I thought it’d put something on as a positive. Just two games from Wembley. We’re playing Brighton under 21’s at AP and will hopefully get a result there. So we could be here at the end of the season mid table and maybe a bit of silverware. I do appreciate that all is not great at the moment, but we have got better since Leyton Orient and with Richard and Gideon onboard we could have a decent run in.
If you gauge our expected league position on average attendance, how do you explain Luton getting promotion to the Premier League last season with average attendance well below 10,000?
I think you need to review Saturday. He did exactly what you've asked for. The difference is it didn't work because the players are not good enough OR are not experienced enough yet to close games out. The first three subs were all attacking changes.
He brought Philips on for Sadlier - not a defensive change. I would have left Taylor behind Vokes and put Philips on the left. Philips and Taylor didn't do so well after the switch. Both players are in their second season of men's football.
He brought Kone on for Vokes - not a defensive change. Stepping up from Tier 9 to Tier 3 is a big leap. He did ok but he didn't do what we needed. Vokes was running on empty, so a change was required.
He brought KVY on for McCleary - not a defensive change? KVY is best going forwards and his defensive skills are yet to be proven. McCleary was dead on his feet, the change was needed.
After all those changes we were still getting battered because Kone/Philips couldn't hold the ball up to release the pressure. KVY and Taylor are not Sadlier/McCleary both in terms of experience and attacking prowess. This is why we offered little going forwards. This is why the ball kept coming back. He made one mistake - he went to a back 5. I agree he needs to stop doing this.
Subs left - Kodua, Jacobson, Forino. Personally I would have brought JJ on at left back, as a calming influence and moved Leahy into midfield and stuck with a back four. He chose, mistakenly, to go to a back five. Potts and Wheeler were also dead on their feet but we had no replacements for them on the bench.
Is this really the best ever squad we've had or comparable to the last few seasons? There is no argument from me that JJ and Forino are class.
However, KVY, Kodua, Kone and Philips are yet to be consistently proven at this level for Wycombe or anyone else. KVY is the most experienced but has only made 49 apperances, in the previous 4 seasons, in league one (plus 112 between 2015-19 at Col U - 98 of them in league 2).
Kodua, Kone and Philips have made 36 appearances in total before Saturday - all by Philips. They could all become good players but they do not have the experience that we've had over the last few seasons from the bench. This squad is potentially as strong on paper but it is not yet as strong in reality - they need time to learn, grow and become consistent.
Take JJ off that bench and you have a total of 150 appearances between 5 outfield players in League One, plus another 98 in League Two. An average of one season per player at best.
Young players are not consistent, they are generally unable to perform at the required level week in week out until they've got 70-80 games under their belt. Mehmeti being the prime example. First 50-60 games very inconsistent, then bang games 60-100 for us absolutely Rolls Royce.
Is it any coincidence that the one game we've won in the last 15 was when we started with 8 very experienced players and only Low, Potts and Taylor as inexperienced. Potts is almost exempt, as we don't see the likes of him too often down at this level.
We are in transition, MB is trying to deal with the biggest elephant in the room - an aging squad - that cannot play a full 90. He's trying to replace them with young, keen players. We've had an horrendous season with injuries. Sooner people accept this is a transitional season where we will get more wrong than right then perhaps we can all move forward together.
Lincoln should have been 2-1 up. We were not as comfortable as you think. Some of the football was lovely I agree, Saddlier played excellently and GMac was doing well too with support from Grimmer.
And then the wheels came off when Saddlier was taken off and Taylor, who up until then was also playing an effective role, was moved to a position he clearly does not function as well in. So in one sub we take off arguably our best player and make one excellent player worse. Lincoln must have thought their luck was in. From that moment it went downhill and even if we had hung on it would have been by luck and due to poor finishing from Lincoln. If Saddlier was injured fine, he wasn't. It was deliberate. And again it was a massive mistake.
Sadlier for Phillips was wrong, Sadlier was playing well. (Phillips ran around and gave away a freekick in a position that allowed them to get their equaliser). This meant that Taylor went wide left where he has played poorly before and played poorly this time. GMac for KVY was another one, KVY is not a defensive left back or midfield player, he was all over the place. Leahy was fine at left back as usual. And the addition of Forino into the back ... well look at their goal, it created a mess. Taking Vokes off as he may have been running out of gas was fair but the other 3 subs made the team worse. Significantly. Not because they are bad players, not at all, but they were put into unfamiliar positions or forced us into a tactic that we are no good at playing.
