OMT - The Sh1tmunchers Derby

[Baleforce]

Sorry but I can't agree. From that line up yesterday, if you took any 2 or 3 of them even and put them in our first eleven then sure you can expect some semblance of a performance.

But we had a back 4 who never play together, three CMs who whilst have all featured in the starting eleven at some point of the season never play together and a front 3 of Tel/Richi/Odobert who sure as hell have never played together. To ask for some form of cohesiveness from all of that is a massive stretch. You see it all the time in cup games when teams heavily rotate even against lower leagues they look a shadow of the team they usually are - whatever you think they should play like on paper it seldom works that way when you don't play together frequently.

And to be clear, Ange can be criticised for plenty but yesterday is not something I would be looking at whinging about.....

I don’t agree, they train together, hours and hours every day.

Thats where the team is built.

If we are still a mess two years in, what the hell is happening on the training ground.

 

[harr1984]

I don’t agree, they train together, hours and hours every day.

Thats where the team is built.

If we are still a mess two years in, what the hell is happening on the training ground.

Of course they train together, but you don't get used to player movements and patterns if you're not together in a match doing it.

Otherwise you should be asking the question about what every team are doing on the training ground because there are thousands of examples of heavily rotated sides with disjointed displays....

 

[billyiddo]

I think given that we can barely see a functioning game plan at the best of times, expecting to see one with multiple changes is asking too much.

 

[Grays_1890]

To be fair Rob, that was a one off. The longer they went with their injuries the worse their form got. We have had decent one off results with a load of our players missing.

The real point is, literally any team who makes 6/7 plus changes to their first team never looks like a cohesive unit at all whether it be at Spurs or any other club. It is a really weird thing to try and go at Ange for. I'm all for criticising Ange for his tactics in certain games but when resting almost the whole team that will be playing on Thursday plus for quite obvious reasons those on the pitch not going full pelt, this way always going to be the type of performance and I am just glad we didn't lose, which I expected to with it being their biggest game of the season....

They have a far lower ceiling than us given the resources and are still 15 points clear, so they have clearly navigated the season which has included their own challenges alot better than us at times.

They won their next game with 9/10 players out 5 nil at home to a side we have lost to home and away.

I know people like to play down Bournemouth, maybe because they don't like the links to their manager and try and find chinks in him, but they have had, by their standards a cracking season, regardless if you like or dislike their gaffer.

 

[ricky2tricky4city]

Sorry but I can't agree. From that line up yesterday, if you took any 2 or 3 of them even and put them in our first eleven then sure you can expect some semblance of a performance.

But we had a back 4 who never play together, three CMs who whilst have all featured in the starting eleven at some point of the season never play together and a front 3 of Tel/Richi/Odobert who sure as hell have never played together. To ask for some form of cohesiveness from all of that is a massive stretch. You see it all the time in cup games when teams heavily rotate even against lower leagues they look a shadow of the team they usually are - whatever you think they should play like on paper it seldom works that way when you don't play together frequently.

And to be clear, Ange can be criticised for plenty but yesterday is not something I would be looking at whinging about.....

To be clear yesterday barely registered tbh (I was more engrossed in the 1000 guineas).

More broadly when football is now accused of being all about systems and the players are like robots it follows that all players (ie the squad) MUST be all learning that one thing. The system.

The system stifles individualism, which is actually a good thing if you are hoping for some form of cohesion.

More specifically our 'first X1' very rarely play together, so everyone has had real match practice. I'm not going to dissect the combinations as it's probably not worth the discussion at this point in time.

And tbh we didn't play any better or worse than in 40 other games I've watched over the past months

 

[harr1984]

They have a far lower ceiling than us given the resources and are still 15 points clear, so they have clearly navigated the season which has included their own challenges alot better than us at times.

They won their next game with 9/10 players out 5 nil at home to a side we have lost to home and away.

I know people like to play down Bournemouth, maybe because they don't like the links to their manager and try and find chinks in him, but they have had, by their standards a cracking season, regardless if you like or dislike their gaffer.

They have had a good season, I like him. But for the likes of them and Forest it's a hell of a lot simpler doing it with low expectations and no European football. I want to see how he copes with European football before we decide he's the next messiah, they have gone through a massive injury crisis with only having to play one game a week and his game is high intensity so I'm not convinced just yet it would all be a bed of roses here.

