There was a thread on here a few weeks ago where the discussion was about keeping same team after a good performance and many think you win or play well you keep same team or formation.
Well I think today kills that argument stone dead.
Yes second half other week we had that attacking formation and many said great, will he keep same or he should keep same.
Well he did and that's your answer. Football is not black and white and as simple as just doing what worked last time. Doing that for a full game away from home was stupid beyond belief.
Yes he showed he's naviety today.
Agree completely MJG. This is not the formation they have implemented and trained for since early pre season.
What would have been better option then? 4-3-3? Once we went down 0-1, wasn't that the most attacking formation we could field? Maybe we could have taken one away from the midfield trio and play 3-4-3 to be even more attacking, but that would have left us exposed at the back, it was TC and Reed in the middle, for eg.
We had the possession, crosses and chances. We just didn't make them count, that's it.
Tinker man got it wrong again. Be amazed if he still has a job come xmas
Quote from: FinFFC on October 19, 2019, 05:15:38 PM
What would have been better option then? 4-3-3? Once we went down 0-1, wasn't that the most attacking formation we could field? Maybe we could have taken one away from the midfield trio and play 3-4-3 to be even more attacking, but that would have left us exposed at the back, it was TC and Reed in the middle, for eg.
We had the possession, crosses and chances. We just didn't make them count, that's it.
We didn't start 1-0 down. We were really poor first half, and no one looked like they knew what they were doing.
Like scott,but he got that wrong today and it was pretty obvious from the off. Too many players looked uncormfortable in their roles and dont think Reed and Arter can play in the same team if we want to play offensively. The system just left us a man short the whole time.Better in the 2nd half but still not good enough . I hope he learns the lessons from today.
Quote from: Sting of the North on October 19, 2019, 05:17:14 PM
Quote from: FinFFC on October 19, 2019, 05:15:38 PM
What would have been better option then? 4-3-3? Once we went down 0-1, wasn't that the most attacking formation we could field? Maybe we could have taken one away from the midfield trio and play 3-4-3 to be even more attacking, but that would have left us exposed at the back, it was TC and Reed in the middle, for eg.
We had the possession, crosses and chances. We just didn't make them count, that's it.
We didn't start 1-0 down. We were really poor first half, and no one looked like they knew what they were doing.
Yes we looked clueless first half.
Agreed. You don't need Reed and Arter in same team against bottom of the league !
We need a new right back in January to play with Hector; but I fear that Parker won't be the Mgr choosing the new right back ! We have to be doing better than we are with those players !
Same formation but different personnel that to me made a huge difference.
Reed & Stefjo ✔️
Reed & Arter ☹️
Stefjo was rested.. .
Had exactly the same thought when I saw the lineup at 2pm. There's a big difference between when you're throwing the kitchen sink in a home game with 20 minutes left, and kicking off an away game. 3-4-3 was naive, the team looked disjointed and the opposition exploited its holes.
Quote from: fulhamben on October 19, 2019, 05:17:05 PM
Tinker man got it wrong again. Be amazed if he still has a job come xmas
Give it a rest Ben.
Well hold on.
Yes the basic rule is stick to your standard formation (which for us is 4-3-3) and best XI when you're winning.
I don't think that applies if you've changed to some radical, super-attacking formation when you're 1-0 down at half time - not sure anyone would say the "stick with a winning team" rule extends as far as keeping that second half team to start a difficult away match two weeks later.
I was one of those who criticised him for making 2-3 changes after our last two wins but if you look at the "team for Stoke" thread you'll see I was still asking for 4-3-3 today
Parker could have played that formation with different players in each positions. Firstly, if we are playing a back three, one of the wing-backs needs to be Bryan, Christie or more someone more defensive. Secondly, if the right wing back is not defensive then the right centre back has to be mobile (lie Odoi and not Mawson) to cover the space behind him. Thirdly, Ream shouldnt be the central centre back and Mawson shouldn't be a right centre back in a back theee. Lastly, we should always start with players in the field that could form a back four if required, which if Bryan played Left Wing Back could have happened.
Reid Mitro Knockartt
Bryan Arter Cairney Calverio/Reed
Ream Mawson Odoi
Betts
Surely you go away from home and you want to come home with a point minimum. Whoever that team is. You do not need an unbalanced team to do that. It has to be well organised and know what it is doing. If it is nil nil just after half time they need three points and will go for it. That is the time to prove we are the better team
The biggest mistake was dropping johansen
:bump:The biggest mistake was the back five selection.
Calevario, Bryan, Ream, Mawson, Knockaert (crazy defense that is going to conceed amd should score)
Ream looks like his played too many games plus Calevario, Bryan, Mawson and Knockaert are not in their best positions.