Because sport can still be random and "little clubs" can still over-achieve - hence Burton, Hereford and Yeovil all reaching the Championship - pretty sure there was one other similar sized club but its name escapes me.....
Long term though it tends to revert back to the mean - which means Sunderland can establish themselves in the Championship and possibly challenge for higher levels where frankly had we won that match at Wembley the odds are we would have been back in League One fairly soon after a season or two.
We have out-performed for a while under the best manager in our history. Gareth was always going to be a very hard act to follow.
@TheAndyGrahamFanClub your points seem to center on the manager being inept but we also have the best squad ever and should be top 6.
You have invited someone/anyone to talk you through the logic, so I've tried. You can make of it what you will.
I'm trying to give a balanced view and I think expectations of this squad and MB are too high. I'm trying to answer some of your comments from this thread. Very happy to grab a beer and discuss if you fancy at the next home game! DM me if that's of interest to you.
“We have the arguably the most talented squad ever, this team should be guaranteed play off, we are huffing and puffing and scraping draws against Burton and Lincoln. With a half decent management team we are top six.”
If we have the best ever squad (top six, as you put it) those replacements on Saturday should be capable of playing in those positions and closing out the game. You cannot have it both ways. This is not a top six squad. Kone and KVY were brought on to replace two tired aging players, one a debutant and the other played 49 games in last four seasons at this level. That's not a strong bench.
“There’s goals in this team. There are attacking options galore. Saddlier and GMac along with Potts are a dream. When you play a team so devoid of attacking intent the goal threat dissipates.”
We were excellent for 65 minutes but for the 10 before Sadlier went off, it was clear we needed a change. That team was not devoid of attacking intent for 65 minutes, we should have been two or three up. You seem to be saying the polar opposite in the same paragraph, it cannot be both. On paper, the bench had attacking options galore but they did not deliver. Philips, Kone, KVY offered nothing when they came on. I'm quite certain MB was hoping that wouldn't be the case.
“Forino, Taff and Low get into every team in our league. Then look at their goal yesterday. We are making good players bad. No one challenges for the first ball, those three all going for it.”
They are good defenders but do they really get into every league one team without fail? Is it MBs fault that more than one defender goes for the same ball meaning we do not clear it properly, or is it a lack of communication. Don't get me wrong, it was poor and I wouldn't have gone to a back 5 but defenders who could play for every club in this division shouldn't be making that basic mistake should they? If they can play for every club in this division then a lot of them play with a back 5, so de facto they shouldn't have made that mistake.
“There were subs to be made. GMac was spent.”
I agree he was spent, and with the resources he had he brought KVY on at right wing. He only went to left wing when Forino came on.
“Three blue shirts go for the first ball. From then on no one is picking up anyone. By introducing the 3rd centre back no one knew their roles.”
I don't disagree, as I said above we should have stayed with a back four but that is basic defending, for players of that quality it is really disappointing.
“I’m happy to listen to anyone who can talk me through the logic of any one of the subs yesterday. Good players one and all. So why did each change make us worse.”
I have no issue with Sadlier coming off, we needed a change and MB thought Sadlier was the one to come off. You disagree. For me Wheeler and Potts were really struggling which made it look like Sadlier was less involved. Sadlier, for me, is normally the weakest of those front four players defensively, so I understand why MB choose him. According to a number of posters Philips is a Rolls Royce footballer.
Thinking about it again, I would have brought JJ on, moved Leahy into centre midfield and taken Taylor off. Gone 4-5-1 to try and get possession of the ball again.
I agree with you I would not have moved Taylor left and put Philips through the middle. Although Taylor still did a reasonable job defensively, it was him who was scythed down when turning defence into attack, he was playing so well with Vokes. So not sure he was as bad as some suggest. Philips was very poor and if anything his lack of understanding with Vokes gave us more problems. He should have gone on the left.
Vokes and McCleary were absolutely spent, so he had to bring on two players. Does he bring two players on to make their league debuts or does he bring one on and someone with a bit of experience? He went for the latter. Front four of Vokes, McCleary, Sadlier and Taylor is very different to Kone, Philips, Taylor and KVY. Are those latter four those of a top six squad - maybe next season but certainly not on Saturday.
It clearly wasn't working as the ball kept coming back for the 5 minutes they were on together. So what does he do next? Try and protect the 1-0 lead as it is clear the four up front are not impacting the game. He goes to something we have played in 80% plus games this season. A back 5. Brings Forino on to deal with balls in the box - makes sense. Moves Leahy into the center of the park to help the already knackered Wheeler and Potts - makes sense. The biggest issue was our midfield and attack could not get a foot on the ball and could not break play up, further up the pitch. Which is why, in hindsight, we should have brought JJ on at left back as the first sub and moved Leahy into midfield.
