He had a terrible game, but they had us sussed a bit more pressure and marking down the right hand side and they reduced our chances.Quote:
Originally Posted by BLUETIT
Printable View
He had a terrible game, but they had us sussed a bit more pressure and marking down the right hand side and they reduced our chances.Quote:
Originally Posted by BLUETIT
Unfortunately, neither Fish or Daaland have physicalityQuote:
Originally Posted by BlueArmy 86
Second game of the season in, not a great performance last night but wasn't great last Saturday. The manager/coach needs a bit of time to either swim or sink.
Some are going from hysterically happy to spat dummies in 6 days.
I didn't see what Alnwick did wrong last season - or Turner on Saturday for that matter. It was probably last position that need strengtheningQuote:
Originally Posted by Pedro de la Rosa
May not be a bad thing, if anyone behind the scenes actually thought such an inexperienced squad could actually challenge.
Not many mentions of the blatant penalty we should have had and the legitimate goal they had ruled offside
BBM acknowledged that we were lucky, and said that improvement is needed in key areas.
I was waiting for him to then list a load of positives but he didn’t.
I’m pleased he didn’t sugar-coat that display.
Not sure how he can improve the physical stature of this squad, because that’s going to be a key weakness.
Possibly because there was no blatant penalty and a couple of City players had stopped when the flag was raised for the goal that was given offside.Quote:
Originally Posted by WJ99mobile
We are in trouble once salech goes off or gets injured or banned as Robinson is incapable of playing the target man role and we've just loaned out the one person who could have provided cover for that role even if he isn't very good.
Every time we lumped the ball in his direction it came straight back at us
There is a bit of an overreaction on here IMHO.
It was a dreadful game which we were lucky to get a point from and there were some poor performances out there, however that doesn't however erase Saturdays superb performance. The question which of the two performances are more indicative of how our season will go?
Id say that these days, far more teams in the lower divisions play like Peterborough, not Port Vale. The hyper physical style isn't the go to tactic it used to be (luckily for us).It's a young team and there will be inconsistencies, the key is that we're able to take points when we don't play well, as we did yesterday
The one big concern for me is that we haven't been able to add one or two more experienced players yet, as two of the three that played last night, Chambers and Willock, have rarely played well since we signed them. Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but I very much regret that we didn't give Joe Ralls another year. Last night was his sort of game.
I have always said that Tanner is very limited. If he can't beat his man (and it's not something he even tries to do most of the time) he is very ineffective all round.Quote:
Originally Posted by North Cardiff Blue
SHOOT ffs
I agree there has been an overreaction to last night's game and I've said so myself further up the thread, but was Saturday's performance really superb? It was a good effort against poor opposition and an entertaining game all round, but we scored one goal from open play against a defence that was the second-worst in the division last season. We won 2-1, not 6-1. I believe there's been an overreaction to both performances.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cardiff Ultra
Agreed, Saturday was a decent performance but nothing amazing.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman
I think it shows the shit we’re used to being served up if Saturdays performance was superb.
Probably right, shouldn't get carried away by either performance. One was encouraging, one concerning, but it's very early days. I'm pleased to see BBM admitting we were lucky to get a point - don't think any of his recent predecessors would have. The key now is what he learns from both games. He needs to find a way to deal with the physicality. Do we need to fight fire with fire? How did Birmingham cope with it last season?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman
Massively disappointing after a decent showing Saturday.
We were fortunate to get a point, but the manager will have learnt more from this game than Saturday.
Clearly we need more physicality in defence and more pace outside. Salech also needs service and support.
Alnwick isn’t very good. He lets a lot of soft goals in, same as Horvath. I imagine they were quite surprised re Turner. Signing a good keeper is hardly a disaster and I don’t know why it’s getting talked about.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Quiet Monkfish
Tanner is thick, it's sometimes the prerequisite of an out and out wide player, they seemingly possess no brain tissue.... When it's working, then it looks really good, effective, impressive. When it isn't, then it's awful. And like so many who have played in that position over the years, Tanner doesn't possess the intelligence to change, to think differently, to adjust himself. He bravely battles on on and continues to do the same things that didn't work previously, it's because he doesn't know how to change or adjust, he is obviously too daft to learn or just a victim of coaches who saw a wide player with some ability and thought that was enough to get him through. We have a few players like it,and i see it in younger players which leads me to the question, Is being adaptable on a football pitch coached into these players? Can it be coached into them, or is the modern day coach stripping individualism out of young players?Quote:
Originally Posted by Taunton Blue Genie
Individuality definitely getting coached out under current training protocolsQuote:
Originally Posted by Tuerto
There was perhaps an overreaction to the win on Saturday, it was good at times and a solid start.
