Author Topic: Ream  (Read 2402 times)

Offline filham

  • Mr Fayed
  • **
  • Posts: 11047
Re: Ream
« Reply #20 on: October 20, 2019, 03:36:11 PM »
It was clear early in the game that the raw pace in the Stoke attack was enjoying the space provided by our back three and that Mawson and Ream were in trouble. Surprised that Parker allowed the situation to continue, surly with Odoi on the bench he could have reverted to a back four system.

Ream has been good this season, this was his first poor game, our three at the back line up has been exposed, we should now revert to four at the back and Ream should be first choice for a place in the back four.

Offline ffcne

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 612
Re: Ream
« Reply #21 on: October 20, 2019, 03:53:29 PM »
Who was  for the first goal that didnt win the header when it was flicked onto Campbell
to leave Ream outpaced  ?
And where was the cover behind Ream .No Mawson and Bryan coming from a long way
to cover.
Ridiculous set up playing 3 at the back.When you are relying on Carvailio and Knockeart to help defend.
We looked so open for both goals.

Offline Matt10

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1556
  • Fulham Supporter. Kansas.USA
Re: Ream
« Reply #22 on: October 20, 2019, 07:24:03 PM »
Who was  for the first goal that didnt win the header when it was flicked onto Campbell
to leave Ream outpaced  ?
And where was the cover behind Ream .No Mawson and Bryan coming from a long way
to cover.
Ridiculous set up playing 3 at the back.When you are relying on Carvailio and Knockeart to help defend.
We looked so open for both goals.

Exactly.

Ream had zero cover each time. Why was Mawson and Bryan all the way on the left hand side, leaving Ream well behind? What was Mawson even thinking there? Would it have been Ream's fault if their LW had scored instead because our RCB was overcomitting to a player who was still on the sidelines...?

There's always this blame but without context. It's always about "on the ball", but the elements of the sport are based on positioning off the ball - especially in defending, yet those items are consistently left out of the conversation. It's a chain reaction . Furthermore, it's always about the goals we concede or score that get the praise or get the criticism.

Goals are less than 2% of what happens in a match, yet we judge our players completely on that more than anything. Think about that for a second. If I as a coach managed my lineup based on the 2% of occurrences and judged my players based on those moments, my goodness, I'd need 11 more subs.


Offline Statto

  • Gentleman Jim
  • ***
  • Posts: 8051
Re: Ream
« Reply #23 on: October 20, 2019, 09:32:54 PM »
Who was  for the first goal that didnt win the header when it was flicked onto Campbell
to leave Ream outpaced  ?
And where was the cover behind Ream .No Mawson and Bryan coming from a long way
to cover.
Ridiculous set up playing 3 at the back.When you are relying on Carvailio and Knockeart to help defend.
We looked so open for both goals.

Exactly.

Ream had zero cover each time. Why was Mawson and Bryan all the way on the left hand side, leaving Ream well behind? What was Mawson even thinking there? Would it have been Ream's fault if their LW had scored instead because our RCB was overcomitting to a player who was still on the sidelines...?

There's always this blame but without context. It's always about "on the ball", but the elements of the sport are based on positioning off the ball - especially in defending, yet those items are consistently left out of the conversation. It's a chain reaction . Furthermore, it's always about the goals we concede or score that get the praise or get the criticism.

Goals are less than 2% of what happens in a match, yet we judge our players completely on that more than anything. Think about that for a second. If I as a coach managed my lineup based on the 2% of occurrences and judged my players based on those moments, my goodness, I'd need 11 more subs.

I think you'll find Ream having "zero cover each time" is an inevitable consequence of us not being allowed more players on the field of play than Stoke. Ultimately defenders will often have to take a man each and be trusted to stop that man scoring. If they're too weak or slow to keep up with their man, that's on them, not the other defenders.

I'd also be interested to know how the people making these sorts of points would react if I praised Mitrovic for keeping a cleaning sheet in a 0-0 draw where he squandered numerous easy chances.

As to this constituting "2% of what happens in a match", well 80% of the game yesterday we had possession, and Stoke probably had possession in their own half for 10-15% of it. The residual 5-10% of the match would have been the handful of times (and I suspect it was barely 5 times) that Ream et al actually had to defend. So the two goals probably represented about 40% of the time Ream actually had to do his job. 


Offline Enfield

  • Lakey/Dark Room
  • *
  • Posts: 27
Re: Ream
« Reply #24 on: October 20, 2019, 09:36:15 PM »
Don't agree Reams totally to blame.
Bryan allows the header on for the first, he makes no attempt to put the player off, Mawson is asleep and makes no attempt to cover.
Bryan and Mawson at fault for allowing the ball in from the wing for the second.
(Why is Bryan never in the right place.)

