Ainsworth slow to react yesterday?
Frustrating day at the office yesterday, but by no means doom and gloom. We started the game brightly and were the better team for the first hour, despite shipping 3 goals. The reason for this was Oxford set-up in a 3-5-3 and came with a very clear and clever gameplan. Their extra man up top swamped our midfield and that formation enabled a quick counter and exploit the Wycombe high line.
Both goals were scored in similar fashion and were the result of this formation. After the second Ainsworth got wise to this and pushed Yennaris forward, bringing Saunders into the middle. But it was too little too late and whilst at 2-1 the game was still winnable (I backed a draw/wycombe win at half time), a combination of poor performances from too many players resulted in a sloppy 3rd and that killed the game off. Yes there were still chances but by this point Oxford reverted to a flat 4 (nearly 5) at the back and 2 enforcers sat in front, and were always going to be difficult to break down.
The Triple sub also took away some momentum but I don't blame him for this, it's one of those catch 22 situations that you need to do something to change things, but in honesty it was change for change sake yesterday and didn't work.
I thought Ainsworth could have reacted to Oxfords strategy faster, it's always difficult for a manager to change a formation early in a game, he would have spent the week working, studying Oxford, formulating his own gameplan and it's difficult to accept that you're wrong and change things. Reacting faster could have saved the second goal. I remember a game many years ago, Alex Ferguson subbed an in form Ronaldo mearly 9 minutes into a game after he realised the opposition were set-up completely to take the sting out of his star protege. It worked and United ran out easy winners. It's decisions like that which define great managers. Ainsworth will learn this. He's not afraid to make a decision, but reacting quicker yesterday could have changed the game.
Comments
No surprise they won if they played 12 men
Thought the subs were strange, taking off Fred, Sam etc but leaving Bean on the pitch....? The first two goals came from similar moves resulting from an overwhelmed midfield.
Reading Colin Garwood's comments, its interesting that we all see the game in a different way. He says we started the game brightly, and were the better team for the first hour, and the triple substitution took away the momentum. My view was that Oxford were the better team in the first half, and we could not argue about the half-time scoreline, and it was only AFTER we made the substitutions that we looked like getting anything from the game.
Blimey, Phil's on here! Ok, I would like to comment on the now drastic difference between our home and away performances. It's gone on too long now to be dismissed as though it's just a statistical anomaly. Is it something in the players' heads or a different approach GA has to home games? Away from home this season no-one, and I mean no-one has made us look mugs as has happened in some recent home games. Away we do the 'ugly' stuff well - we don't let the opposition have the ball, and when they do have it, we don't let them do anything with it. At home it seems our players are trying to play a more attractive game - which is commendable, in a way, but it clearly ain't working. So what's the answer? Make ourselves a little more difficult to play against at home? The main trouble with that approach is that GA would get stick for being too negative...
Buzz i'd rather negative sometimes than losing so often at home especially in the last 3 home games of the season.
I think the men we had on the pitch should have done far better and Gazza was giving them a chance to. The chants when he made the subs made no sense to me...I would have said the players on the pitch did not know what they were doing. Problem we have is that Oxford played better and scored two good goals early doors...but obviously that is all Marcus Bean's fault.
since the Beanmeister is back on thread, just to note that, watching the highlights, for the third Oxford goal their assist pass 'nut-megged' our star signing. Of course every thing isn't his fault but boy he has more than his fair share of f@#k ups.
Bean did not have a good game against Oxford, but he was getting dog's abuse from the crowd. Meanwhile Matt Bloomfield touched the ball about three times all game and was described by one fan as being our best player
Dean Morgan's gone, we've not had a scapegoat since then, so as sure as night follows day...
Who did have a good game against Oxford? Did I miss something?