Even then, but for Philips stupid foul, we win that game. Albeit only just.
“It wasn’t a last minute fluke goal yesterday. It was a sustained period of defensive rear guard made worse with every sub.”
I agree it was a sustained period of pressure but a top six side, with attacking options galore, the best squad in years and three center backs who walk into any team in this league should not need to have such a defensive rearguard action? Perhaps, and just perhaps, the squad is not as capable (right now) as some people think it is. I absolutely agree that MB is making mistakes but he is not making anywhere near as many as the players on the pitch seem to be.
It's been clear since going to a back four things have dramatically improved. I'm confident they will continue to do so and we can finish top half, barring anymore injuries.
Someone had mentioned our wage budget was reduced by 40% compared to last season, if so, I think you can see why MB has signed so many players who look brilliant on paper. They are cheaper for a reason, they are not yet consistent. If this 40% is true we are not able to sign forwards/wingers who play consistently like Leahy. We've taken some gambles. Hopefully with the experiences they've had first half of the season by playing regularly they can kick on second half.
We had a lot of injuries at the start of the run of one win in fifteen. Which showed on Saturday.
Potts, McCleary, Wheeler, Vokes all struggled with energy and fitness after the hour mark - they are not fully fit yet. We've played 7 games in 21 days. Grimmer has taken 7-8 games to get back up to speed.
Wouldn't it be great if we could choose from a full squad for more than one or two games. Scowen's red card has really not helped. If he was fit, we beat Burton & Lincoln IMHO.
If he was available, you have Wheeler coming on to replace McCleary or Sadlier and not KVY/Philips.
I think MB needs to trust JJ to play left back for last 20, so it releases Leahy to help in midfield if required. If he doesn't trust JJ then we need a left back pronto. We also need Vokes to start putting his chances away. His conversion rate against Burton and Lincoln must be pretty low.
@Commoner A respectful debate, happy to argue my opinion as that is all it is.
If we needed a body in midfield, which I think we did, Leahy would be the obvious choice. In which case JJ to left back? If we don't trust JJ at left back then that's a different issue. Sadlier was the last player I would have taken off in the attack. If GMac is coming off then KVY is surely his natural replacement. All the changes made saw a player out of position, and whilst I think we do have an excellent squad no player will play his best in an unfamiliar position. I'm not sure what position Philips plays if I'm honest. He had a purple patch a few weeks ago and now is not much more than an enthusiastic energy player.
And as for the three centre halves they are all first class players but if you look at the goal the whole defending a set piece drill that they must train for was a first class shit show. I think it was Potts that didn't track the scorer but the problem all started when all three towering centre halves went for the same ball. How can that happen? Who trains for this, who is leading this on the field?
We were still creating chances for Vokes late in the game, he missed a 'sitter' of a header from a great cross. Although Kone is raw, he is an unknown to the opposition too. MAYBE chucking him on earlier would have made Lincoln think about dropping two players to ensure he couldn't break out. Defending from the front is not the most stupid tactic.
Thank you, always good to have a sensible debate. I understand why MB took Sadlier off from a defensive viewpoint. I agree moving Taylor wide to take him off weakened the team but more because Taylor was doing so well through the middle and Philips was awful.
Having said that, I think all of the subs came on in their normal places. They just didn't do enough to defend from the front.
Philips through the middle, he's pretty much played every game there.
KVY right midfield and left wing back. He was signed as being able to play right wing back or left wing back.
Kone up front through the middle.
Forino centre back.
I dont feel the first three subs significantly weakened the team playing out of position, they just weakened the team because they were nowhere near as good as the people they replaced, even though they played in their primary positions.
Completely agree @Commoner . I would have replaced Vokes and Taylor earlier myself just to freshen up the attack...but right until they scored I thought we had enough experience on the pitch to see out the game. Which is probably why I am not a manager.
Worth remembering that we all seem to think we know what went wrong on Saturday and we'd have done it differently, but none of us know if it actually would have been better. It's still possible that had we done everything suggested by us armchair managers we might have shipped two and lost the game. It's possible that Blooms made the right choices. I can totally see why he went to five at the back (even if we are shit at it) because Lincoln had gone 3 at the back with their wide players pushing as high up as possible - they were pretty much playing a 3-2-5 at the end.
Seems to me a lot of games at this level, when there's maybe a one goal lead or teams are drawing, become a game of chicken - who's going to blink first and do the final massive push for a goal. We've seen it several times when we're the team losing by a goal, where we're largely anonymous for the second half until ~15 minutes from the end when suddenly we seem to wake up. We lost the game of chicken on Saturday.