Offline AnOldBrownie

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1147
Re: Ream
« Reply #25 on: October 21, 2019, 01:24:14 AM »
Thought he looked tired after the international week . Not good enough today.


None of the lads really seemed up to it.

You're correct...but Tim Ream is one of those players that needs to stay away from international football...as I think it has an affect on his club team play.    He's not fast...and at times he makes positional mistakes (does the same with his USA squad)) and he doesn't have the pace to make up for those mistakes.

Yes, the entire team seemed off "yesterday".


Parker going with the 3 CB setup was definitely a mistake, but I think Ream was poor. 


Offline The Rational Fan

  • Jimmy Hill
  • *
  • Posts: 2242
Re: Ream
« Reply #26 on: October 21, 2019, 02:09:34 AM »
Thought he looked tired after the international week . Not good enough today.


None of the lads really seemed up to it.

You're correct...but Tim Ream is one of those players that needs to stay away from international football...as I think it has an affect on his club team play.    He's not fast...and at times he makes positional mistakes (does the same with his USA squad)) and he doesn't have the pace to make up for those mistakes.

Yes, the entire team seemed off "yesterday".


Parker going with the 3 CB setup was definitely a mistake, but I think Ream was poor.

With Betts, Rodak, Christie, Odoi, Mawson, MLM, Bryan, Reed, Arter, Cairney, Onamah, Knockaert, Reid and Cav in the squad; why would we play anyone (except Mitrovoic) straight after international duty? Ream should have been rested and now he should be rested against Luton.

Offline Matt10

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1556
  • Fulham Supporter. Kansas.USA
Re: Ream
« Reply #27 on: October 21, 2019, 05:13:09 AM »
Who was  for the first goal that didnt win the header when it was flicked onto Campbell
to leave Ream outpaced  ?
And where was the cover behind Ream .No Mawson and Bryan coming from a long way
to cover.
Ridiculous set up playing 3 at the back.When you are relying on Carvailio and Knockeart to help defend.
We looked so open for both goals.

Exactly.

Ream had zero cover each time. Why was Mawson and Bryan all the way on the left hand side, leaving Ream well behind? What was Mawson even thinking there? Would it have been Ream's fault if their LW had scored instead because our RCB was overcomitting to a player who was still on the sidelines...?

There's always this blame but without context. It's always about "on the ball", but the elements of the sport are based on positioning off the ball - especially in defending, yet those items are consistently left out of the conversation. It's a chain reaction . Furthermore, it's always about the goals we concede or score that get the praise or get the criticism.

Goals are less than 2% of what happens in a match, yet we judge our players completely on that more than anything. Think about that for a second. If I as a coach managed my lineup based on the 2% of occurrences and judged my players based on those moments, my goodness, I'd need 11 more subs.

I think you'll find Ream having "zero cover each time" is an inevitable consequence of us not being allowed more players on the field of play than Stoke. Ultimately defenders will often have to take a man each and be trusted to stop that man scoring. If they're too weak or slow to keep up with their man, that's on them, not the other defenders.

I'd also be interested to know how the people making these sorts of points would react if I praised Mitrovic for keeping a cleaning sheet in a 0-0 draw where he squandered numerous easy chances.

As to this constituting "2% of what happens in a match", well 80% of the game yesterday we had possession, and Stoke probably had possession in their own half for 10-15% of it. The residual 5-10% of the match would have been the handful of times (and I suspect it was barely 5 times) that Ream et al actually had to defend. So the two goals probably represented about 40% of the time Ream actually had to do his job.

Fair enough, I hadn't considered the possession and attack percentages by Stoke. I believe some of their shots were created from set pieces or afterwards.

Offline ffcne

  • Graham Leggat
  • **
  • Posts: 612
Re: Ream
« Reply #28 on: October 21, 2019, 05:13:20 AM »
Who was  for the first goal that didnt win the header when it was flicked onto Campbell
to leave Ream outpaced  ?
And where was the cover behind Ream .No Mawson and Bryan coming from a long way
to cover.
Ridiculous set up playing 3 at the back.When you are relying on Carvailio and Knockeart to help defend.
We looked so open for both goals.

Playing 3 at the back against 2 forwards should be sufficient but our wing backs
Cav and Knockeart are not defenders so no one stopping wingers.
Mawson should have picked up Gregory ,Bryan more pace so Campbell,
leaving Ream to sweep up.

