.
Veltman and Burn are great pros and good back up but not technically good enough for are passing game.

Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk

Is that the only match you’ve seen Veltman play since he got here?!

Not technically good enough?!

 

[Fran Sandaza 8 my hamster]

I've seen every one of our games and he is a good defender but has a mistake in him like the ridiculous penalty against Everton.
As centre back ok but 4th choice!! As wing back no as poor on the ball relative to all our other options.
Absolute bargain buy though for player of his pedigree

Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk

 

[GT49er]

Forget the subs for a moment - why did Maupay not start on Saturday?

With Lamptey and MC providing the width, March was 'lost'

I know Trossard played well - but IMO he should have started behind Maupay - not playing your best striker (or any real striker) at home to the bottom of the league doesn't sit right with me.

Maybe Potter is working towards a system where we play with a fluid attacking front three, rather than the (beginning to become old fashioned) idea of a big lump (sometimes, TBF, quite a skillful big lump) called a striker.
Maybe we should all get used to discussing attacking options, rather than using soon to be archaic words like 'striker', soon to be consigned to history, along with wing halves and inside rights!

 

[Nobby Cybergoat]

It never really helps a manager look good when all the subs come on and play rubbish

 

[Badger Boy]

Maybe Potter is working towards a system where we play with a fluid attacking front three, rather than the (beginning to become old fashioned) idea of a big lump (sometimes, TBF, quite a skillful big lump) called a striker.
Maybe we should all get used to discussing attacking options, rather than using soon to be archaic words like 'striker', soon to be consigned to history, along with wing halves and inside rights!

Perhaps he could work towards a system which gets players into positions to get plenty of shots off. The first half was staggeringly impotent with very few shots and it was a surprisingly easy game for Darlow, generous penalty aside. We had the whole game, why didn't we get more shots off to get ourselves a killer second goal?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Perhaps he could work towards a system which gets players into positions to get plenty of shots off. The first half was staggeringly impotent with very few shots and it was a surprisingly easy game for Darlow, generous penalty aside. We had the whole game, why didn't we get more shots off to get ourselves a killer second goal?

If I could point you to post #24, it's not easy working shooting positions against a team happy to go flat back 5 with 4 close in front of them and 1 striker. It just isn't. As said Chelsea found it difficult against Burnley, top teams struggle if the other team doggedly defends as deep as Newcastle deep. And it wasn't like we didn't have at least 2 gilt edged thank you very much chances to get the second. Got to take them when they arrive in a game like that. I'm not blaming Lallana at all but his shot is the fine margins we talk about in the PL from setting up a comfortable 3 points to only claiming 1.

 

[Badger Boy]

If I could point you to post #24, it's not easy working shooting positions against a team happy to go flat back 5 with 4 close in front of them and 1 striker. It just isn't. As said Chelsea found it difficult against Burnley, top teams struggle if the other team doggedly defends as deep as Newcastle deep. And it wasn't like we didn't have at least 2 gilt edged thank you very much chances to get the second. Got to take them when they arrive in a game like that. I'm not blaming Lallana at all but his shot is the fine margins we talk about in the PL from setting up a comfortable 3 points to only claiming 1.

The team played with the usual urgency, pretending they're 3-0 up. This time against Newcastle, they weren't. There was no hunger or desire to score a second goal which is largely why we didn't get one. If a chance happens to present itself, they'll have a go. But we don't have a player who wants to get shots off and none who seem to really enjoy scoring goals. Lallana falls into that category.