I 100% believe that to see that game out we should have brought on JJ at left back and moved Leahy into midfield. 5 in midfield not 5 at the back would have hopefully meant keeping possession.
Easy in hindsight but Sadlier and possibly Taylor should have stayed on with a tiring GMac and Vokes replaced by KYV and JJ
If we're talking about the merits of the squad as a whole I'll make the point once again that I know very few of you agree with but I'm convinced I'm right: the strength of the squad is being let down in one position more than any other. That of goalkeeper.
Max Stryjek is a great shot stopper from those coming from outside the box. He does it with panache and athleticism and in a spellbinding way which makes him look Championship quality. When he was playing behind Mawson and Taffazoli and opposing strikers were being forced to shoot from distance, he looked imperious.
Those days are gone.
He often looks slow and ponderous when shots come in from within the box, incapable of judging angles or preventing balls from spilling out into the path of opposition attackers. His confidence looks shot, his communication skills seem to have deserted him, he appears flustered when he needs to look strong and intimidating. His distribution is poor; it always has been but that's become more exposed under the way Bloomfield wants him to play.
We have good defenders now but balls are regularly getting into the box and shots on our goal are becoming more frequent. We are regularly coming across keepers that look more composed, confident, communicative and consistent in their distribution. Personally I think Gareth had the right idea in trying to sign a young Premier League keeper on loan 18 months ago, only going for Stryjek when that didn't work out. I would like to see Matt do similar this window.
One comment in the above thread I do take issue with was about us "scraping a draw" at Burton. We were excellent in the 2nd half up there. One of our better 45mins under Bloomfield. But for some wayward finishing and some fine goalkeeping we'd have won very comfortably. I'd say it was more a case of Burton "scraping" a draw with us!
On a positive note, it's a real compliment to Sadlier, that he's gone from no starts, to now a definite starter and one we seemingly can't cover for 15mins at the end of a game!
I'd imagine a good couple of hours of his Saturday night are spent pouring over what Dancing Yak, Kim-il-Swan, Otter and (add other mildly comedy name in here) suggest.
I think his shot stopping is great from anywhere. In or outside the box.
But his kicking is dreadful and he is too often stuck to his line. When the ball loops up in the air before Lincoln's goal he should have come and punched it away.
Having watched through the last 15 mins again it is staggering just how deep we sit. So many times we cleared our lines, but had only pressed up to just outside our own box by the time the next ball came forward. We should have been near the halfway line before Lincoln could recycle the ball.
I've been moaning about this since Matt took over. Our defensive line is almost always 10 yards behind where it should be in my opinion. The closing stages reminded me of our own comebacks when we had Bayo - teams could nullify the threat by defending close to the halfway line, but instead sank back toward the edge of their own box.
Maybe this is Matt's tactics, or perhaps a lack of leadership from whoever calls the line. Part of it may be that Max isn't great sweeping up in the space left behind. Whatever it is, we have got to be brave enough to defend higher up the pitch.
A couple of others have said it, but it bears repeating - Sadlier is excellent going forward (although a little hasty in his shooting), with two good feet, a trick and a decent work ethic, but he is the weakest player in the team defensively. So when Lincoln were increasingly pressing forward in the second half and marauding down the right flank particularly through Sorensen, I could understand why Bloomfield took him off. I might not have made that choice at that precise moment myself, but I could definitely understand it.
I'd like to think that Bloomfield's coaching team could build up Sadlier's defensive game the way that Ainsworth's so obviously improved the combativeness of Lewis Wing's game in his 18 months with us.
That’s quite funny because I think Sadlier is poor going forward but much better out of possession.
On Saturday this wasn’t the case - I would agree with your review - but in his prior showings I thought he had been very wasteful when in possession. Very poor decision making.
Edit - should add he was my motm on Saturday. I’m not totally delusional.
The goalkeeper who has not conceded more than one in a match (with eleven on the pitch for us) for nine consecutive league games? That one?
For anyone to think our problem is defensive (except a little bit of panic late in games) must not be seeing the actual scorelines. Aside from the random Rovers results with 10 v 11, it is all 0-0, 0-1 and 1-1s. The problem is scoring goals!
Comments
Probably weakness. But who knows?
I thought it’d put something on as a positive. Just two games from Wembley. We’re playing Brighton under 21’s at AP and will hopefully get a result there. So we could be here at the end of the season mid table and maybe a bit of silverware. I do appreciate that all is not great at the moment, but we have got better since Leyton Orient and with Richard and Gideon onboard we could have a decent run in.