Exactly.

Ream had zero cover each time. Why was Mawson and Bryan all the way on the left hand side, leaving Ream well behind? What was Mawson even thinking there? Would it have been Ream's fault if their LW had scored instead because our RCB was overcomitting to a player who was still on the sidelines...?

There's always this blame but without context. It's always about "on the ball", but the elements of the sport are based on positioning off the ball - especially in defending, yet those items are consistently left out of the conversation. It's a chain reaction . Furthermore, it's always about the goals we concede or score that get the praise or get the criticism.

Goals are less than 2% of what happens in a match, yet we judge our players completely on that more than anything. Think about that for a second. If I as a coach managed my lineup based on the 2% of occurrences and judged my players based on those moments, my goodness, I'd need 11 more subs.

I think you'll find Ream having "zero cover each time" is an inevitable consequence of us not being allowed more players on the field of play than Stoke. Ultimately defenders will often have to take a man each and be trusted to stop that man scoring. If they're too weak or slow to keep up with their man, that's on them, not the other defenders.

I'd also be interested to know how the people making these sorts of points would react if I praised Mitrovic for keeping a cleaning sheet in a 0-0 draw where he squandered numerous easy chances.

As to this constituting "2% of what happens in a match", well 80% of the game yesterday we had possession, and Stoke probably had possession in their own half for 10-15% of it. The residual 5-10% of the match would have been the handful of times (and I suspect it was barely 5 times) that Ream et al actually had to defend. So the two goals probably represented about 40% of the time Ream actually had to do his job.


Offline toshes mate

  • cebu
  • *
  • Posts: 4971
  • Vitam Impendere Vero
Re: Ream
« Reply #29 on: October 21, 2019, 09:49:08 AM »
All of this seems a far cry from Jokanovic's mantra that you defend from the front backwards and attack from the back forwards.  Personally I believe all of it is down to a basic naivety in setting up the side to play the game and would have happened to this team with pretty much anybody in charge unless all the players had brilliantly clicked together as one on day one.  We still have some misfits in the squad and SP should know by now who they are.

Offline LittleErn

  • tjl
  • *
  • Posts: 176
Re: Ream
« Reply #30 on: October 21, 2019, 03:09:49 PM »
This is Parker’s fault, Tim Ream spent most of his career as a left-back and now he is better as a left centre back, but he is not a central centre back. Making matters worse as he was away the last two weeks, Ream had no time to learn playing in the back three. Even worse Bryan is not a left centre back and Mawson is not a right centre back in a back three.

If Parker wanted a back three, MLM, Mawson and Odoi could have learnt to play together. Frankly, it was crazy to play this formation with the players he did, especially with Ream away. If you have a back three, all of them need to be both quick and good in the air (Ream and Mawson are slow, Ream and Bryan aren’t great in the air).

You identify the problem, but I'm not sure your preferred selection would be any better. None of them are dominant in the air. Odoi does offer some covering pace though.

Offline Sting of the North

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1466
Re: Ream
« Reply #31 on: October 21, 2019, 04:26:59 PM »
@TRF: Might want to double check your facts about Ream. He has very clearly not played most of his career as an LB.


Offline clanky

  • Lakey/Dark Room
  • *
  • Posts: 94
Re: Ream
« Reply #32 on: October 21, 2019, 05:04:00 PM »
Don't disagree with many comments here but wonder as Fulham fans why we get too pessimistic and try to blame individuals/single issues as opposed to a combinations of factors.

My comments are :

The back three decision didn't seem to suit us on this occasion.

They focussed on the high ball to Bryan who missed his challenge which lead to the first goal. Is he more liable than Ream ??

Bettinelli made some key saves prior to the penalty

Cavaliero and Knockeart were a shadow of their normal selves. They often got the ball when static and never took on a defender on the run.

Crosses into Mitro were poor in general.

B-Reid had an unopposed header on the six yard box which went straight to their keeper.

In general none of the team showed any spark. Cairney had glimpses of his normal self.

Their pies were very hot

My technical summary is they all need a kick up the a88e

Lets hope Wed is better

Offline The Rational Fan

  • Jimmy Hill
  • *
  • Posts: 2242
Re: Ream
« Reply #33 on: October 21, 2019, 11:43:59 PM »
@TRF: Might want to double check your facts about Ream. He has very clearly not played most of his career as an LB.

I checked and I was wrong, but not so wrong, as before he joined Fulham he played left back 44%, right back 2%, defensive midfield 7% and centre back 47%. Reams days as a left back are largely over due to his pace, but he still has many qualities that a full back needs and much more than Mawson.

In my opinion, Ream best position is with at least one more central defensive centre back (like Mawson or Hector).  If Mawson plays he should be in the most defensive position possible and Ream should be the more attacking centre back.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2019, 11:48:23 PM by The Rational Fan »

Offline Sting of the North

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1466
Re: Ream
« Reply #34 on: October 22, 2019, 08:35:02 AM »
@TRF: Might want to double check your facts about Ream. He has very clearly not played most of his career as an LB.

I checked and I was wrong, but not so wrong, as before he joined Fulham he played left back 44%, right back 2%, defensive midfield 7% and centre back 47%. Reams days as a left back are largely over due to his pace, but he still has many qualities that a full back needs and much more than Mawson.

In my opinion, Ream best position is with at least one more central defensive centre back (like Mawson or Hector).  If Mawson plays he should be in the most defensive position possible and Ream should be the more attacking centre back.

I agree with your conclusion. However, when it comes to Ream's position surely you should count his time with Fulham as well, since that is the single biggest sample of games from his career?


Offline Whitesideup

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1268
Re: Ream
« Reply #35 on: October 22, 2019, 09:25:00 AM »
Just to echo the sentiments that it is a team game. Sure the first goal was not Ream's finest moment, and must go down as a mistake.

Statto in particular sings the praises of Mawson, but watch that goal again. Mawson is some 30 to 40 yards to Ream's right. There is no opponent within 30 yards of him, yet as the ball is being played forward he is making no effort to get closer to Ream. From where he was it was always going to be difficult to offer Ream any cover. My issue was that with no threat he should have been much closer to Ream. Whenever possible you should not leave your last defender exposed to a one-on-one. So yes, Ream made the big mistake, but it's a team game.

And just for good measure ... for the second goal, Ream was caught upfield .. we are 1-0 down and trying to get forward. I don't blame him for that. Mawson offers Bryan support right out on the touchline, and gets close ... however, the real danger is coming down the middle, and the better bet for Mawson was to drop in more centrally.

Oh, and while I'm at it, even Tom  .. when in the 2nd half he had that shot that was deflected past the post, there was a very simple ball available to an onside Mitro who would have had a clear line on goal with defenders too far away. Good attempt or bad mistake?

With hindsight everything is easy isn't it? And I don't want to start a blame game. Just two points then: 1) we succeed or fail as a team and 2) imo Ream has been performing well this season, and even if it was his error, the team should not be set up so that one flicked on header from a long ball leaves our last defender exposed.


Offline toshes mate

  • cebu
  • *
  • Posts: 4971
  • Vitam Impendere Vero
Re: Ream
« Reply #36 on: October 22, 2019, 11:28:12 AM »
Just to echo the sentiments that it is a team game ...
I absolutely subscribe to what you say and agree with your comments about Mawson. 

The key to success all over a football pitch is that each team member understands what their role and the role of all the others is in an ever growing sphere of experience.   After a game you analyse problems that have occurred not as a blame game but as a means to prevent further occurrences.  As supporters we have got to stop the meaningless attribution of mistakes to individuals, and, instead, focus on what would be better for the team.  We have shipped a lot of goals we shouldn't have shipped and we have failed to score goals we should have scored. 

That has been true of any football team since I first kicked a ball as a toddler and no one has successfully found a cure for it.   

Offline Statto

  • Gentleman Jim
  • ***
  • Posts: 8051
Re: Ream
« Reply #37 on: October 22, 2019, 04:10:17 PM »
Just to echo the sentiments that it is a team game. Sure the first goal was not Ream's finest moment, and must go down as a mistake.

Statto in particular sings the praises of Mawson, but watch that goal again. Mawson is some 30 to 40 yards to Ream's right. There is no opponent within 30 yards of him, yet as the ball is being played forward he is making no effort to get closer to Ream. From where he was it was always going to be difficult to offer Ream any cover. My issue was that with no threat he should have been much closer to Ream. Whenever possible you should not leave your last defender exposed to a one-on-one. So yes, Ream made the big mistake, but it's a team game.

And just for good measure ... for the second goal, Ream was caught upfield .. we are 1-0 down and trying to get forward. I don't blame him for that. Mawson offers Bryan support right out on the touchline, and gets close ... however, the real danger is coming down the middle, and the better bet for Mawson was to drop in more centrally.

Oh, and while I'm at it, even Tom  .. when in the 2nd half he had that shot that was deflected past the post, there was a very simple ball available to an onside Mitro who would have had a clear line on goal with defenders too far away. Good attempt or bad mistake?