Bryan, MLM, Mawson, Odoi, Christie (easily good enough against the team coming last)
Quote from: Steven Ageroad on October 19, 2019, 06:10:31 PM
Quote from: fulhamben on October 19, 2019, 05:17:05 PM
Tinker man got it wrong again. Be amazed if he still has a job come xmas
Give it a rest Ben.
Why???? He's right .... If we're not top 6 in a month Parker has to go.
I like Scotty but as has been said he is a bit naive sometimes.The Stoke manager is young also and part of that is sussing out the other man.
Jones said we knew how Fulham were set up and that
it would leave space at the back for them,Scotty kind of fell into the trap.
He has lots to learn yet,let's hope he does it quickly.
Quote from: MJG on October 19, 2019, 05:05:55 PM
There was a thread on here a few weeks ago where the discussion was about keeping same team after a good performance and many think you win or play well you keep same team or formation.
Well I think today kills that argument stone dead.
Yes second half other week we had that attacking formation and many said great, will he keep same or he should keep same.
Well he did and that's your answer. Football is not black and white and as simple as just doing what worked last time. Doing that for a full game away from home was stupid beyond belief.
I do not think the argument is killed 'stone dead' because it didn't work yesterday. The starting 11 was clearly wrong yesterday but that was not the team that started the 2nd half V charlton.
Usually if you do well you stick with it...but no steff jo made a big difference and scott just got it wrong.
Quote from: ALG01 on October 20, 2019, 10:22:21 AM
Quote from: MJG on October 19, 2019, 05:05:55 PM
There was a thread on here a few weeks ago where the discussion was about keeping same team after a good performance and many think you win or play well you keep same team or formation.
Well I think today kills that argument stone dead.
Yes second half other week we had that attacking formation and many said great, will he keep same or he should keep same.
Well he did and that's your answer. Football is not black and white and as simple as just doing what worked last time. Doing that for a full game away from home was stupid beyond belief.
I do not think the argument is killed 'stone dead' because it didn't work yesterday. The starting 11 was clearly wrong yesterday but that was not the team that started the 2nd half V charlton.
Usually if you do well you stick with it...but no steff jo made a big difference and scott just got it wrong.
The point is as I wrote is it just doesn't work like that. So many were saying keep it 352 which is what yesterday was with those two wingers as wing backs. Even if Johansen had started you would still have had same issues. What happens next game we win with say 424.... Keep it next game? Its the peaks and troughs of opinion from some... Win everything great, lose... Sack everyone.
My main point was you can't just mirror the last game because it went well. Football doesn't work like that.
I actually disagree and agree with the OP at the same time. You should play your best XI but you adjust formation and tactics within the context of the game and you need players who can adapt their game too. Jokanovic wasn't afraid to drop players who didn't conform to tactical and formation changes. Parker needs to be much stronger minded than he has demonstrated for a few games now. I have him written in for the whole season and I think he may need all that time to prove he is a good fit for the job. He has the players in the squad but he must select them and not give in to other factors which then compound his problems rather than resolving them.
Quote from: toshes mate on October 20, 2019, 10:52:20 AM
I actually disagree and agree with the OP at the same time. You should play your best XI but you adjust formation and tactics within the context of the game and you need players who can adapt their game too. Jokanovic wasn't afraid to drop players who didn't conform to tactical and formation changes. Parker needs to be much stronger minded than he has demonstrated for a few games now. I have him written in for the whole season and I think he may need all that time to prove he is a good fit for the job. He has the players in the squad but he must select them and not give in to other factors which then compound his problems rather than resolving them.
I also agree and disagree with the op as well. That's it really it's just not a clear cut.... do.. Don't do.
Playing 3 at the back could work ,but then Bryan is a candidate to be left out with odoi coming in and Ream moving to the left side in my book.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on October 19, 2019, 11:22:48 PM
Parker could have played that formation with different players in each positions. Firstly, if we are playing a back three, one of the wing-backs needs to be Bryan, Christie or more someone more defensive. Secondly, if the right wing back is not defensive then the right centre back has to be mobile (lie Odoi and not Mawson) to cover the space behind him. Thirdly, Ream shouldnt be the central centre back and Mawson shouldn't be a right centre back in a back theee. Lastly, we should always start with players in the field that could form a back four if required, which if Bryan played Left Wing Back could have happened.
Reid Mitro Knockartt
Bryan Arter Cairney Calverio/Reed
Ream Mawson Odoi
Betts
I thin you make some valid points here.
IMO, Odoi should be in any FFC Championship team.
The International break did us no favours. Mitro looked knackered.Ream had jet lag, Johansen was rested.