Not it wasn’t!
If you gauge our expected league position on average attendance, how do you explain Luton getting promotion to the Premier League last season with average attendance well below 10,000?
I think you need to review Saturday. He did exactly what you've asked for. The difference is it didn't work because the players are not good enough OR are not experienced enough yet to close games out. The first three subs were all attacking changes.
He brought Philips on for Sadlier - not a defensive change. I would have left Taylor behind Vokes and put Philips on the left. Philips and Taylor didn't do so well after the switch. Both players are in their second season of men's football.
He brought Kone on for Vokes - not a defensive change. Stepping up from Tier 9 to Tier 3 is a big leap. He did ok but he didn't do what we needed. Vokes was running on empty, so a change was required.
He brought KVY on for McCleary - not a defensive change? KVY is best going forwards and his defensive skills are yet to be proven. McCleary was dead on his feet, the change was needed.
After all those changes we were still getting battered because Kone/Philips couldn't hold the ball up to release the pressure. KVY and Taylor are not Sadlier/McCleary both in terms of experience and attacking prowess. This is why we offered little going forwards. This is why the ball kept coming back. He made one mistake - he went to a back 5. I agree he needs to stop doing this.
Subs left - Kodua, Jacobson, Forino. Personally I would have brought JJ on at left back, as a calming influence and moved Leahy into midfield and stuck with a back four. He chose, mistakenly, to go to a back five. Potts and Wheeler were also dead on their feet but we had no replacements for them on the bench.
Is this really the best ever squad we've had or comparable to the last few seasons? There is no argument from me that JJ and Forino are class.
However, KVY, Kodua, Kone and Philips are yet to be consistently proven at this level for Wycombe or anyone else. KVY is the most experienced but has only made 49 apperances, in the previous 4 seasons, in league one (plus 112 between 2015-19 at Col U - 98 of them in league 2).
Kodua, Kone and Philips have made 36 appearances in total before Saturday - all by Philips. They could all become good players but they do not have the experience that we've had over the last few seasons from the bench. This squad is potentially as strong on paper but it is not yet as strong in reality - they need time to learn, grow and become consistent.
Take JJ off that bench and you have a total of 150 appearances between 5 outfield players in League One, plus another 98 in League Two. An average of one season per player at best.
Young players are not consistent, they are generally unable to perform at the required level week in week out until they've got 70-80 games under their belt. Mehmeti being the prime example. First 50-60 games very inconsistent, then bang games 60-100 for us absolutely Rolls Royce.
Is it any coincidence that the one game we've won in the last 15 was when we started with 8 very experienced players and only Low, Potts and Taylor as inexperienced. Potts is almost exempt, as we don't see the likes of him too often down at this level.
We are in transition, MB is trying to deal with the biggest elephant in the room - an aging squad - that cannot play a full 90. He's trying to replace them with young, keen players. We've had an horrendous season with injuries. Sooner people accept this is a transitional season where we will get more wrong than right then perhaps we can all move forward together.
Lincoln should have been 2-1 up. We were not as comfortable as you think. Some of the football was lovely I agree, Saddlier played excellently and GMac was doing well too with support from Grimmer.
And then the wheels came off when Saddlier was taken off and Taylor, who up until then was also playing an effective role, was moved to a position he clearly does not function as well in. So in one sub we take off arguably our best player and make one excellent player worse. Lincoln must have thought their luck was in. From that moment it went downhill and even if we had hung on it would have been by luck and due to poor finishing from Lincoln. If Saddlier was injured fine, he wasn't. It was deliberate. And again it was a massive mistake.
@Commoner I have to disagree.
Sadlier for Phillips was wrong, Sadlier was playing well. (Phillips ran around and gave away a freekick in a position that allowed them to get their equaliser). This meant that Taylor went wide left where he has played poorly before and played poorly this time. GMac for KVY was another one, KVY is not a defensive left back or midfield player, he was all over the place. Leahy was fine at left back as usual. And the addition of Forino into the back ... well look at their goal, it created a mess. Taking Vokes off as he may have been running out of gas was fair but the other 3 subs made the team worse. Significantly. Not because they are bad players, not at all, but they were put into unfamiliar positions or forced us into a tactic that we are no good at playing.
Because sport can still be random and "little clubs" can still over-achieve - hence Burton, Hereford and Yeovil all reaching the Championship - pretty sure there was one other similar sized club but its name escapes me.....