With hindsight everything is easy isn't it? And I don't want to start a blame game. Just two points then: 1) we succeed or fail as a team and 2) imo Ream has been performing well this season, and even if it was his error, the team should not be set up so that one flicked on header from a long ball leaves our last defender exposed.

The way Ream got beaten for the first goal was reminiscent of that Bergkamp flick against Newcastle years ago. No matter how many times I watch that goal, I cannot work out how Bergkamp got the ball to move like that. Similarly, no matter how many times I watch the first Stoke goal, I cannot work out how Ream managed to get his body out of Campbell's way so quickly and seamlessly. It's as if Ream slipped through a wormhole when he was goal side of Campbell, then re-emerged a second later, 10 yards behind him. I suspect Mawson was as stunned as I am, and don't blame him for not anticipating such a miraculous f***-up. In fact Mawson had already done for the first goal exactly what you're saying he should have done for the second - "drop in more centrally" - but it's not enough.

Anyway, my point isn't that Ream is totally at fault for all our goals or Mawson is entirely blameless. My point was (and this should have been pretty clear) that Ream's failings in the goals we've conceded this season have been more frequent and egregious than Mawson's. I don't think anyone can reasonably deny that.

Offline Whitesideup

  • Legend
  • ***
  • Posts: 1268
Re: Ream
« Reply #38 on: October 22, 2019, 04:44:59 PM »
Just to echo the sentiments that it is a team game. Sure the first goal was not Ream's finest moment, and must go down as a mistake.

Statto in particular sings the praises of Mawson, but watch that goal again. Mawson is some 30 to 40 yards to Ream's right. There is no opponent within 30 yards of him, yet as the ball is being played forward he is making no effort to get closer to Ream. From where he was it was always going to be difficult to offer Ream any cover. My issue was that with no threat he should have been much closer to Ream. Whenever possible you should not leave your last defender exposed to a one-on-one. So yes, Ream made the big mistake, but it's a team game.

And just for good measure ... for the second goal, Ream was caught upfield .. we are 1-0 down and trying to get forward. I don't blame him for that. Mawson offers Bryan support right out on the touchline, and gets close ... however, the real danger is coming down the middle, and the better bet for Mawson was to drop in more centrally.

Oh, and while I'm at it, even Tom  .. when in the 2nd half he had that shot that was deflected past the post, there was a very simple ball available to an onside Mitro who would have had a clear line on goal with defenders too far away. Good attempt or bad mistake?

With hindsight everything is easy isn't it? And I don't want to start a blame game. Just two points then: 1) we succeed or fail as a team and 2) imo Ream has been performing well this season, and even if it was his error, the team should not be set up so that one flicked on header from a long ball leaves our last defender exposed.

The way Ream got beaten for the first goal was reminiscent of that Bergkamp flick against Newcastle years ago. No matter how many times I watch that goal, I cannot work out how Bergkamp got the ball to move like that. Similarly, no matter how many times I watch the first Stoke goal, I cannot work out how Ream managed to get his body out of Campbell's way so quickly and seamlessly. It's as if Ream slipped through a wormhole when he was goal side of Campbell, then re-emerged a second later, 10 yards behind him. I suspect Mawson was as stunned as I am, and don't blame him for not anticipating such a miraculous f***-up. In fact Mawson had already done for the first goal exactly what you're saying he should have done for the second - "drop in more centrally" - but it's not enough.

Anyway, my point isn't that Ream is totally at fault for all our goals or Mawson is entirely blameless. My point was (and this should have been pretty clear) that Ream's failings in the goals we've conceded this season have been more frequent and egregious than Mawson's. I don't think anyone can reasonably deny that.
Mawson didn't have to anticipate a monumental mistake .. centre halves work as a pair, and Mawson was miles away marking acres and acres of space. And as I have said, the team, not just Mawson, should avoid the situation where a simple flick-on leaves the last defender exposed. Though it was an error, which we all appreciate, any defender can be beaten on a one-on-one. And Ream has been playing well. You prefer Mawson … fine. Personally I am hoping we have yet to see the best of Mawson, as I don't think he has delivered value for his fee, and of the two, Ream has been the more impressive this year. Having said that, I would also argue that the two are both easily good enough for a good Championship team.

Offline Statto

  • Gentleman Jim
  • ***
  • Posts: 8051
Re: Ream
« Reply #39 on: October 22, 2019, 04:58:26 PM »
of the two, Ream has been the more impressive this year

no