Yesterday was pretty bad and were extremely lucky to have gotten a point. It wasn't as if we defended well, they had a 3 or 4 good chances, some free headers that they really should have put away.
Going forward, maybe only the Salech effort from outside the box was noteworthy.
We looked ragged, sloppy and didn't work hard enough to pick up anywhere near enough of the second balls. When Vale went longer, which they mostly did, we were outmuscled almost every time.
Those weaknesses will be exploited and targeted even by the better footballing sides. We were a soft touch all last season and nothing has been done about it.
I won't blame BBM or the younger players, I'm sure over the season they will become sharper, fitter and more accustomed to the system they are being asked to play. I believe we will still score plenty but also concede far too many to be near the top.
It boils down to fan expectations as to how we view the performances this season. If it's a reset season, bringing through and getting league minutes into the younger players, maybe around mid table then those 2 performances and the inconsistency is about right.
If people are really expecting promotion, which the board indicated but haven't really backed up then I feel people are going to get a bit upset every other week.
The takeover seemingly not happening is a massive negative as it feels as though Tan and the club are happy to tread water which is ultimately what we were doing in the champ until we couldn't any longer.
We badly need a few quality players into the starting 11 if we really are targeting top 6.
I don't think anyone is being trained to pass very poorly, over-hit crosses, run into dead ends and squander possession. The players have to take responsibility for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by fugsyphil
Bit of an overreaction to both games
What was concerning I'd say was the general performance of the senior players in Chambers, Wintle & Willock. Chambers in particular was standoffish and not for the first time looks like his legs have gone. Willock looks like he doesn't really want to be here
Ryan Wintle is too slow physically and mentally for the position he wants to play. He lacks pace to cover ground as a holding midfielder and takes 4, 5, 6 touches rather than take the easy quick pass which slows the game immensely and allows Port Vale to get back into shape. I agree the wingers were poor, I'm no fan of either Tenner or Willock and there's no excusing the shocking crosses, but how many times did they get the ball played in front of them at pace? Positionally Wintle has a tendency to wander as well, leaving no protection to the back 4. I'd start King and if he's not up to it go and get someone who is
I'd agree about Willock and Chambers, completely disagree about Wintle thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by City123
I'd disagree about Wintle but it is an accurate description of what I thought of Chambers last season in the holding midfield role
City have to adapt or die to the hard work physicality of L1.
And Callumity Chambers should be chased out of Cardiff after that "display".
Strange how so many balls were completely over hit last night, from lots of players.
perhaps the extra frisson of aggression from being in a physical battle interfered with their natural game more than it should.
the players will have to get used to it quickly though, as other teams will have seen this performance and be looking to ruffle our feathers.
Don't forget that we came bottom of the Championship last year. It's just more of the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rjk
Ashford should have started over Willock. I think Ashford's performance was underrated against Posh, and when Willock came on in that game, he almost conceded a goal.
Trott fannied about with the ball a bit, and made me nervous when being closed down by the Vale striker.
Chambers is good as a CDM, but the drizzling shits as a CB. Lawlor looked outclassed. Kpakio was one of the better players, but still made too many mistakes. Bagan got stuck in, and had a few OK balls, but looked very petulant and clumsy in defence.
Joel was probably my man of the match for at least getting stuck in and showing energy. Wintle wasn't awful, but definitely not the performance we saw on Saturday. Rubin didn't get too much of the ball, but looked OK with it. Midfield battles were still being lost, and Vale often played long balls past them.
Both Willock and Tanner were horrendous. Salech tried, but was in a graveyard shift and got no service from the wingers.
Overall, seems like the players thought they could stay in second gear and still get a win. They were incredibly fortunate to get a draw. Hopefully BBM gets it through that you can't afford to half-ass any game against any competition in this league, we need to take games by the scruff of their neck and play with confidence rather than haphazardly and lackadaisically.
I'm surprised how much you've pushed Joel's performance, for me totally anonymous and fortunate to stay on as long as he didQuote:
Originally Posted by Coyote
If the system gets the wingers into good wide possession, as happened several times last night for both Tanner and Willock, then it's not the system's fault if each of them sends in crosses that are utterly and embarrassingly useless, overhit by maybe 20 yards more than once. That system worked, the players didn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Taunton Blue Genie
Of course it can be the manager's fault if he trusts a useless player to make a decent cross, and particularly if he was anything to do with giving one of them a lengthy new contract.
Apparently the players, under BBM's tutelage, chose Chambers to be their captain. That sums them up. They don't want a bollocking for not doing what they should, and he's a nice bloke. There's hardly a tough guy amongst them.
We shall see, it's all very interesting.
:ayatollah: