Forest 5-1 City

Log in to stop seeing adverts

Status
Not open for further replies.
David Gwilliam said:
The last time we had a successful Championship season was in Adams first year and the team of Muzzy, Dickov, Deane and other quality players got hammered by Ipswich - I thinik it was 6-0. The team got back on track very quickly.
Click to expand...

It was 6-1, and we didn't play that badly in that match.
At half time it was 1-1 but five of our players were injured in the first half. Three were subbed including Izzet and Taggart (his replacement Ashton had an awful game) and two played on but couldn't do much. The injuries made the difference with most of the Ipswich goals coming towards the end.
 
Jeff said:
It was 6-1, and we didn't play that badly in that match.
At half time it was 1-1 but five of our players were injured in the first half. Three were subbed including Izzet and Taggart (his replacement Ashton had an awful game) and two played on but couldn't do much. The injuries made the difference with most of the Ipswich goals coming towards the end.
Click to expand...

Watched the 'highlights' over the weekend. Feck me we looked bad, and lucky we 'only' lost 5-1.

Don't live in Leicester but still having the shit ripped out of me today, nice one LCFC.
 
DesertFox said:
Slightly concerned that Pearson doesn't think it was anything to do with tactics on Saturday...
Click to expand...

Tactics don't win games, players do.

If the players don't follow the instructions, you can tactic them until you are blue in the face, it wont make any difference!
 
Of course players win games, they're the ones that are playing! :icon_roll

But seriously, do you think it makes no difference whether there's a plan or not? If tactics are largely irrelevant (or players are going to do whatever they like anyway) why even have managers?

The two first half substitutions and change of formation suggested to me that Pearson thought he'd got it wrong and tried to fix it, for which I give him great credit. The fact that it didn't work is unfortunate but at least he had the balls to recognize everything was going pear-shaped and tried to change it.

But then afterwards Pearson reckons it was nothing to do with "tactics". So were these substitutions and change of formation planned from the start? Or were the individual performances of Kermorgant and Fryatt so awful that they had to be hauled off immediately? They weren't replaced like for like, so they looked for all the world to be tactical substitutions to me, because we clearly needed to change our shape, quickly. Is that not "tactics"?

:102: Maybe I just don't understand. I still find it all a little bizarre.
 
We could've had Alex Ferguson, Jose Mourinho and Bill Shankly from beyond the grave tactic that lot on Saturday.
It wouldn't have made any difference, collectively they all had a bad day at the office.

Sometimes you can carry a player or 2, but not all 10 outfield players (and the subs!). That's what happened on Saturday.

Saturday needed a vocal and demonstrative leader on the pitch. It seems what leaders we have had turned passive.

Tomorrow night will tell me more about the players than Saturday did.
 
DesertFox said:
But seriously, do you think it makes no difference whether there's a plan or not? If tactics are largely irrelevant (or players are going to do whatever they like anyway) why even have managers?
Click to expand...

That's not what I said. If you have tactics, players play to them then hopefully things will go to plan.

If players aren't playing to instructions, you have to question whether they understand and are capable of following said tactics.

As we haven't changed anything drastic over the past 1 & 1/2 seasons, how can it be the tactics?

As I said, just a shite day at the office.
 
been getting a fair bit of stick today as i work in Newark and Nottingham on a monday, most were of the opinion that their teams confidence grew once we took Fryatt off
 
H T B said:
Tactics don't win games, players do.

If the players don't follow the instructions, you can tactic them until you are blue in the face, it wont make any difference!
Click to expand...


Yes, if players don't follow your instructions then tactics are meaningless, but that's why you buy players who aren't incompetent feckwits.

But saying "tactics don't win game, players do" is a complete load of horse shit.

Why the feck did Greece win Euro 2004 if tactics don't win games? It certainly wasn't their world beating players. Yet they were the only side to play a libero man marking system, that was so old teams had simply forgotten how to deal with it.
 
Last edited:
H T B said:
We could've had Alex Ferguson, Jose Mourinho and Bill Shankly from beyond the grave tactic that lot on Saturday.
It wouldn't have made any difference, collectively they all had a bad day at the office.

Sometimes you can carry a player or 2, but not all 10 outfield players (and the subs!). That's what happened on Saturday.

Saturday needed a vocal and demonstrative leader on the pitch. It seems what leaders we have had turned passive.

Tomorrow night will tell me more about the players than Saturday did.
Click to expand...

Unsurprising, given that Bob Paisley did all Shankly's tactics for him. :102:
 
beaumontfox said:
He was ineffectual though. I would've taken him off and put Kermit upfront with Waghorn.
Click to expand...


How could you have done that when Kermit had already been taken off?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Log in to stop seeing adverts

Championship

P Pld Pts
1Leicester4697
2Ipswich4696
3Leeds Utd4690
4Southampton4687
5West Brom4675
6Norwich City4673
7Hull City4670
8Middlesbro4669
9Coventry City4664
10Preston 4663
11Bristol City4662
12Cardiff City4662
13Millwall4659
14Swansea City4657
15Watford4656
16Sunderland4656
17Stoke City4656
18QPR4656
19Blackburn 4653
20Sheffield W4653
21Plymouth 4651
22Birmingham4650
23Huddersfield4645
24Rotherham Utd4627

Latest posts

Top