FT: SUNDERLAND 2 - 1 CARDIFF CITY. Match thread

[Eric the Half a Bee]

So you don't think having a regular settled defence would have helped over the course of Rizas time in charge.?

I think a right back Ng a left back Bagan with Fish and Goutas going forward will help. I don't think it's great by any means but having them play together where they know their jobs has to help.

You mentioned earlier about the short corners. This has happened in other games as well. We just look badly organised.

Is it Riza , the players. It's probably both. But I'm convinced a better manager would have us better organised and that's why Oxford with Vaulks Harris Brown are ahead of us.

Since Bulut was sacked:

Cardiff P 30 W 8 D 11 L 11 F 38 A 46 GD -8 Pts 35
Oxford P 30 W 6 D 12 L 12 F 27 A 45 GD -18 Pts 30

I'd probably suggest that it's the bad start we had under Bulut, when Oxford were 8 points above us after 6 games, that is why Oxford are ahead of us.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

So you don't think having a regular settled defence would have helped over the course of Rizas time in charge.?

How many sides down towards the bottom have a regular, settled defence? I think this is a bit of a chicken/egg scenario. A team concedes goals, loses games; it makes changes. A team that wins games and doesn't concede many goals has the added bonus of having a settled defence in terms of personnel. It's not just in defence, either. Partnerships form all over the field, players playing reguarly together get to know each others' games more. Imagine a side that hasn't won in several games having an unchanged line up for all of them?

[Hilts]

Since Bulut was sacked:

Cardiff P 30 W 8 D 11 L 11 F 38 A 46 GD -8 Pts 35
Oxford P 30 W 6 D 12 L 12 F 27 A 45 GD -18 Pts 30

I'd probably suggest that it's the bad start we had under Bulut, when Oxford were 8 points above us after 6 games, that is why Oxford are ahead of us.

Of course if wed beaten Oxford under Riza wed have been above them now.

Let's hope he reverses the results v Oxford and Luton which are upcoming. If he doesn't we are really looking at L1.

In fairness he's done better than Bulut. But I think with the January additions we have enough to stay up but I'm not convinced at all that Riza will get the best out of what he's got.

[Hilts]

How many sides down towards the bottom have a regular, settled defence? I think this is a bit of a chicken/egg scenario. A team concedes goals, loses games; it makes changes. A team that wins games and doesn't concede many goals has the added bonus of having a settled defence in terms of personnel. It's not just in defence, either. Partnerships form all over the field, players playing reguarly together get to know each others' games more. Imagine a side that hasn't won in several games having an unchanged line up for all of them?

True. But a much improved 2nd half v Burnley when Fish comes on. I'm totally baffled when I then see he's left out for our left back. I don't get it.

It's anyone's guess who lines up v Luton.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

True. But a much improved 2nd half v Burnley when Fish comes on. I'm totally baffled when I then see he's left out for our left back. I don't get it.

It's anyone's guess who lines up v Luton.

Agree with all of that. He tries to rotate things too much for no reason at times.

[Jordi Culé]

Agree with all of that. He tries to rotate things too much for no reason at times.

He tries to be too clever for his own good perhaps?

[olderblue]

He tries to be too clever for his own good perhaps?

We’ve called it Riza roulette
Spin the wheel to see what numbers come up
I thought Fish was playing well and growing into the centre half position, usually there is an understanding built up by the two centre half’s developed by playing together on a regular basis
If you don’t know who your partner is from one week to another what chance have you got to know when to go and when to drop off as your team mate is going for the ball?

Fish not starting was baffling yesterday but I guess the manager has a reason for that????

Bagan is a LB and that’s where he should be playing

Lawlor looks like a really good prospect to me, with good decision making and a maturity beyond his years

I hope he doesn’t get that coached out of him!!!

