v Stoke City (A) Match thread

[Harrowram]

17 hours ago, i-Ram said:

I guess I shouldn’t draw too many conclusions from BBC Stats or a 6 minutes highlights package, but it seems to me to be a sounder base to work from than few of the rabid assessments on here.  We went away to a reasonable side (consider their teamsheet) who have a pretty good home record, and a passionate crowd.  We matched them 50/50 with possession, and we had more efforts on target.  We got a couple of good goals from nicely constructed attacking moves (if you allow for the build up to the pen) and we created a lovely chance at the end that Waghorn was only just unable to convert. Could easily have won that 3-2.  Yes there was a bit of dodgy defending, and our midfield is yet to be settled let alone gel but in my close to 50 years of watching football l have come to the conclusion it does often take a little while to get going in a new league season. Quite often more than 3 games. Good point I would say.

I would agree given the money Stoke have have spent. Butland is a top class goalkeeper, Clucas, Allen,Ince ,have all cost significant money and have played in the Premier league, Hogan cost Villa £10 million, Woods was also expensive. Stoke aren't a bad side regardless of their league position. It is a good job they can't finish!

Derby should improve in the midfield once Bielik is fully fit and Bogle returns.

[ram1964]

Consider all 3 games to have been potential banana skins, would have thought Huddersfield would have had more about them and clearly aren't looking like they will be a force this season. Swansea will do well and disappointed we didn't take all 3 points but other teams will fair worse. Stoke always a hard game and the lads did well to get back into the game.Considering new manager,players and different formations,players still to come back from injury I've been pleased with results so far. Just hope we can continue to improve and show a littor more quality and resistance at times.

Hopefully new players settle and improve the team. Would really.like to see Waggers and Marriott form a partnership upfront ?

[Edtheram]

After watching the highlights we didn't do as bad as people are making out. Stoke had a few good chances but apart form the Allen miss there other good chances like Inces came from us losing possession in our own half and half the team being caught out of position. Both goals were avoidable, the first goal the player gets the wrong side of Clarke and Waggy could of possibly done better on the line, Roos maybe could of come for it. The second is a massive defensive error and just a poor goal to conceded, i doubt and i hope we wont concede another like it for the remainder of the season. We showed enough quality to take the lead and enough quality to get back in the game. We look more capable of grinding out results this season compared to last which is a positive when your not at your fluent best. We could of won it with Waghorn but were still unbeaten and are only 3 games in. Marriott and Bielik need to be starting games now in my opinion. UTR

[Srg]

1 minute ago, Edtheram said:

After watching the highlights we didn't do as bad as people are making out. Stoke had a few good chances but apart form the Allen miss there other good chances like Inces came from us losing possession in our own half and half the team being caught out of position. Both goals were avoidable, the first goal the player gets the wrong side of Clarke and Waggy could of possibly done better on the line, Roos maybe could of come for it. The second is a massive defensive error and just a poor goal to conceded, i doubt and i hope we wont concede another like it for the remainder of the season. We showed enough quality to take the lead and enough quality to get back in the game. We look more capable of grinding out results this season compared to last which is a positive when your not at your fluent best. We could of won it with Waghorn but were still unbeaten and are only 3 games in. Marriott and Bielik need to be starting games now in my opinion. UTR

I think a draw was probably fair. I haven't read much of this thread, but I imagine much of frustration is from how good and comfortable we looked early on and seemed to surrender this without Stoke having to do much.

Two of the most classic Pulis-esque Stoke goals ever though - corner and a long straight punt.

[jono]

8 hours ago, 86 Schmokes & a Pancake said:

I agree with you Jono but I think we have the players now to address this. Bielik looks a monster of a player and not just a destroyer-type but a proper footballer. With him at CDM watch the other mids grow in confidence. Duane, Tom, young Jason Knight and Dowell too, they all have some serious ability not to mention Huddlestone who could find a new lease of life played higher and freed to a degree of last-line defensive duties.