Long term though it tends to revert back to the mean - which means Sunderland can establish themselves in the Championship and possibly challenge for higher levels where frankly had we won that match at Wembley the odds are we would have been back in League One fairly soon after a season or two.
We have out-performed for a while under the best manager in our history. Gareth was always going to be a very hard act to follow.
@TheAndyGrahamFanClub your points seem to center on the manager being inept but we also have the best squad ever and should be top 6.
You have invited someone/anyone to talk you through the logic, so I've tried. You can make of it what you will.
I'm trying to give a balanced view and I think expectations of this squad and MB are too high. I'm trying to answer some of your comments from this thread. Very happy to grab a beer and discuss if you fancy at the next home game! DM me if that's of interest to you.
“We have the arguably the most talented squad ever, this team should be guaranteed play off, we are huffing and puffing and scraping draws against Burton and Lincoln. With a half decent management team we are top six.”
If we have the best ever squad (top six, as you put it) those replacements on Saturday should be capable of playing in those positions and closing out the game. You cannot have it both ways. This is not a top six squad. Kone and KVY were brought on to replace two tired aging players, one a debutant and the other played 49 games in last four seasons at this level. That's not a strong bench.
“There’s goals in this team. There are attacking options galore. Saddlier and GMac along with Potts are a dream. When you play a team so devoid of attacking intent the goal threat dissipates.”
We were excellent for 65 minutes but for the 10 before Sadlier went off, it was clear we needed a change. That team was not devoid of attacking intent for 65 minutes, we should have been two or three up. You seem to be saying the polar opposite in the same paragraph, it cannot be both. On paper, the bench had attacking options galore but they did not deliver. Philips, Kone, KVY offered nothing when they came on. I'm quite certain MB was hoping that wouldn't be the case.
“Forino, Taff and Low get into every team in our league. Then look at their goal yesterday. We are making good players bad. No one challenges for the first ball, those three all going for it.”
They are good defenders but do they really get into every league one team without fail? Is it MBs fault that more than one defender goes for the same ball meaning we do not clear it properly, or is it a lack of communication. Don't get me wrong, it was poor and I wouldn't have gone to a back 5 but defenders who could play for every club in this division shouldn't be making that basic mistake should they? If they can play for every club in this division then a lot of them play with a back 5, so de facto they shouldn't have made that mistake.
“There were subs to be made. GMac was spent.”
I agree he was spent, and with the resources he had he brought KVY on at right wing. He only went to left wing when Forino came on.
“Three blue shirts go for the first ball. From then on no one is picking up anyone. By introducing the 3rd centre back no one knew their roles.”
I don't disagree, as I said above we should have stayed with a back four but that is basic defending, for players of that quality it is really disappointing.
“I’m happy to listen to anyone who can talk me through the logic of any one of the subs yesterday. Good players one and all. So why did each change make us worse.”
I have no issue with Sadlier coming off, we needed a change and MB thought Sadlier was the one to come off. You disagree. For me Wheeler and Potts were really struggling which made it look like Sadlier was less involved. Sadlier, for me, is normally the weakest of those front four players defensively, so I understand why MB choose him. According to a number of posters Philips is a Rolls Royce footballer.
Thinking about it again, I would have brought JJ on, moved Leahy into centre midfield and taken Taylor off. Gone 4-5-1 to try and get possession of the ball again.
I agree with you I would not have moved Taylor left and put Philips through the middle. Although Taylor still did a reasonable job defensively, it was him who was scythed down when turning defence into attack, he was playing so well with Vokes. So not sure he was as bad as some suggest. Philips was very poor and if anything his lack of understanding with Vokes gave us more problems. He should have gone on the left.
Vokes and McCleary were absolutely spent, so he had to bring on two players. Does he bring two players on to make their league debuts or does he bring one on and someone with a bit of experience? He went for the latter. Front four of Vokes, McCleary, Sadlier and Taylor is very different to Kone, Philips, Taylor and KVY. Are those latter four those of a top six squad - maybe next season but certainly not on Saturday.
It clearly wasn't working as the ball kept coming back for the 5 minutes they were on together. So what does he do next? Try and protect the 1-0 lead as it is clear the four up front are not impacting the game. He goes to something we have played in 80% plus games this season. A back 5. Brings Forino on to deal with balls in the box - makes sense. Moves Leahy into the center of the park to help the already knackered Wheeler and Potts - makes sense. The biggest issue was our midfield and attack could not get a foot on the ball and could not break play up, further up the pitch. Which is why, in hindsight, we should have brought JJ on at left back as the first sub and moved Leahy into midfield.
Even then, but for Philips stupid foul, we win that game. Albeit only just.