I’ve said before, after reading the managers comments that he’s a good analyser of what went wrong, I think the mark of a good experienced manager is making sure that a lot of those things don’t happen in the first place

If any of our coaching staff think we have the players to play out successfully from the back and watching that debacle yesterday then there delusional imho

Bagan, Giles, Fish, Lawlor , the Colwill brothers,Ashford, Davies, Robertson and Salech

There’s enough promising young talent there to build a team on for the future with probably one or two more prospects to add to the list

I hope we don’t waste this opportunity

[the other bob wilson]

Riza seems to be in denial about the first goal.

https://www.cardiffcityfc.co.uk/news...trating-result

[The Lone Gunman]

Riza seems to be in denial about the first goal.

https://www.cardiffcityfc.co.uk/news...trating-result

Then mindset at this club is weird. The interviewer talks about Isaak Davies in relation to a 'youth movement' at the club. Davies is 24 this year!

[Forest Green Bluebird]

Riza seems to be in denial about the first goal.

https://www.cardiffcityfc.co.uk/news...trating-result

The 1st goal was scored soon after taking a short goal-kick and losing possession.

Without reviewing all games this season (and last), how many times can playing out from the back be blamed for conceding?

Would reverting to 'Warnockball' be safer and perhaps more productive now that we have a forward line that is better suited to dealing with long balls?

[Tuerto]

Then mindset at this club is weird. The interviewer talks about Isaak Davies in relation to a 'youth movement' at the club. Davies is 24 this year!

It's bizzare, it happens on here as well.

[The Lone Gunman]

Ian . Olderblue , is a friend of mine , funny how he didn't get offended enough to get personal??

I didn't get in the least bit offended and I didn't get personal either. How could I? I don't know you, never met you and know next to nothing about you. It's impossible to get personal with someone under such circumstances.

I'm merely addressing the message board persona you have created that in recent months has continually been attempting to paint a positive picture of all things Cardiff City and while denigrating and sneering at those you perceive as being negative.

There's a balance to be had here. There are some positive aspects of Cardiff City's current situation, no doubt about that, but there are also many negatives. Being critical of the professional football club we pay to support is not an offence of any kind. It's entirely natural when the team is sitting in 21st position in the Championship.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

The 1st goal was scored soon after taking a short goal-kick and losing possession.

Without reviewing all games this season (and last), how many times can playing out from the back be blamed for conceding?

Would reverting to 'Warnockball' be safer and perhaps more productive now that we have a forward line that is better suited to dealing with long balls?

No.

Nobody wants to go back to the days of whacking it long in the hope we might get something out of it. It just invites pressure back on to us.

I really don't know what the appeal of Warnockball is - whack into the opponent's half - hope a blue shirt is nearby to challenge for it. No teams play like that any more. It's archaic, boring and looks awful when it doesn't work.

Nathan Blake has mentioned several times on phone-ins etc that we need to stop reverting to that sort of game, that if it doesn't work for a short while, we ditch that project and go back to long ball stuff. We have to move away from it eventually. We are never going to produce a good Championship side that could do well in the PL if we went back to long ball. I'd rather us go down than whack it long.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

I didn't get in the least bit offended and I didn't get personal either. How could I? I don't know you, never met you and know next to nothing about you. It's impossible to get personal with someone under such circumstances.

I'm merely addressing the message board persona you have created that in recent months has continually been attempting to paint a positive picture of all things Cardiff City and while denigrating and sneering at those you perceive as being negative.

There's a balance to be had here. There are some positive aspects of Cardiff City's current situation, no doubt about that, but there are also many negatives. Being critical of the professional football club we pay to support is not an offence of any kind. It's entirely natural when the team is sitting in 21st position in the Championship.

Indeed. I would also suggest that there are a handful who thrive on seemingly being "positive" and use that as a stick to put down anyone who dares offer a different viewpoint. Daft.

[The Lone Gunman]

Nobody wants to go back to the days of whacking it long in the hope we might get something out of it. It just invites pressure back on to us.

I want to see us go back to the days of whacking it long from goal kicks. Immediately. Playing short goal kicks invites pressure and we're no good at coping with it.

[MacAdder]

I want to see us go back to the days of whacking it long from goal kicks. Immediately. Playing short goal kicks invites pressure and we're no good at coping with it.

