Match Day Thread Sheffield Utd v Norwich City.Sat 7 March ko 15.00hrs

But surely the fact that he overachieved last season in the Championship hasn't helped. We weren't expected to get promoted last year. If we hadn't and we had retained the core of the team in the championship for another season and then got promoted, then we would be entering the PL a lot stronger and more prepared.

 

I agree with this, in fact I questioned why Vrancic should start when several poster said he must start. For me Vrancic has hardly made a compelling case to be in the starting 11 when he has come on as a sub. McLean made an instant impact when he came on, which I think provides some justification to DF's decision to use him as a regular starter.

 

Perish the thought that there is more than 1 person that disagrees with you. I will delete my 20 user names straight away now that I have been found out .
I believe Rob said that" at times we dominated" as opposed to dominating the game, which we clearly did not. . We created enough chances to have come away with 1 point and I don't believe Mr Wilder would have had a lot to complain about..
So your possession stat that "40% took place in our defensive third" is indicative that perhaps , on the whole, we defended quite well and we still managed more shots on target in spite of spending only 25% in their defensive 3rd. Furthermore , a team within striking distance of qualifying for the Champions League, would be expected to take the game to the opposition , especially when playing at home against the bottom club. Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

 

As a big Vrancic fan,I have never stated that he should start ahead of Mclean.
He certainly has more to offer IMO than both Duda and Rupp,given a chance and a run of games.

 

Interesting that both Villa and The Blades, who were promoted with us last season, have done the double over us this term.

 

Mike, 4 of our 5 shots on target were Godfrey's header and the three subsequent attempts to get the ball over the line. They weren't 4 separate passages of attacking play culminating in a shot on target. The only other was Lewis's strike. So the truth is, we had only 2 real shots on target in the entire game (plus Pukki's chance early on which wasn't on target but hit the outside of the post).

 

Yes GM, just as a lot of our majority possession is "building slowly" from the back. BUT, the supposed point of our bossing possession and building from the back is to end up with the opposition pinned in their defensive third with us subjecting them to penetrative attacks. That's the sort of "domination of the opposition" that Farkeball is supposed to create. That was almost entirely absent on Saturday, apart from very early on, and the last 15 minutes or so (ALL our shots on target were in that late spell).

As I said in an earlier post, Sheffield controlled the game, not us. They largely kept us at arms length, and waited for us to obligingly switch off. DF recognised what was happening and switched formation at half-time to match Sheffield's midfield diamond and provide more cover out wide. That was reactive, not proactive, and indicative of who was calling the shots.

And I owe you an apology, as another not fully convinced voice amidst the cacophony of orthodoxy

 

We aren't disagreeing about how much of the match we dominated, Rob, we are disagreeing about what "dominating" means. Who would you say controlled the match? Whose game plan proved most effective? Which of the two coaches was forced into changing his game plan? If it was DF, doesn't that indicate that we weren't in fact in control of the game? Wilder doesn't aim to boss possession; he aims to prevent the opposition turning possession into goals. You keep commenting about the number of times Sheffield CBs blocked and intercepted; exactly, that is what they are coached to do. What you seem to see is us mounting wave after wave of attacks at a creaking back line; what I see is a well-coached defence blunting every attempt to penetrate and get in behind.

 

Had to chuckle when I read this. Robbie accusing other contributors to this forum of orthodoxy when clearly he believes only his opinion is the one that really matters. Some have had their opinions labelled as "untruths" and others have had verses of the Bible quoted at them . You are clearly on a much higher plane to the rest of us and in future I will treat your written word as gospel.

 

My two cents. We always have trouble against a high press. I think what we're missing are players who can dribble through the press, pulling defenders out of position, then making a good forward pass. Tettey tried a few times but he doesn't have the speed to do that. Our best at doing this are Ben and Jamal, two backs; and Todd, who wasn't effective on Saturday. And Emi, who can get through a press before so often dribbling himself into trouble. I want us to find a 10 or an 8 who is very good at doing this.

 

We have one. His name is Stiepermann!
And we have another player very adept at playing through a press. His name is Leitner.

 

To be fair, I would have been glad to see Stieps come in not only to help with the press but also to play a deeper position and help defend against all the high crosses and corners they were putting into our box. But then Stiepermann doesn't have the quickness or speed I think we need to break the press.

 

I believe we are too heavily reliant on Pukki ,most sides have a second striker that they call upon to pick up the slack .
Unfortunately our other free transfer international forward came with a horrendous injury record, which is probably why he was free.
Drmic has proved that he can score at this level but he hasn't been given a run of games to show his true potential.
Idah will no doubt turn out to be a great striker but it's a big ask to expect him to start regularly.
Add to this the failure of Stiepermann Buendia and other midfielders to chip in with goals like they all did last season and it's clear we don't have enough firepower to claw ourselves back from losing positions.
Our settled back 4 of Godfrey Hanley Aarons and Lewis are doing o.k with Krul keeping us in games lately but we have lacked the cutting edge and good fortune to grind out back to back wins.

