Most people seemed to think that we played ‘better football’ (whatever that is) when Bayo wasn’t in the starting line up recently but as I recall he provided vital assists for goals by Kashket v.Northampton and Bloomfield v.Plymouth and did so again for Kashket last night. You can’t underestimate his importance to the team, the question is whether he might be more effective as a sub than as a starter. Either way, he dictates the approach to how we play and I’m happy with our current philosophy of mixing up both playing styles.
@eric_plant Whilst I take your point about what is good and what is bad football, I do firmly believe that there is such a thing as soul-destroying football. Which is what we 'played' more often than not at home the season before last. God most of that season was a tough watch.
In terms of what we've achieved since he arrived, how he has performed individually and the impact he has made both on fans and on his teammates, I think Akinfenwa is Wycombe's greatest ever signing
I agree with @eric_plant - I don't believe in a good or bad style of football.
What I do believe exists is effective football. If a team smashes it up the pitch at every opportunity, scoring and winning games regularly whist doing so then great. Same goes for teams who pass a team to death in order to score.
Watching teams try the same tactic repeatedly (sometimes for games at a time) and get absolutely nowhere is soul destroying and frustrating - again that can be hoofball/total football etc.
A great example of substance over style is Luton beating WW at Adams Park last September. The Hatters scored two very late goals to snatch the three points by sticking a CB up top and launching it forwards, followed by another speculative long cross into the box which lead to the winner (sorry to drag all this up again, especially this week).
After the game, Nathan Jones spoke a little condescendingly (if I remember it correctly) about 'knowing what you are going to get against WW' but for all the total football he employed during the game, they won the match by beating WW at their own game.
Last night FGR had 58% possession, 14 shots (7 on target) to WWs 10 (5 on target) but are out of the competition. Their two goals came from a rare long ball down the middle and the one time they stuck the ball in the box from a free-kick.
Perhaps Mark Cooper will be afforded a bit more time from the boo boys if results don't go his way by employing total football tactics?
I was told last night by an Opta analyst that the three teams with the highest possession stats in L2 last season all finished up in the bottom five. Perhaps this is an indication that rolling the ball out to oafish centre backs is not the way in the fourth tier?
Opposition fans bemoan direct football frequently, but I suspect it is because it can be very successful.
I find direct football more appealing nowadays, in general, as possession football has become a parody of itself in many cases. When you see a PL team take a short corner and end up gradually passing it back to the halfway line, or even the keeper, you know things are out of control. How awful and uncouth it would be to lose possession by taking a corner into the box!
One of the best things about Leicester winning the league is that they sacrificed possession for direct play when they had the ball.
I know this is all subjective, and I am fine with wonderful link up play as long as it goes somewhere, such as the great performances against Plymouth and Bradford. But I am fine with free kicks launched into the box from the halfway line, as this brings us moments like Bean's Carlisle goal, which sequence probably had Guardiola picking out a rotating coffin so he can comfortably turn in his grave when the time comes.
@Shev Neil Warnock is a passing reference on another thread, but he's also another example to back up your point - in that he managed to get Cardiff into the Premier League by 'sacrificing possession' in pursuit of perfect execution of the counter-attack.
Most people seemed to think that we played ‘better football’ (whatever that is) when Bayo wasn’t in the starting line up recently but as I recall he provided vital assists for goals by Kashket v.Northampton and Bloomfield v.Plymouth and did so again for Kashket last night.
I thought it was a huge mistake bringing him on against Plymouth when we'd played some of the best football I've ever seen Wycombe play for most of that second half, but when he came on there were still only a couple of hoof-it-to-Bayo moments and he contributed hugely to the exciting end to that match without our attacking momentum being lost.
It's when teams miss an opportunity to play it forward, pass it back and then hoof it that gets me. Especially when they are chasing a goal at the end of the match.
I'm happy to go along with all the previous comments about style of play. Two seasons ago, our style was not so different to the style we play when Bayo is in the team. The difference was we had Thompson and Hayes trying and failing to win the headers one needs to win from the long balls in order to establish meaningful attacks. For sure, when Bayo is right on his game, which I really don't think he is yet this season, it can be good to watch things evolve from a successful knock-down about as much as it is when one plays through the midfield or down the wings. Similarly, there are no style points for knocking back and forth across the back four unless it leads to the creation of space.
Last night, FGR played plenty of tippy tappy stuff in their own half that went nowhere in particular. Frankly, when that ends up with a fruitless long ball, I am delighted as a fan of the opposition and see it as a win for my team. But my original comment on this thread referred to the purposeful play, varied in nature (which is often the mark of attractive and effective football and which variation I thought we lacked for much of last night) that they employed to create space down the flanks leading to some good opportunities. There was one such passage in the first half, for example, that lead to a sliced shot from an attacker about eight yards out level with the near post. Had the shot been better, it would have been a wonderful goal and fair reward for the skilful and creative play that lead up to it. I thought both that they had one or two livewires in midfield that buzzed attractively and effectively and that they were playing a similar style to last season but quite a bit more effectively. I can see why they are currently mid-table rather than bringing up the rear and thought they gave a very good account of themselves last night.