“It wasn’t a last minute fluke goal yesterday. It was a sustained period of defensive rear guard made worse with every sub.”
I agree it was a sustained period of pressure but a top six side, with attacking options galore, the best squad in years and three center backs who walk into any team in this league should not need to have such a defensive rearguard action? Perhaps, and just perhaps, the squad is not as capable (right now) as some people think it is. I absolutely agree that MB is making mistakes but he is not making anywhere near as many as the players on the pitch seem to be.
It's been clear since going to a back four things have dramatically improved. I'm confident they will continue to do so and we can finish top half, barring anymore injuries.
Someone had mentioned our wage budget was reduced by 40% compared to last season, if so, I think you can see why MB has signed so many players who look brilliant on paper. They are cheaper for a reason, they are not yet consistent. If this 40% is true we are not able to sign forwards/wingers who play consistently like Leahy. We've taken some gambles. Hopefully with the experiences they've had first half of the season by playing regularly they can kick on second half.
This squad is good enough to win more than one game in fifteen.
Yes, I agree. When fully fit and no suspensions.
We had a lot of injuries at the start of the run of one win in fifteen. Which showed on Saturday.
Potts, McCleary, Wheeler, Vokes all struggled with energy and fitness after the hour mark - they are not fully fit yet. We've played 7 games in 21 days. Grimmer has taken 7-8 games to get back up to speed.
Wouldn't it be great if we could choose from a full squad for more than one or two games. Scowen's red card has really not helped. If he was fit, we beat Burton & Lincoln IMHO.
If he was available, you have Wheeler coming on to replace McCleary or Sadlier and not KVY/Philips.
I think MB needs to trust JJ to play left back for last 20, so it releases Leahy to help in midfield if required. If he doesn't trust JJ then we need a left back pronto. We also need Vokes to start putting his chances away. His conversion rate against Burton and Lincoln must be pretty low.
@Commoner A respectful debate, happy to argue my opinion as that is all it is.
If we needed a body in midfield, which I think we did, Leahy would be the obvious choice. In which case JJ to left back? If we don't trust JJ at left back then that's a different issue. Sadlier was the last player I would have taken off in the attack. If GMac is coming off then KVY is surely his natural replacement. All the changes made saw a player out of position, and whilst I think we do have an excellent squad no player will play his best in an unfamiliar position. I'm not sure what position Philips plays if I'm honest. He had a purple patch a few weeks ago and now is not much more than an enthusiastic energy player.
And as for the three centre halves they are all first class players but if you look at the goal the whole defending a set piece drill that they must train for was a first class shit show. I think it was Potts that didn't track the scorer but the problem all started when all three towering centre halves went for the same ball. How can that happen? Who trains for this, who is leading this on the field?
We were still creating chances for Vokes late in the game, he missed a 'sitter' of a header from a great cross. Although Kone is raw, he is an unknown to the opposition too. MAYBE chucking him on earlier would have made Lincoln think about dropping two players to ensure he couldn't break out. Defending from the front is not the most stupid tactic.
Thank you, always good to have a sensible debate. I understand why MB took Sadlier off from a defensive viewpoint. I agree moving Taylor wide to take him off weakened the team but more because Taylor was doing so well through the middle and Philips was awful.
Having said that, I think all of the subs came on in their normal places. They just didn't do enough to defend from the front.
Philips through the middle, he's pretty much played every game there.
KVY right midfield and left wing back. He was signed as being able to play right wing back or left wing back.
Kone up front through the middle.
Forino centre back.
I dont feel the first three subs significantly weakened the team playing out of position, they just weakened the team because they were nowhere near as good as the people they replaced, even though they played in their primary positions.
Completely agree @Commoner . I would have replaced Vokes and Taylor earlier myself just to freshen up the attack...but right until they scored I thought we had enough experience on the pitch to see out the game. Which is probably why I am not a manager.
Worth remembering that we all seem to think we know what went wrong on Saturday and we'd have done it differently, but none of us know if it actually would have been better. It's still possible that had we done everything suggested by us armchair managers we might have shipped two and lost the game. It's possible that Blooms made the right choices. I can totally see why he went to five at the back (even if we are shit at it) because Lincoln had gone 3 at the back with their wide players pushing as high up as possible - they were pretty much playing a 3-2-5 at the end.
Seems to me a lot of games at this level, when there's maybe a one goal lead or teams are drawing, become a game of chicken - who's going to blink first and do the final massive push for a goal. We've seen it several times when we're the team losing by a goal, where we're largely anonymous for the second half until ~15 minutes from the end when suddenly we seem to wake up. We lost the game of chicken on Saturday.