I can't tell if you are being serious here or not.
I assume you aren't and that you mean you'd like to see us revert to the style that Sir Neil of Warnock played when he was here.
The style that made your eyes hurt.
You and a couple of others were the ones advocating a more possession based style where it was obvious that to play such a style is fraught with danger, especially without good players.
You will always find something to "use as a stick" to hammer everything that is Cardiff City and start crying when someone dates to call you out on it.

[MacAdder]

Indeed. I would also suggest that there are a handful who thrive on seemingly being "positive" and use that as a stick to put down anyone who dares offer a different viewpoint. Daft.

I suspect this could be the fact that they come on here get tired of the glass half empty people posting all the time.

[MacAdder]

I applaud Riza for making us more watchable but he needs to get the basics right, and quickly, as our defending has been so poor recently.
Yes, he has been hit with injuries and certain things have been forced upon him but continously tinkering with the back line rarely works.

[The Lone Gunman]

I'm a bit thick.

As I said in TOBW's thread, I'm 100% in favour of playing out from the back when that circumstances allow it, but for a team like ours to be attempting to play out from goal kicks is mind-numbingly stupid, especially in the second minute of a game away to a promotion contender. It's a ridiculous tactic for any side, let alone one that is embroiled in a relegation battle.

This particular tactic has only emerged in the Championship and at Cardiff City in particular during the last couple of seasons and it's just plain dumb. It has no benefits and is clearly counter-productive. Playing out from the back is obviously beneficial under the right circumstances, but twatting about with the ball in your own six yard box from a goal kick is a different thing altogether. It's idiotic.

I'm not surprised that you can't differentiate between the two scenarios, though. It seems everything is black and white as far as you're concerned. You seem to believe that football teams have a choice of either attempting to keep the ball at all times regardless of where they are on the pitch or whacking it long at every opportunity. That is, of course, utter nonsense.

Teams have been playing good, attractive, possession-based football which includes playing out from the back for decades without ever feeling the need to fool around with the ball in their own six-yard boxes at goal kicks. Either you realise that and are having a go for effect, or you're even duller than you seem.

Anyway, this will be my last interaction with you. From this point onwards you're on my five-man 'ignore' list as communicating with you is clearly a complete waste of time and effort. Life really is too short.

[MacAdder]

As I said in TOBW's thread, I'm 100% in favour of playing out from the back when that circumstances allow it, but for a team like ours to be attempting to play out from goal kicks is mind-numbingly stupid, especially in the second minute of a game away to a promotion contender. It's a ridiculous tactic for any side, let alone one that is embroiled in a relegation battle.

This particular tactic has only emerged in the Championship and at Cardiff City in particular during the last couple of seasons and it's just plain dumb. It has no benefits and is clearly counter-productive. Playing out from the back is obviously beneficial under the right circumstances, but twatting about with the ball in your own six yard box from a goal kick is a different thing altogether. It's idiotic.

I'm not surprised that you can't differentiate between the two scenarios, though. It seems everything is black and white as far as you're concerned. You seem to believe that football teams have a choice of either attempting to keep the ball at all times regardless of where they are on the pitch or whacking it long at every opportunity. That is, of course, utter nonsense.

Teams have been playing good, attractive, possession-based football which includes playing out from the back for decades without ever feeling the need to fool around with the ball in their own six-yard boxes at goal kicks. Either you realise that and are having a go for effect, or you're even duller than you seem.

Anyway, this will be my last interaction with you. From this point onwards you're on my five-man 'ignore' list as communicating with you is clearly a complete waste of time and effort. Life really is too short.

Ah name calling, very grown up.

Life really is too short to be sifting through data to produce stats, particularly ones that portray us in a bad light.

You mentioned "balance" earlier in the thread. The irony.

Byeeeee...

[Forest Green Bluebird]

No.

Nobody wants to go back to the days of whacking it long in the hope we might get something out of it. It just invites pressure back on to us.