@HCblue said:
I'm happy to go along with all the previous comments about style of play. Two seasons ago, our style was not so different to the style we play when Bayo is in the team. The difference was we had Thompson and Hayes trying and failing to win the headers one needs to win from the long balls in order to establish meaningful attacks. For sure, when Bayo is right on his game, which I really don't think he is yet this season, it can be good to watch things evolve from a successful knock-down about as much as it is when one plays through the midfield or down the wings. Similarly, there are no style points for knocking back and forth across the back four unless it leads to the creation of space.
Last night, FGR played plenty of tippy tappy stuff in their own half that went nowhere in particular. Frankly, when that ends up with a fruitless long ball, I am delighted as a fan of the opposition and see it as a win for my team. But my original comment on this thread referred to the purposeful play, varied in nature (which is often the mark of attractive and effective football and which variation I thought we lacked for much of last night) that they employed to create space down the flanks leading to some good opportunities. There was one such passage in the first half, for example, that lead to a sliced shot from an attacker about eight yards out level with the near post. Had the shot been better, it would have been a wonderful goal and fair reward for the skilful and creative play that lead up to it. I thought both that they had one or two livewires in midfield that buzzed attractively and effectively and that they were playing a similar style to last season but quite a bit more effectively. I can see why they are currently mid-table rather than bringing up the rear and thought they gave a very good account of themselves last night.
I also thought they gave a good account of themselves - certainly far better than their performances against us last year, and arguably will be feeling a bit unlucky not to have gone through. Their passing appeared reasonably purposeful and incisive, although their two goals came from completely the opposite
I suspect I’ve yammered on about this many times, but to me the best teams at lower league level are generally the ones that can mix tactics to suit.
So they can play direct when needed, but they can play ball-to-feet in the right areas.
I think that with the standard of players at this level, it’s very difficult to get away with just playing tippy tappy football - I think the best example I’ve ever seen was Swansea when they were in L1 and we were L2, a Tuesday night tinpot trophy game and they just passed us off the park. But that’s absolutely the exception rather than the rule.
Bucket collections seem to be the way forward. Huddersfield fans were shaking them at us before an away match there once, and now they are enjoying their second successive year as a Premier League club.
Comments
Most people seemed to think that we played ‘better football’ (whatever that is) when Bayo wasn’t in the starting line up recently but as I recall he provided vital assists for goals by Kashket v.Northampton and Bloomfield v.Plymouth and did so again for Kashket last night. You can’t underestimate his importance to the team, the question is whether he might be more effective as a sub than as a starter. Either way, he dictates the approach to how we play and I’m happy with our current philosophy of mixing up both playing styles.
@eric_plant Whilst I take your point about what is good and what is bad football, I do firmly believe that there is such a thing as soul-destroying football. Which is what we 'played' more often than not at home the season before last. God most of that season was a tough watch.
@bookertease maybe but we were mid-table for most of that season, which is when it becomes more important, like I said
In terms of what we've achieved since he arrived, how he has performed individually and the impact he has made both on fans and on his teammates, I think Akinfenwa is Wycombe's greatest ever signing
Good point. Yes if we’d been fighting relegation or striving for promotion it may have made it a little more interesting.
I agree with @eric_plant - I don't believe in a good or bad style of football.
What I do believe exists is effective football. If a team smashes it up the pitch at every opportunity, scoring and winning games regularly whist doing so then great. Same goes for teams who pass a team to death in order to score.
Watching teams try the same tactic repeatedly (sometimes for games at a time) and get absolutely nowhere is soul destroying and frustrating - again that can be hoofball/total football etc.
A great example of substance over style is Luton beating WW at Adams Park last September. The Hatters scored two very late goals to snatch the three points by sticking a CB up top and launching it forwards, followed by another speculative long cross into the box which lead to the winner (sorry to drag all this up again, especially this week).
After the game, Nathan Jones spoke a little condescendingly (if I remember it correctly) about 'knowing what you are going to get against WW' but for all the total football he employed during the game, they won the match by beating WW at their own game.
Last night FGR had 58% possession, 14 shots (7 on target) to WWs 10 (5 on target) but are out of the competition. Their two goals came from a rare long ball down the middle and the one time they stuck the ball in the box from a free-kick.
Perhaps Mark Cooper will be afforded a bit more time from the boo boys if results don't go his way by employing total football tactics?
I was told last night by an Opta analyst that the three teams with the highest possession stats in L2 last season all finished up in the bottom five. Perhaps this is an indication that rolling the ball out to oafish centre backs is not the way in the fourth tier?
Opposition fans bemoan direct football frequently, but I suspect it is because it can be very successful.
I find direct football more appealing nowadays, in general, as possession football has become a parody of itself in many cases. When you see a PL team take a short corner and end up gradually passing it back to the halfway line, or even the keeper, you know things are out of control. How awful and uncouth it would be to lose possession by taking a corner into the box!