I 100% believe that to see that game out we should have brought on JJ at left back and moved Leahy into midfield. 5 in midfield not 5 at the back would have hopefully meant keeping possession.
Easy in hindsight but Sadlier and possibly Taylor should have stayed on with a tiring GMac and Vokes replaced by KYV and JJ
If we're talking about the merits of the squad as a whole I'll make the point once again that I know very few of you agree with but I'm convinced I'm right: the strength of the squad is being let down in one position more than any other. That of goalkeeper.
Max Stryjek is a great shot stopper from those coming from outside the box. He does it with panache and athleticism and in a spellbinding way which makes him look Championship quality. When he was playing behind Mawson and Taffazoli and opposing strikers were being forced to shoot from distance, he looked imperious.
Those days are gone.
He often looks slow and ponderous when shots come in from within the box, incapable of judging angles or preventing balls from spilling out into the path of opposition attackers. His confidence looks shot, his communication skills seem to have deserted him, he appears flustered when he needs to look strong and intimidating. His distribution is poor; it always has been but that's become more exposed under the way Bloomfield wants him to play.
We have good defenders now but balls are regularly getting into the box and shots on our goal are becoming more frequent. We are regularly coming across keepers that look more composed, confident, communicative and consistent in their distribution. Personally I think Gareth had the right idea in trying to sign a young Premier League keeper on loan 18 months ago, only going for Stryjek when that didn't work out. I would like to see Matt do similar this window.
Taylor went off injured
He did. Only after being moved to the left. I would have left him where he was albeit on his own without Vokes.
But how will MB learn if he does not do what the Gasroom tells him he should have done after the game?
One comment in the above thread I do take issue with was about us "scraping a draw" at Burton. We were excellent in the 2nd half up there. One of our better 45mins under Bloomfield. But for some wayward finishing and some fine goalkeeping we'd have won very comfortably. I'd say it was more a case of Burton "scraping" a draw with us!
On a positive note, it's a real compliment to Sadlier, that he's gone from no starts, to now a definite starter and one we seemingly can't cover for 15mins at the end of a game!
I'd imagine a good couple of hours of his Saturday night are spent pouring over what Dancing Yak, Kim-il-Swan, Otter and (add other mildly comedy name in here) suggest.
I think his shot stopping is great from anywhere. In or outside the box.
But his kicking is dreadful and he is too often stuck to his line. When the ball loops up in the air before Lincoln's goal he should have come and punched it away.
Having watched through the last 15 mins again it is staggering just how deep we sit. So many times we cleared our lines, but had only pressed up to just outside our own box by the time the next ball came forward. We should have been near the halfway line before Lincoln could recycle the ball.
I've been moaning about this since Matt took over. Our defensive line is almost always 10 yards behind where it should be in my opinion. The closing stages reminded me of our own comebacks when we had Bayo - teams could nullify the threat by defending close to the halfway line, but instead sank back toward the edge of their own box.
Maybe this is Matt's tactics, or perhaps a lack of leadership from whoever calls the line. Part of it may be that Max isn't great sweeping up in the space left behind. Whatever it is, we have got to be brave enough to defend higher up the pitch.
A couple of others have said it, but it bears repeating - Sadlier is excellent going forward (although a little hasty in his shooting), with two good feet, a trick and a decent work ethic, but he is the weakest player in the team defensively. So when Lincoln were increasingly pressing forward in the second half and marauding down the right flank particularly through Sorensen, I could understand why Bloomfield took him off. I might not have made that choice at that precise moment myself, but I could definitely understand it.
I'd like to think that Bloomfield's coaching team could build up Sadlier's defensive game the way that Ainsworth's so obviously improved the combativeness of Lewis Wing's game in his 18 months with us.
That’s quite funny because I think Sadlier is poor going forward but much better out of possession.
On Saturday this wasn’t the case - I would agree with your review - but in his prior showings I thought he had been very wasteful when in possession. Very poor decision making.
Edit - should add he was my motm on Saturday. I’m not totally delusional.
Periodic reminder that Sadlier has played as a wingback at multiple previous clubs.
The goalkeeper who has not conceded more than one in a match (with eleven on the pitch for us) for nine consecutive league games? That one?
For anyone to think our problem is defensive (except a little bit of panic late in games) must not be seeing the actual scorelines. Aside from the random Rovers results with 10 v 11, it is all 0-0, 0-1 and 1-1s. The problem is scoring goals!
And the problem with scoring goals is that you first need decent distribution to the strike force.