But the point wasn't directly about him it's the fact you seldom get good performances with so many changes. The untouchable Poch made a load of changes for UEFA cup games against poor opposition and we constantly looked like strangers. Made many changes against Colchester Utd and we drew 0-0 and lost on penalties. Playing a load of backups/reserves or whatever you want to call them just seldom works in football in terms of performance - history literally tells you that....

 

[Mikey10]

Sorry but I can't agree. From that line up yesterday, if you took any 2 or 3 of them even and put them in our first eleven then sure you can expect some semblance of a performance.

But we had a back 4 who never play together, three CMs who whilst have all featured in the starting eleven at some point of the season never play together and a front 3 of Tel/Richi/Odobert who sure as hell have never played together. To ask for some form of cohesiveness from all of that is a massive stretch. You see it all the time in cup games when teams heavily rotate even against lower leagues they look a shadow of the team they usually are - whatever you think they should play like on paper it seldom works that way when you don't play together frequently.

And to be clear, Ange can be criticised for plenty but yesterday is not something I would be looking at whinging about.....

I don’t think people would be “whinging” if it wasn’t part of an established pattern stretching back to December 2023.

 

[Grays_1890]

They have had a good season, I like him. But for the likes of them and Forest it's a hell of a lot simpler doing it with low expectations and no European football. I want to see how he copes with European football before we decide he's the next messiah, they have gone through a massive injury crisis with only having to play one game a week and his game is high intensity so I'm not convinced just yet it would all be a bed of roses here.

But the point wasn't directly about him it's the fact you seldom get good performances with so many changes. The untouchable Poch made a load of changes for UEFA cup games against poor opposition and we constantly looked like strangers. Made many changes against Colchester Utd and we drew 0-0 and lost on penalties. Playing a load of backups/reserves or whatever you want to call them just seldom works in football in terms of performance - history literally tells you that....

I think for clubs with the resources of a Bournemouth or say Palace and their season, we are seeing a equivalence based on club size alone on how they would handle things because A) they have less quality and money in the first place and B) they have injuries and crisis in the season and deal with it based on their own circumstances.

Take Ange and the clamber for them as managers aside, both of those examples have proven themselves to be very very good managers, we shouldn't allow bias to really manipulate that view.

On the second part I agree, many changes hurt any side if wholesale are made, but I do believe some sides are coached in a way where they are so well drilled that players in some numbers come in and they know their roles better than what seemingly is the case at times with us.

 

[Yiddo]

Haven’t players came out talking about how Ange only works on the system every day and no tactical work gets done at all?

 

[harr1984]

I don’t think people would be “whinging” if it wasn’t part of an established pattern stretching back to December 2023.

This is the match thread discussing specifically the West Ham game, and hence why I said there is plenty Ange can be criticised for overall.

Yesterdays side put out and its performance not a big deal in any way shape or form IMO, it's all about Thursday and the fact we didn't even lose is a bonus - we don't have a great record there at the best of times....

 

[billyiddo]

Haven’t players came out talking about how Ange only works on the system every day and no tactical work gets done at all?

Dier did in an interview after he joined Bayern. So his experience would be limited to the first half season - could be that it was just a way for Ange to embed his setup early doors and since then that has changed but no way of knowing for sure either way.

 

[Mikey10]

This is the match thread discussing specifically the West Ham game, and hence why I said there is plenty Ange can be criticised for overall.

Yesterdays side put out and its performance not a big deal in any way shape or form IMO, it's all about Thursday and the fact we didn't even lose is a bonus - we don't have a great record there at the best of times....

Apologies for taking you up wrong. Picking through the thread at speed, so my fault!

 

[Yiddo]

Dier did in an interview after he joined Bayern. So his experience would be limited to the first half season - could be that it was just a way for Ange to embed his setup early doors and since then that has changed but no way of knowing for sure either way.

I think the lack of tactics suggest he has one way and one way only.

 

[Robspur12]

They have had a good season, I like him. But for the likes of them and Forest it's a hell of a lot simpler doing it with low expectations and no European football. I want to see how he copes with European football before we decide he's the next messiah, they have gone through a massive injury crisis with only having to play one game a week and his game is high intensity so I'm not convinced just yet it would all be a bed of roses here.

But the point wasn't directly about him it's the fact you seldom get good performances with so many changes. The untouchable Poch made a load of changes for UEFA cup games against poor opposition and we constantly looked like strangers. Made many changes against Colchester Utd and we drew 0-0 and lost on penalties. Playing a load of backups/reserves or whatever you want to call them just seldom works in football in terms of performance - history literally tells you that....