There's a few on here who do nothing but slate the latter but clearly Cocu doesn't agree with them and neither do I. His passing ability and that of Bielik too can see us transformed, or so I hope at least. The midfield balance is coming and by the time Wazza rocks up we could already have proven ourselves a match for anyone in the division. The team we're watching at the moment is some way off our best after all.

COYR

Absolutely my view as well. I guess I am an eternal optimist but this time I think the tools are in the locker. I haven’t felt this positive about match day since early days of Mac 1 and if anything I feel more secure because central defence feels organised and balanced.

just add a bit of salt, some chillies turn up the gas and we’re going to be feasting 

[RamNut]

11 hours ago, Edtheram said:

After watching the highlights we didn't do as bad as people are making out. Stoke had a few good chances but apart form the Allen miss there other good chances like Inces came from us losing possession in our own half and half the team being caught out of position. Both goals were avoidable, the first goal the player gets the wrong side of Clarke and Waggy could of possibly done better on the line, Roos maybe could of come for it. The second is a massive defensive error and just a poor goal to conceded, i doubt and i hope we wont concede another like it for the remainder of the season. We showed enough quality to take the lead and enough quality to get back in the game. We look more capable of grinding out results this season compared to last which is a positive when your not at your fluent best. We could of won it with Waghorn but were still unbeaten and are only 3 games in. Marriott and Bielik need to be starting games now in my opinion. UTR

Um.... After watching the full 90 i had the opposite reaction. We battled but we faded away quickly and thereafter we played like a rowett team - standing off them, conceding possession and trying to keep our shape. If waggy had finished off the gilt edged chance that marriott and jozefzoon created it would have been a classic rowett counter attacking performance. On the other hand, a soft penalty got us a point which we only just about deserved.

Pleased to see cocu prepared to make a change at half time but against stoke's narrow diamond, our wingers should have been well placed to cause trouble. Why didn't they? we were too deep and too passive. We didn't have possession. Shifting to three at the back and moving lawrence central made no real difference. Clarke and bielik were exposed by pace for their second. The only productive change was marriott for lawrence. Giving up on the two wingers after 45 minutes was some statement, but both stayed on. Lawrence playing centrally still couldn't get into the game and jozefzoon at left wing back was bizarre. Preferring jozefzoon to Malone was a slap unless there was another reason for the change. 

Overall, it was disappointing especially after that electric start. Huddlestone and evans don't give the platform for a possession based attacking game. They seem to concede territory and possession. I'd rather see bielik and shinnie or knight v bristol. 

 

[Edtheram]

10 hours ago, RamNut said:

Um.... After watching the full 90 i had the opposite reaction. We battled but we faded away quickly and thereafter we played like a rowett team - standing off them, conceding possession and trying to keep our shape. If waggy had finished off the gilt edged chance that marriott and jozefzoon created it would have been a classic rowett counter attacking performance. On the other hand, a soft penalty got us a point which we only just about deserved.

Pleased to see cocu prepared to make a change at half time but against stoke's narrow diamond, our wingers should have been well placed to cause trouble. Why didn't they? we were too deep and too passive. We didn't have possession. Shifting to three at the back and moving lawrence central made no real difference. Clarke and bielik were exposed by pace for their second. The only productive change was marriott for lawrence. Giving up on the two wingers after 45 minutes was some statement, but both stayed on. Lawrence playing centrally still couldn't get into the game and jozefzoon at left wing back was bizarre. Preferring jozefzoon to Malone was a slap unless there was another reason for the change. 

Overall, it was disappointing especially after that electric start. Huddlestone and evans don't give the platform for a possession based attacking game. They seem to concede territory and possession. I'd rather see bielik and shinnie or knight v bristol. 

 

I agree, when watching parts of the game we seemed to lose possession too easily too often it happened against Swansea too. Big test tonight we need to change something to cause Bristol problems for the full 90 tonight, not sure our wingers are cut out for the job required.

