Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Sunderland' started by Smug in Boots, Sep 14, 2021.
Wyke decided he wanted to leave
Because you were quite rightly concerned at what the team were doing / being asked to do to see out games.
What I don't understand is why did LJ think we could pull this off today, having seen our whole defence go awol and needing The Hoff to pull off a couple of awesome saves just before our first goal?!
Just watched Brighton go 2-0 up, sit back and concede a goal. They then concede two more which were ruled out. But they did exactly what we did yesterday, exactly.
Devil’s advocate time…
Get a goal up. Keep going and try to get another goal… get caught on the break and concede… who’s to blame then?
LJ is in a no win situation for me. If we keep going and don’t score, and we don’t bring on that extra defender, then the last 10 are going to be the same anyway just with less players. Would you rather try to soak up pressure and get a nervy win, or try to score and end up drawing or losing?
I dint think it’s anywhere near as easy as saying “just keep going” when players are tiring and things aren’t sticking. Neill was quite ineffective on Saturday. Rightly withdrawn IMO after watching the game.
I think some are missing an important point here. The decision whether or not to sit deep to try to defend a lead surely depends on how the pattern of the match has progressed to the 80th minute. If we have had much the less of the play,created very little,been penned back for much of the game,and found ourselves 1-0 up against the run of play with 10 minutes to go,then it would make sense to bring a couple of extra defenders on to try to see the game out.
If,however,we have been the better side for much of the match,allowed the opposition to create very little,but our play in the final third has not matched our superiority and we've been wasteful with our chances, and,as a consequence, find ourselves only one goal ahead instead of the three it should have been,there is no logical reason to change our tactics with 10 minutes + 5 minutes added time still to go. On the balance of play,we are much more likely to score than the opposition,so why concede ground to them and invite them to try? The tiring players argument doesn't hold water either....they can be replaced with like for like subs.when you have a squad like ours.
However, purely as an alternative view point...
Knowing that we've dominated the play and haven't put our chances away as well as the knowledge that 1 poor decision by an official can change the game, it may be prudent to shore up the defence so that one fluke moment has less chance of preventing the win.
It really is a case of you say tomato and i say tomatoe. If LJ hadn't done a thing and we'd conceded some fans would be lambasting him for not making changes with 10 minutes to go
You're right of course....one poor decision can change the result,as we've found,and it's easy to be wise after the event. I think though,that over the course of a season,in most matches, I'd prefer we didn't drop too deep in the last 10 minutes and that over 46 matches,we'd come out ahead if we didn't......although I have no stats to back that up!
Having watched our game back, and Brighton yesterday, this really is a difficult situation.
A team losing on the last 15 minutes will naturally push up an extra man or two, so the nature of the game changes quickly. They'll also get the ball forward quicker/longer so there's little chance of pressing and winning the ball back. The problem, obviously, is that they have nothing to lose.
The lack of clean sheets is worrying me and it’s something that we’ve struggled with ever since we were relegated.
We also seem to create bucket loads of chances but are only able to convert one or two leaving ourselves open for the sucker punch.
Problem solved if we score more goals, but if the question is, do we bring on defenders and try to "park the bus'". A version of this is to counter attack and grab another goal.. but we need the speed merchants up front for this.
The problem with breakaways is that, if it fails, you're left with two or three players 'behind the lines' ...
... a long clearance can cut out more of the defending team and puts them under pressure.
It's really up to everyone to keep hold of the ball and use it well, not easy.
If the defence has gone AWOL and the keeper is keeping us in the game, surely the logical thing to do is shore up the defence.
Agree, For all the plaudits we have given Winchester, Doyle, Flanagan and Cirkin, we are conceding too many goals. Other than the Burton goal, I can't think of any other goals where we didn't make mistakes. We need to tighten that up and sharpish.....
That, IMO is a very worrying trait we seem to have developed. If you miss half chances that’s one thing. But some of the chances we’re missing are “put your house on it” chances. Stewart, McGeady, Gooch have all done it. These are players you back to score in those situations. Not “kids”.
If we sort that out, then we’ll not have to worry about the defending and ref as much
Certainly the way to see out a match is to keep hold of the ball further up the pitch. I think I'm right in saying the move for Fleetwood's first goal began with Goochy taking an unecessary touch......something he's very prone to......near the half way line and losing the ball.
Agree. I think the goalie is an improvement,and so are the two full backs,although we have to do better at stopping crosses coming in.However, we look porous through the middle sometimes. I think Doyle shows a lot of promise,but I'm not sure he's the finished article for this league at the minute mind.
What i don't get with the first goal is that people are blaming Wright who went with his man. Winchester was the one who didn't track his direct opponent.
I think we seem to defend better on break aways
But struggle when there is sustained attacks ???
That could be because when we get under sustained pressure we get too deep.
Seems pretty obvious to me. Fans want a scapegoat and Winchester has been playing well. A number of fans wanted rid of Wright so, if need be, just return to “blame the scapegoat” scenario