I am sorry mate that is not a fair comparison. If Poch had injuries or needed to rest players there were no proper back ups in many positions. That was the problem! Ange, with this squad could field 2 teams. Most of the players that were in the team yesterday have already played multiple games this season. It was not a scratch team! That they came in and were so disjointed when they have been in and around the first team was really poor imho. They have been presumably training as part of the match day squad all season. The comparison with Bournemouth this season is appropriate as they played multiple games with a big injury list and a smaller squad.

Edit: seen your post responding to @ricky2tricky4city’s post. Danso and Davies have played together several times with Spence too. Biss and Starr have played in midfield together. Tel has played on the left and looked good and Kulu was playing in his favoured positIon. That team should have been good enough to beat a poor West Ham team?

 

[Baleforce]

Of course they train together, but you don't get used to player movements and patterns if you're not together in a match doing it.

Otherwise you should be asking the question about what every team are doing on the training ground because there are thousands of examples of heavily rotated sides with disjointed displays....

I think that’s exactly what training should be simulating.

 

[harr1984]

I am sorry mate that is not a fair comparison. If Poch had injuries or needed to rest players there were no proper back ups in many positions. That was the problem! Ange, with this squad could field 2 teams. Most of the players that were in the team yesterday have already played multiple games this season. It was not a scratch team! That they came in and were so disjointed when they have been in and around the first team was really poor imho. They have been presumably training as part of the match day squad all season. The comparison with Bournemouth this season is appropriate as they played multiple games with a big injury list and a smaller squad.

Edit: seen your post responding to @ricky2tricky4city’s post. Danso and Davies have played together several times with Spence too. Biss and Starr have played in midfield together. Tel has played on the left and looked good and Kulu was playing in his favoured positIon. That team should have been good enough to beat a poor West Ham team?

I think this will just have to be one of those things we disagree on Rob. Did a quick check and Danso/Davies have played together three other times, and what is evident is that over the past few months the back 4 is forever different. This will be a big reason why our defence looks so dodgy and for me it's no coincidence ( I know you disagree on this too) that we look much more secure and like a unit when we have our traditional back 5 of Vicario/Porro/Romero/VDV/Udogie playing but this lineup has only featured a small number of times this season.

As for the this team should be good enough to beat West Ham, I really don't agree that team we put out who have never played together as an eleven before are better or should be beating that strongest West Ham side at their place - a place where we traditionally don't do well at no matter how poor they are and they have Fulkrug/Bowen/Kudus and we have Richi/Odobert/Tel I just can't agree we should be beating them by any metric....

 

[Robspur12]

I think given that we can barely see a functioning game plan at the best of times, expecting to see one with multiple changes is asking too much.

I agree but who was missing yesterday? VDV and Romero. Well yes VDV is a miss but Romero has been very inconsistent when he’s played this season, some might say poor. Madders. I love him, but he has had spells of inconsistency too and doesn’t make the match day squad week in week out when fit. Solanke, again I think he’s very good imho but had long spells out and been inconsistent since his injury; In any cas, Richy was a like for like replacement with similar qualities. Udogie, again has not been great recently. Porro yes he is a miss. So Porro and VDV out and we look disjointed?

 

[Robspur12]

I think this will just have to be one of those things we disagree on Rob. Did a quick check and Danso/Davies have played together three other times, and what is evident is that over the past few months the back 4 is forever different. This will be a big reason why our defence looks so dodgy and for me it's no coincidence ( I know you disagree on this too) that we look much more secure and like a unit when we have our traditional back 5 of Vicario/Porro/Romero/VDV/Udogie playing but this lineup has only featured a small number of times this season.

As for the this team should be good enough to beat West Ham, I really don't agree that team we put out who have never played together as an eleven before are better or should be beating that strongest West Ham side at their place - a place where we traditionally don't do well at no matter how poor they are and they have Fulkrug/Bowen/Kudus and we have Richi/Odobert/Tel I just can't agree we should be beating them by any metric....

Fair enough mate, I don’t necessarily agree but fine to agree to disagree.

 

[billyiddo]

I agree but who was missing yesterday? VDV and Romero. Well yes VDV is a miss but Romero has been very inconsistent when he’s played this season, some might say poor. Madders. I love him, but he has had spells of inconsistency too and doesn’t make the match day squad week in week out when fit. Solanke, again I think he’s very good imho but had long spells out and been inconsistent since his injury; In any cas, Richy was a like for like replacement with similar qualities. Udogie, again has not been great recently. Porro yes he is a miss. So Porro and VDV out and we look disjointed?

We look disjointed no matter who plays that was my point and where the problem lays