Style of football

[IslandExile]

6 hours ago, TomTom92 said:

Rowett - One of my favourite seasons

One shot over two legs in the playoff against Fulham with Vydra on the bench.

Rowettball was generally terrible, hardly entertaining.

[CornwallRam]

For the last decade, we've pretty much played with a lone striker upfront.

In my world, that's been our main issue.

OK, when we've had players like Russell, Ward, Bryson, Ince, Wilson and Mount playing off that striker we've looked pretty good at times. However, I still think it limits the way we can play. We're always outnumbered on the box, so crosses are less effective. When we break, there's often no one for the striker to pass to. There's so rarely a scope for clever and quick passes in the opositions box.

The problem is though, that's where my thought process is and it's probably wrong. For so few teams to still play with two strikers, there must be some pretty strong evidence to say that a lone striker works better. The analysts must know far more than me. I'd love to see us play 352 or 442 at a push...but logically, it's probably better that we don't. 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

6 hours ago, Jubbs said:

I honestly don't understand what our fans want.

People have been naming the likes of Warnock/McCarthy, which is Rowettball on steroids, yet the majority of our fans complained about the football we played under Rowett.

The sides McCarthy had at Wolves and Sunderland played really good football as did his Ireland team.  At Ipswich he had not a pot to pee in and had to set up his side accordingly. Effective, as the same squad went down like a sack of s*** once he left and he had them in the top half most of the time.   He's a good manager.  

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

39 minutes ago, CornwallRam said:

For the last decade, we've pretty much played with a lone striker upfront.

In my world, that's been our main issue.

OK, when we've had players like Russell, Ward, Bryson, Ince, Wilson and Mount playing off that striker we've looked pretty good at times. However, I still think it limits the way we can play. We're always outnumbered on the box, so crosses are less effective. When we break, there's often no one for the striker to pass to. There's so rarely a scope for clever and quick passes in the opositions box.

The problem is though, that's where my thought process is and it's probably wrong. For so few teams to still play with two strikers, there must be some pretty strong evidence to say that a lone striker works better. The analysts must know far more than me. I'd love to see us play 352 or 442 at a push...but logically, it's probably better that we don't. 

Even back then we had games where we had to change it.  Normally the Millwall and Blackburn type of games where Martin would be totally ineffective against the Hanleys.  Enter the Sammon as partner, to stretch play off the shoulder and knock s*** out them with elbows and wandering cranium.  He added a lot to the side in those type of games. 

[SK47]

I see your Pearson..

 

And I raise you Phil Brown. 

 

Mac 1 was by far the best the though. And his introduction of going into the dressing room from the stand with derby 3-0 down at half time and us drawing 3-3 was truly God like. I thought he was sent by the Lord himself after the run we went on after

Edited September 14, 2022 by SK47

[RoyMac5]

8 minutes ago, SK47 said:

Mac 1 was by far the best the though. And his introduction of going into the dressing room from the stand with derby 3-0 down at half time and us drawing 3-3 was truly God like. I thought he was sent by the Lord himself after the run we went on after

???

But didn't he need to wait for them to gel?

[RadioactiveWaste]

8 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

???

But didn't he need to wait for them to gel?

This is where I do think Nigel should get his fair credit, he'd cheaply built a very capable squad who were all hard working and commited to the cause. He just lacked the finesse to really set them free.

But on the team this season, it does seem a bit Cocu like - yes there's a vision but it's got to be a really good team playing really well to make it work properly and at the same time, it's fairly easy to disrupt.

More pragmatism and robustness are needed. It's not that the vision is necessarily that wrong,so much as you've got to deal with the game that's actually being played. Even man city et al can lump a "well executed long pass" when the situation demands it.

I didn't hate rowett, it was nice to have a season of a competent defence in a "oh that's what it's like" kind of way