We still have a slim chance of survival but losing to all of the teams near the bottom other than Bournemouth has made the victories against the better teams less important.
This season is drifting away from us and if it wasn't for our cup run it would be alot more bleak for us loyal supporters.

I have no complaints with the signings or decisions our management team have made .
We may end up with the unwanted label of best side to get relegated from the Premiership but , we can hold our heads up knowing we are not far from the finished product.
Farke said from the start that we don't have a side that will park the bus and he will try to play his exciting quick passing game , pundits have called it naive but we have competed in most games and rarely got humiliated or thrashed.

I'm starting to think one or two posters are on a wind up with the continuous essays on Farkes failings , we have over achieved as a club on a tiny budget and produced some thoroughly entertaining games .

Hooton Adams Gunn and Neil lost the fans and needed to go , I don't think anyone is calling for Farke to be sacked , in our position that says everything for me as a club and as supporters.

 

Don't forget my encyclopaedic knowledge of children's rhymes and songs Mike, reference "There's a hole in the bucket, dear Liza, dear Liza"

And talking of higher planes, I'm due to fly home to Norwich this weekend, so if I'm notable by my absence post-match Saturday, this should not be interpreted as stunned silence following our clean-sheet thrashing of Southampton but quite simply no internet connection!

 

I can only assume that you revel in arguing with pretty much every other fan on here , almost contrary like to most that read your contributions.
Of course you are entitled to your opinion on here , it would be boring if we all agreed but you have painted yourself into a corner where it appears you would rather us lose as an I told you so , than enjoy the journey that many of us are on looking forward to the next game.

Most have been patient with you but , with respect you can come across as gloomy , sanctimonious and condescending in your view that everyone else is wrong apart from yourself, which may be a possibility ?
Nothing personal but i find you hard work and usually avoid replying to you .

 

Pace helps of course, but Marco has quick feet and excellent close control; he also has an amazing eye for squeezing a pass through the tightest of gaps. The value of breaking through a press is simply getting through it, because that puts you goal side with fewer defenders ahead of you. It doesn't rely on pace from the press breaker, just on his being a good passer and having team mates to pass to.

 

Robbie if you read my post I’ve already answered this. For two decent stretches we controlled the game, as I said. We dominated.

Sheffield United did not block every attack - we had at least three excellent chances to score (more than they created through our defence...) But I am glad you finally agree that the problem was we did not manage to penetrate their defence sufficiently. Therefore it is our attacking play that needs work...

 

Completely agree with you re Stiepermann. Unfortunately he’s too erratic - when he plays well, we play well, when he has a shocker so do we. I can’t help but feel we need to take the risk with him now though, because we look toothless going forward

 

I didn't say that was the problem Rob; what I said was that Sheffield are coached to be defensively solid and their neutering so much of our attacking play is simply what they do week in week out to whoever they are playing. Only Liverpool have conceded fewer goals in the EPL this season.

However, this does bring us to the nub of the matter. Our current approach is flawed precisely because, to penetrate well-organised opposition defences, we rely on over-committing to create overloads and draw defenders away from the centre where we concentrate our attacks. By doing so we leave ourselves too open at the back. We don't only leave ourselves too open when we have the ball deep in the opposition half, we also do it when moving forward out of defence, often leaving two, or even three, attackers in the space between our CBs and our quickly advancing midfield. This weakness is built into our offensive strategy; it's the way we are designed to play, and what has governed our recruitment. Hence DF's refrain that "we can do no other". If we had top quality players capable of truly keeping the ball, and recycling and recycling until the opposition make a mistake, this might work. But we don't have that quality of player, nor are we going to have that quality of player by the beginning of the season after next.

People complain that I ignore the fact that we have conceded fewer goals in recent league games. At the same time they complain that we are scoring fewer goals. That is precisely what you would predict given how we set out to play: to penetrate defences we gamble on leaving ourselves open at the back; to be less open, we can't get bodies forward in the numbers that we need. This is why we have greater success when we don't try to implement the standard approach, letting the opposition have the ball, waiting for them to make a mistake and then mounting a swift attack. DF's strategy in most league games (not the Man Citys or Liverpools) is to have us try to overpower the opposition in the manner we overpowered a disheveled Newcastle in that false dawn way back in August. Is that really a sensible approach week in week out? There aren't that many disheveled Newcastles in the EPL.[/QUOTE]

 

Sorry Robbie, I’m afraid you’ve lost me as you’re now twisting your argument into something else altogether and deliberately avoiding the point I’m making.