Playing 3 at the back & asking Bryan to play LCB was madness. Our defence is shaky at the best of times but to go into an away game with one less defender was stupid. Cav & Knockers are not wing backs. All the players have had 2 weeks to prepare but they still looked like strangers with so many playing out of position.
Still not heard from SP on why he changed from our preferred 4-3-3 to an untried 3-4-1-2.
I remember the 'Team In' thread being very positive for a while and it was also noted how weak the bench was thus making the starting eleven the best available due to enforced absentees. In earlier threads people wanted both Reid and Reed in, more support for Mitro, more bite in the midfield and in less positive comments the likes of Christie and AK were to be banished and Sess needed a break. It has also been commented on that Ream and Mawson should be nurtured as the spine of the defence and that Joe Bryan is a really good egg. Threads also picked up on our inability to get the ball forward and get crosses in.
For the most part people got what they had been banging on about yesterday. You could debate whether Mitrovic had his head up his own backside in a sulk or was he knackered. You could debate whether Cairney needs a rocket or whether Odoi has moved on from being too weak and fragile to defensive messiah but to sack Parker and his coaches and mention JOka as a replacement is utter madness. He is history, got found out and a bit exposed and has not been deemed good enough for a number of Championship vacancies. How on earth is he suddenly the answer?
There was a comment somewhere on here yesterday about bumps in the road. This was one of them and there will be more. There was angst last week about not walloping Charlton. They had a good win yesterday and are proving to be a decent team. Stoke have been rubbish but have 'come together', in part to rescue the manager and have put together some decent performances. We have no right to expect them to let us win because we are the bookies favourites. Was this season not about a monumental rebuild?
Quote from: ScalleysDad on October 20, 2019, 12:08:34 PM
I remember the 'Team In' thread being very positive for a while and it was also noted how weak the bench was thus making the starting eleven the best available due to enforced absentees. In earlier threads people wanted both Reid and Reed in, more support for Mitro, more bite in the midfield and in less positive comments the likes of Christie and AK were to be banished and Sess needed a break. It has also been commented on that Ream and Mawson should be nurtured as the spine of the defence and that Joe Bryan is a really good egg. Threads also picked up on our inability to get the ball forward and get crosses in.
For the most part people got what they had been banging on about yesterday.
Sorry but I'm not sure how you get from the first few sentences to the last one. Yes the majority of people (including me) wanted Reed and Reid in, and Sessegnon rotated, but how many in the "your team v stoke" thread wanted 3 at the back? A couple mentioned it but 90% (again, including me) were sticking with 4-3-3.
Quote from: MJG on October 20, 2019, 10:36:23 AM
So many were saying keep it 352
No, some said that but only a minority (on here at least)
Quote from: Statto on October 20, 2019, 12:53:01 PM
Quote from: ScalleysDad on October 20, 2019, 12:08:34 PM
I remember the 'Team In' thread being very positive for a while and it was also noted how weak the bench was thus making the starting eleven the best available due to enforced absentees. In earlier threads people wanted both Reid and Reed in, more support for Mitro, more bite in the midfield and in less positive comments the likes of Christie and AK were to be banished and Sess needed a break. It has also been commented on that Ream and Mawson should be nurtured as the spine of the defence and that Joe Bryan is a really good egg. Threads also picked up on our inability to get the ball forward and get crosses in.
For the most part people got what they had been banging on about yesterday.
Sorry but I'm not sure how you get from the first few sentences to the last one. Yes the majority of people (including me) wanted Reed and Reid in, and Sessegnon rotated, but how many in the "your team v stoke" thread wanted 3 at the back? A couple mentioned it but 90% (again, including me) were sticking with 4-3-3.
Playing with three at the back is not crazy, as long as one of the wing-backs (e.g. Bryan or Christie) has at least some defensive experience. The formation wasn't the problem, the combination of players assigned to each position was crazy and demonstrates our managers inexperience.
Quote from: Statto on October 20, 2019, 12:53:01 PM
Quote from: ScalleysDad on October 20, 2019, 12:08:34 PM
I remember the 'Team In' thread being very positive for a while and it was also noted how weak the bench was thus making the starting eleven the best available due to enforced absentees. In earlier threads people wanted both Reid and Reed in, more support for Mitro, more bite in the midfield and in less positive comments the likes of Christie and AK were to be banished and Sess needed a break. It has also been commented on that Ream and Mawson should be nurtured as the spine of the defence and that Joe Bryan is a really good egg. Threads also picked up on our inability to get the ball forward and get crosses in.
For the most part people got what they had been banging on about yesterday.
Sorry but I'm not sure how you get from the first few sentences to the last one. Yes the majority of people (including me) wanted Reed and Reid in, and Sessegnon rotated, but how many in the "your team v stoke" thread wanted 3 at the back? A couple mentioned it but 90% (again, including me) were sticking with 4-3-3.