[RamNut]

15 minutes ago, Edtheram said:

I agree, when watching parts of the game we seemed to lose possession too easily too often it happened against Swansea too. Big test tonight we need to change something to cause Bristol problems for the full 90 tonight, not sure our wingers are cut out for the job required.

For me, the first thing we need is a midfield prepared to work harder; to press; to get the ball back quickly; and to push up in support of the attacking players. None of lawrence, dowell, jozefzoon, evans or huddz seem to be natural 'ratters' but perhaps 'ratting' isn't the dutch way? 

[Edtheram]

43 minutes ago, RamNut said:

For me, the first thing we need is a midfield prepared to work harder; to press; to get the ball back quickly; and to push up in support of the attacking players. None of lawrence, dowell, jozefzoon, evans or huddz seem to be natural 'ratters' but perhaps 'ratting' isn't the dutch way? 

Evans won us the penalty on Saturday from making a run forward and getting into the box. At home Bielik should start with Dowell and Knight/Holmes in front. Away its should be Bielik and Evans as the holders and Dowell in front. Huddlestone is a liability in my eyes.

[G STAR RAM]

16 hours ago, RamNut said:

Um.... After watching the full 90 i had the opposite reaction. We battled but we faded away quickly and thereafter we played like a rowett team - standing off them, conceding possession and trying to keep our shape. If waggy had finished off the gilt edged chance that marriott and jozefzoon created it would have been a classic rowett counter attacking performance. On the other hand, a soft penalty got us a point which we only just about deserved.

Pleased to see cocu prepared to make a change at half time but against stoke's narrow diamond, our wingers should have been well placed to cause trouble. Why didn't they? we were too deep and too passive. We didn't have possession. Shifting to three at the back and moving lawrence central made no real difference. Clarke and bielik were exposed by pace for their second. The only productive change was marriott for lawrence. Giving up on the two wingers after 45 minutes was some statement, but both stayed on. Lawrence playing centrally still couldn't get into the game and jozefzoon at left wing back was bizarre. Preferring jozefzoon to Malone was a slap unless there was another reason for the change. 

Overall, it was disappointing especially after that electric start. Huddlestone and evans don't give the platform for a possession based attacking game. They seem to concede territory and possession. I'd rather see bielik and shinnie or knight v bristol. 

 

If Saturday is anything to go by I hope he gives up on Josefzoon full stop. He was absolutely awful. In the early stages of the game we managed to get him one on one against his full back on numerous occasions, not once did he take him on and deliver a good cross. He also never tracked back and basically hung Max Lowe out to dry in the first half. Granted, he did play Waghorn through for the chance at the end but for the other 89 minutes he was a passenger.

Re Malone he may have been taken off for his stupid booking, Lawrence was also taken off too shortly after receiving a yellow card, may have just been a coincidence though.

[Rampage]

34 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

If Saturday is anything to go by I hope he gives up on Josefzoon full stop. He was absolutely awful. In the early stages of the game we managed to get him one on one against his full back on numerous occasions, not once did he take him on and deliver a good cross. He also never tracked back and basically hung Max Lowe out to dry in the first half. Granted, he did play Waghorn through for the chance at the end but for the other 89 minutes he was a passenger.

Re Malone he may have been taken off for his stupid booking, Lawrence was also taken off too shortly after receiving a yellow card, may have just been a coincidence though.

Cocus way of saying do not do tha,t perhaps

[TibshelfRam]

23 minutes ago, Rampage said:

Cocus way of saying do not do tha,t perhaps

That, and probably recognising that they would both be liabilities on yellow cards so was not wanting to take the chance of things escalating.

[FindernRam]

6 hours ago, RamNut said:

None of lawrence, dowell, jozefzoon, evans or huddz seem to be natural 'ratters' but perhaps 'ratting' isn't the dutch way? 

Its the Ramage way!