I really don't know what the appeal of Warnockball is - whack into the opponent's half - hope a blue shirt is nearby to challenge for it. No teams play like that any more. It's archaic, boring and looks awful when it doesn't work.

Nathan Blake has mentioned several times on phone-ins etc that we need to stop reverting to that sort of game, that if it doesn't work for a short while, we ditch that project and go back to long ball stuff. We have to move away from it eventually. We are never going to produce a good Championship side that could do well in the PL if we went back to long ball. I'd rather us go down than whack it long.

Unsure whether this is true.

Maybe my use of the term 'Warnockball' was not appropriate.

Just wanted to make the point that with the current defenders we have available, playing out from the back is perhaps putting MORE pressure on us than kicking it long or kicking out to wide receivers. Taking a goal kick in the 'archaic' sense does not mean that every kick has to get into the last third.

Perhaps there are some statisticians out there who keep tabs on how many goals have resulted directly from keepers getting the ball into the position of maximum opportunity (POMO) ... for any teams.

[Forest Green Bluebird]

No.

Nobody wants to go back to the days of whacking it long in the hope we might get something out of it. It just invites pressure back on to us.

I really don't know what the appeal of Warnockball is - whack into the opponent's half - hope a blue shirt is nearby to challenge for it. No teams play like that any more. It's archaic, boring and looks awful when it doesn't work.

Nathan Blake has mentioned several times on phone-ins etc that we need to stop reverting to that sort of game, that if it doesn't work for a short while, we ditch that project and go back to long ball stuff. We have to move away from it eventually. We are never going to produce a good Championship side that could do well in the PL if we went back to long ball. I'd rather us go down than whack it long.

Just done some googling and found this analysis https://statsbomb.com/articles/socce...to-do-with-it/

which concludes:

"Long balls are undoubtedly less common in elite football than they were in the past. But they aren’t going anywhere, either as a means to clear your lines and reset your shape, or a direct attempt to try to create a goal for yourself. And if you’re going to be a good team, then being good at even the unfashionable aspects of the game will help."

Of course this is all subjective.

[Michael Morris]

[Eric the Half a Bee]

I suspect this could be the fact that they come on here get tired of the glass half empty people posting all the time.

I don't know about you, but I bump into City fans from time to time that I've never met. Whether it be someone is wearing a City shirt in front of me in a supermarket or a City hat when I'm out having a stroll, I'll usually introduce myself as a fellow sufferer, and this is always replied to with a knowing smile. There's something generally self-deprecating about City fans in general; a feeling that if something is going well, it won't last, or it's the same old shit. Yet, aside from some moans, there's always a fondness of the club that cuts through. It's a part of our City DNA and appears in virtually every City fan I know.

I find it hilarious when I get described as negative on here as I'm anything but. I never get described as such by anyone. It doesn't bother me, though when trolls go out of their way to be abusive, I sometimes wonder whether it's worth bothering coming on here. Then I realise these trolls haven't got the ability to challenge me or anyone else - it's why they do it as they haven't got the ability to enter into rational conversation or debate.

[Eric the Half a Bee]

Just done some googling and found this analysis https://statsbomb.com/articles/socce...to-do-with-it/

which concludes:

"Long balls are undoubtedly less common in elite football than they were in the past. But they aren’t going anywhere, either as a means to clear your lines and reset your shape, or a direct attempt to try to create a goal for yourself. And if you’re going to be a good team, then being good at even the unfashionable aspects of the game will help."

Of course this is all subjective.

It's a very interesting read. There's little to suggest in there that long ball for long balls' sake does much to improve on things defensively. Everton, who (under Dyche) were more direct than anyone else, just hoofed it down the middle and found the ball coming back their way. There's one thing just getting the ball away from your penalty area and another turning it into meaningful possession. Teams that press well tend to be able to turn a long ball into possession.

This might be a controversial comment, but here goes anyway - a team that takes a goal kick long which just presents possession back to the opposition, who create an attack and score is just as bad as a defender giving the ball away when playing from the back. The end result is the same, poor use of possession leading to a goal being conceded.