I did say it started positively.
Quote from: MJG on October 20, 2019, 10:36:23 AM
Quote from: ALG01 on October 20, 2019, 10:22:21 AM
Quote from: MJG on October 19, 2019, 05:05:55 PM
There was a thread on here a few weeks ago where the discussion was about keeping same team after a good performance and many think you win or play well you keep same team or formation.
Well I think today kills that argument stone dead.
Yes second half other week we had that attacking formation and many said great, will he keep same or he should keep same.
Well he did and that's your answer. Football is not black and white and as simple as just doing what worked last time. Doing that for a full game away from home was stupid beyond belief.
I do not think the argument is killed 'stone dead' because it didn't work yesterday. The starting 11 was clearly wrong yesterday but that was not the team that started the 2nd half V charlton.
Usually if you do well you stick with it...but no steff jo made a big difference and scott just got it wrong.
The point is as I wrote is it just doesn't work like that. So many were saying keep it 352 which is what yesterday was with those two wingers as wing backs. Even if Johansen had started you would still have had same issues. What happens next game we win with say 424.... Keep it next game? Its the peaks and troughs of opinion from some... Win everything great, lose... Sack everyone.
My main point was you can't just mirror the last game because it went well. Football doesn't work like that.
Well yes your point is taken.
Scott took an attacking gamble which Stoke were able to take advantage of.
But if you are going to take such a gamble I guess the right time to take it is when you are playing the team at the bottom of the table.
Quote from: MJG on October 19, 2019, 05:05:55 PM
There was a thread on here a few weeks ago where the discussion was about keeping same team after a good performance and many think you win or play well you keep same team or formation.
Well I think today kills that argument stone dead.
Yes second half other week we had that attacking formation and many said great, will he keep same or he should keep same.
Well he did and that's your answer. Football is not black and white and as simple as just doing what worked last time. Doing that for a full game away from home was stupid beyond belief.
Yes, that's true. Particularly disappointing since the team had full two weeks to prepare. To analyze the teams' best eleven and also closely scrutinize what Stoke is all about and try to play to take advantage. I assume they watch tape of opponents coming into a new game in the way of preparation. Very disappointing result. BUT, we've seen this movie before. Dominant possession, little to no productive offense. Just like last year, a couple of good halves have been played, the rest, not so much. How can you have 80% possession and have ZERO shots (first half)? Something is wrong with the offensive structure. FFC should at least be getting many more chances/shots/shots on target. It just isn't happening.
Only issue I had with the formation is that we have the same type of players in the midfield with Arter and Reed. As a result, Ream had to start the attacks. We had 90% pass accuracy, if that doesn't say square ball football, I am not sure what else it could have been. In addition, the inverted wingers, especially Knockaert, slowed us down. Lastly, we had 10 shots and only 4 on target. How we managed that with a pretty lackluster creative spark is beyond me.
Quote from: Matt10 on October 20, 2019, 07:30:02 PM
Only issue I had with the formation is that we have the same type of players in the midfield with Arter and Reed. As a result, Ream had to start the attacks. We had 90% pass accuracy, if that doesn't say square ball football, I am not sure what else it could have been. In addition, the inverted wingers, especially Knockaert, slowed us down. Lastly, we had 10 shots and only 4 on target. How we managed that with a pretty lackluster creative spark is beyond me.
I know some have criticized having just 3 in the back. I happen to like it and think it can still work for FFC and provide more offense up front. But, it has to be the "right" back 3. And as you point out, midfielders need to also contribute. The most frustrating thing is all the possession and so few shots. First half close to 80% possession and ZERO shots! How does/can that happen?
There was a lovely purple patch n 2017 when Jokanovic's possession football could be observed in all its glory. It wasn't about possessing the football to stop the opponent scoring and bore everybody rigid by putting twenty odd passes together to move a few yards up the pitch. It was about telling the opportunity that when we had the football we would make their lives miserable and no matter how many passes it took a goal scoring opportunity will occur and we will score from many such opportunities. In 2019 that has been parodied by Parker and not in a humorous way. Opponent's will now look at a video and say let them have the ball because sooner or later they'll spill possession after a while without threatening us and you can then breakaway and score against their depressed defence.
What is really missing from this team is the composure and patience to circulate the football in as many different areas of the pitch are necessary until an opening occurs. What works most effectively for Parker's team is possession in our half because the opponent is allowing it but once you cross the half way line everything becomes too rushed and is not being built around a single play maker who is directing and choreographing movement with the single intention of creating a clear and dangerous chance to score. The play maker can also then be used as a decoy when more than one player is sent to mark them and someone else can make things happen in the spaces created. The strategy of the team at the moment is nowhere near the clarity of Jokanovic's set up was.