One of the best things about Leicester winning the league is that they sacrificed possession for direct play when they had the ball.
I know this is all subjective, and I am fine with wonderful link up play as long as it goes somewhere, such as the great performances against Plymouth and Bradford. But I am fine with free kicks launched into the box from the halfway line, as this brings us moments like Bean's Carlisle goal, which sequence probably had Guardiola picking out a rotating coffin so he can comfortably turn in his grave when the time comes.
@Shev Neil Warnock is a passing reference on another thread, but he's also another example to back up your point - in that he managed to get Cardiff into the Premier League by 'sacrificing possession' in pursuit of perfect execution of the counter-attack.
I thought it was a huge mistake bringing him on against Plymouth when we'd played some of the best football I've ever seen Wycombe play for most of that second half, but when he came on there were still only a couple of hoof-it-to-Bayo moments and he contributed hugely to the exciting end to that match without our attacking momentum being lost.
Good job I'm not a football manager.
Just watched the highlights from last night and a Bayo also played a part in our second goal as well.
It's when teams miss an opportunity to play it forward, pass it back and then hoof it that gets me. Especially when they are chasing a goal at the end of the match.
@bluntphil I think you'll find Luton Town won every game last season, playing the best football.
I'm happy to go along with all the previous comments about style of play. Two seasons ago, our style was not so different to the style we play when Bayo is in the team. The difference was we had Thompson and Hayes trying and failing to win the headers one needs to win from the long balls in order to establish meaningful attacks. For sure, when Bayo is right on his game, which I really don't think he is yet this season, it can be good to watch things evolve from a successful knock-down about as much as it is when one plays through the midfield or down the wings. Similarly, there are no style points for knocking back and forth across the back four unless it leads to the creation of space.
Last night, FGR played plenty of tippy tappy stuff in their own half that went nowhere in particular. Frankly, when that ends up with a fruitless long ball, I am delighted as a fan of the opposition and see it as a win for my team. But my original comment on this thread referred to the purposeful play, varied in nature (which is often the mark of attractive and effective football and which variation I thought we lacked for much of last night) that they employed to create space down the flanks leading to some good opportunities. There was one such passage in the first half, for example, that lead to a sliced shot from an attacker about eight yards out level with the near post. Had the shot been better, it would have been a wonderful goal and fair reward for the skilful and creative play that lead up to it. I thought both that they had one or two livewires in midfield that buzzed attractively and effectively and that they were playing a similar style to last season but quite a bit more effectively. I can see why they are currently mid-table rather than bringing up the rear and thought they gave a very good account of themselves last night.
I also thought they gave a good account of themselves - certainly far better than their performances against us last year, and arguably will be feeling a bit unlucky not to have gone through. Their passing appeared reasonably purposeful and incisive, although their two goals came from completely the opposite
I suspect I’ve yammered on about this many times, but to me the best teams at lower league level are generally the ones that can mix tactics to suit.
So they can play direct when needed, but they can play ball-to-feet in the right areas.
I think that with the standard of players at this level, it’s very difficult to get away with just playing tippy tappy football - I think the best example I’ve ever seen was Swansea when they were in L1 and we were L2, a Tuesday night tinpot trophy game and they just passed us off the park. But that’s absolutely the exception rather than the rule.
Just chatting with an old friend who happens to support Bournemouth. Their tea sheet last night was as follows:
Goal Keeper ........................Arturo Boruc, Polish, free
Left Back...............................Something Dico, Spanish, £11m
Right Back.............................Simon Francis, English £200,000
Centre Half............................. Tyrone Mings.English, £8m
Other Centre Back................Jack Simpson. English, free
Midfield 1................................Lewis Cook, English, £6m
Midfield 2................................Jefferson Lerma, Columbian, £27m
Midfield 3................................Ryan Fraser.... Scottish, £500,000
Midfield 4................................Jordan Ibe, English £15m
Forward1................................Jermaine Defoe, English, free but reported to be on £50k pw
Forward 2................................Lys Mousset, French, £3m
And not too long ago we we in the same division!
Then along cane a multimillionaire property developer.
And an exceptionally capable and personable young English manager.
And £111m Premier League prize money for last season helps somewhat!
I wonder if they ever consider paying back all those fans they begged for cash with their buckets out at numerous games!
Come on @malone that was football fans helping out a club in trouble. You cannot demand they remain struggling or you want your change back, can you?
Probably not.
It's just funny how things change isn't it!
Bucket collections seem to be the way forward. Huddersfield fans were shaking them at us before an away match there once, and now they are enjoying their second successive year as a Premier League club.
Perhaps that's where we are missing a trick...we should just shake buckets at away fans as they arrive.
Fan owned versus a genuine owner.
I’ll bring me bucket.
Do you feel sick then micra!
Definitely became an issue this at Swansea when the saviour directors started selling their shares