[brady1993]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

If Saturday is anything to go by I hope he gives up on Josefzoon full stop. He was absolutely awful. In the early stages of the game we managed to get him one on one against his full back on numerous occasions, not once did he take him on and deliver a good cross. He also never tracked back and basically hung Max Lowe out to dry in the first half. Granted, he did play Waghorn through for the chance at the end but for the other 89 minutes he was a passenger.

Re Malone he may have been taken off for his stupid booking, Lawrence was also taken off too shortly after receiving a yellow card, may have just been a coincidence though.

Funny how people see things differently. I'll caveat this opinion by saying I've only seen the first half but honestly I thought he was ok. 

He won a couple free kicks, put in a decent ball no one gambled and helped stretch play when we went forward. I though him not tracking back looked tactical (Lawrence was similar) as they only had the full backs as wide players. 

Nothing special but I don't think he was that bad either. 

Lawrence for me was worse because he kept coming way too central rather than try to exploit where the space was out wide. There was a few times where Malone started to come forward looked for an option in front to exploit the space and then had to check back because nobody was there.

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, brady1993 said:

Funny how people see things differently. I'll caveat this opinion by saying I've only seen the first half but honestly I thought he was ok. 

He won a couple free kicks, put in a decent ball no one gambled and helped stretch play when we went forward. I though him not tracking back looked tactical (Lawrence was similar) as they only had the full backs as wide players. 

Nothing special but I don't think he was that bad either. 

Lawrence for me was worse because he kept coming way too central rather than try to exploit where the space was out wide. There was a few times where Malone started to come forward looked for an option in front to exploit the space and then had to check back because nobody was there.

Like I said, had his full back one on one numerous times and dont recall him beating him once.

Offered literally nothing defensively and even stood there watch a man have a free header at the far post. 

Game of opinions but I thought he was a complete waste of a shirt on Saturday and that seemed to be the general consensus of opinion.

[brady1993]

31 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Like I said, had his full back one on one numerous times and dont recall him beating him once.

Offered literally nothing defensively and even stood there watch a man have a free header at the far post. 

Game of opinions but I thought he was a complete waste of a shirt on Saturday and that seemed to be the general consensus of opinion.

But he did beat him on three occasions twice getting a free kick and another getting the ball in. Admittedily the free kicks were just in front of the box but I think it should be noted. 

I'm not sure I follow about the free header part because if you are on about the goal he wasn't in the box. 

Yeah I get that was the consensus. I was kinda surprised when I watched and thought he was fine: 5-6/10. Maybe everyone saying how he was poor affected my view going in? There were a few worse performers and he was definately not the reason why we were having problems in the first half.

I dunno, just don't 100% agree with the criticism.

[G STAR RAM]

10 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

But he did beat him on three occasions twice getting a free kick and another getting the ball in. Admittedily the free kicks were just in front of the box but I think it should be noted. 

I'm not sure I follow about the free header part because if you are on about the goal he wasn't in the box. 

Yeah I get that was the consensus. I was kinda surprised when I watched and thought he was fine: 5-6/10. Maybe everyone saying how he was poor affected my view going in? There were a few worse performers and he was definately not the reason why we were having problems in the first half.

I dunno, just don't 100% agree with the criticism.

No wasnt on about the goal, it was another chance.

I dont dislike him but would honestly score him 2 or 3 on Saturday, was our worst player although Lawrence ran him close.

[brady1993]

11 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

No wasnt on about the goal, it was another chance.

I dont dislike him but would honestly score him 2 or 3 on Saturday, was our worst player although Lawrence ran him close.

Personally thought Lawrence and Huddlestone were worse (but would put after those two). Huddlestone was a complete passenger and was uncharacteristically sloppy in possession. Lawrence is a strange one because I think the biggest problem was where he was setting himself up. When we'd start building play down the left he kept drifted really inside into a very congested midfield rather than trying to exploit the space that was occurring our wide. There was a few times in first half where Malone has to check back because there is no option in front of him because Lawrence has taken up a position in midfield. 

We needed him to stay wide so we could attempt to overload where they had few players and attack their full backs.