John Brayford

[TonyAgana]

But the liners view is a different angle and Baxter would be stuck out behind our back four like a sore thumb playing him onside.

...making him appear onside, not actually onside, right?

 

[SWB]

He's not even very good at going forward. Never takes a man on and his crosses are always poor. Summed him up today when he had space in the second half and only needed to have a half decent first touch to get himself into a dangerous crossing position, but he miscontrolled and had to come inside.

If your criticising players then Brayford would be way down the list. Why don't you change the track & start with an absolute poor, poor, poor midfield display. Pick any one of them they were all garbage & totally lacking, we all know you and Smirth have a downer on Brayford by now.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

...making him appear onside, not actually onside, right?

Baxter has both feet on the line, their player has one foot 2' inside the area and offside.

 

[TonyAgana]

If your criticising players then Brayford would be way down the list. Why don't you change the track & start with an absolute poor, poor, poor midfield display. Pick any one of them they were all garbage & totally lacking, we all know you and Smirth have a downer on Brayford by now.

Indeed. After that performance today, I'd have expected fans to single out those most anonymous. Maybe that's the answer; hide and avoid criticism...

 

[TonyAgana]

Baxter has both feet on the line, their player has one foot 2' inside the area and offside.

Sorry, I've lost you Grumps. That's what I was saying.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Sorry, I've lost you Grumps. That's what I was saying.

Thought you were trying to say he wasn't offside?

 

[TonyAgana]

Thought you were trying to say he wasn't offside?

Nah! Offside! I thought you were saying he was onside! ---

Played onside by Baxter

:/

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Nah! Offside! I thought you were saying he was onside! ---
:/

Point was the liner could see him as onside as Baxter was slow coming out.

 

[Blade56]

Maybe his problem is he is having to cover two positions. Full back and right wing which means 50% of the time he's out of position and 100% of the time he's having to do a 100m final ever few minutes when play changes.

Maybe I'm searching for reasons I've chucked sh!t loads of cash and 7 years of my families lives down the pan watching a team trying to get back to the billions of the PL on the cheap. I'm taking up de coupage

 

[TonyAgana]

With Coutts in front of him for the first 30 mins, our right was rock solid and dangerous going forward. Horribly imbalanced compared to the left, and I suppose that's why Coutts and Woolford switched, but it all went to shit from then on.

 

[Thorpy]

Probably, but at the moment his form is substandard. He is coasting through games. He knows he has no threats to his position.

dont talk like an idiot, the reason why hes struggling defensively is because adkins is happy for john brayford to work with coutes down the right as an overlap winger, the poor sod is probably so tired by constantly bombing forward that he has no legs towards the end of the game. if adkins played a half decent winger then brayford would defend much better, so blame adkins for the woefull displays not brayford.

 

[Blade56]

One advantage of a huge squad is we can easily solve our defensive issues

 

[sheepbridge]

With Coutts in front of him for the first 30 mins, our right was rock solid and dangerous going forward. Horribly imbalanced compared to the left, and I suppose that's why Coutts and Woolford switched, but it all went to shit from then on.

That's the reason for the goal, not Brayford. Any right-back would have been exposed at the end after those substitutions and switch in formation.
We went from having a solid team defending quite well and pushing forward, certainly at the start of the second half to a formation that was, well, dreadful. Brayford lost a man in front of him and a midfield that lost all tackling ability, Baxter is never a defensive midfielder and I have no idea what Flynn was doing. The diamond formation was a disaster and totally unnecessary.

And I doubt any manager in the country would pick Freeman ahead of Brayford and our form did pick up considerably with the return of Brayford. The problem in the team is not there, that is for certain.

 

[sheepbridge]

Speaking of Brayford, did anyone here hear the exchange between him and Adkins??

When I first saw the thread title I assumed it would be about this.
It did seem quite heated. It was just after an attack down his side after the Coutts substitution.

 

[super_pig]

Phipps suggested very close to £2m. He was apparently in 18k p/w at Cardiff. We have improved but not as much as you'd expect to with a player who cost that much.



No, I don't admit he can go by a player. He can't. Just about anyone can do it with a starting advantage over the opponent. That's different to going by a player when starting on a level footing, relying on nothing but your own ability. It's also different when carrying the ball inside into space relatively unchallenged. That's not beating an opponent, it's 'carrying the ball forwards'.

I'll always rate his performance based on what I consider to be his actual ability level, rather than the fee. The fee isn't the only factor, it's also that he's proven he can play better than he is now. But I'll always keep in mind that whatever he produces won't justify the fee. There's nothing wrong with that.

We defended narrow but their man was in acres of space, was the most obvious threat and it was in Brayford's position. Who was Brayford marking centrally? Anybody?

what the fuck is this bullshit?..

 

[sheffielder]

Just asking the question because someone I know at work told me that Brayford and Adkins had a few words during the substitutions, with a bit of finger pointing from Mr Brayford. Did anyone else notice this? Apparently those at the front could hear it and applauded Brayford.

 

[Dellas Cowboys]

Just asking the question because someone I know at work told me that Brayford and Adkins had a few words during the substitutions, with a bit of finger pointing from Mr Brayford. Did anyone else notice this? Apparently those at the front could hear it and applauded Brayford.

saw it, but didn't hear it - would also love to know what he said - didn't seem best pleased

 

[Rodley]

what the fuck is this bullshit?..

Laughable stuff from one of the usual suspects.

 

[Rodders]

Just asking the question because someone I know at work told me that Brayford and Adkins had a few words during the substitutions, with a bit of finger pointing from Mr Brayford. Did anyone else notice this? Apparently those at the front could hear it and applauded Brayford.

After the goal, Swindon had another attack down the right, with no-one assisting Brayford. He ran straight up to Adkins and was pointing, along the lines of "I'm getting hammered here and getting no help" - but all the subs had been made by then.

 

[sheffielder]

After the goal, Swindon had another attack down the right, with no-one assisting Brayford. He ran straight up to Adkins and was pointing, along the lines of "I'm getting hammered here and getting no help" - but all the subs had been made by then.

Worries me that he didn't see the solution in moving reed and Flynn.

 

[PeteBlade]

Those slagging him off clearly aren't taking into account the fact that he has a cool beard.

 

[Smirth]

My suspicions are correct. He's beyond criticism for a lot of people. If McEveley had put in some of the performances Brayford has lately he would have been hammered for it.

I do like Brayford, but he's off form at the moment and I would have thought Freeman is deserving of an opportunity for a game or two.

 

[wizadry]

I think Brayford hasn't played to the best of his ability recently but people on here have come out with very good reasons for that.

One of the main reasons for me is that he's absolutely bollocksed with about 15 to 20 minutes left making it easier for anyone going down that side, this will then get noticed and remembered very easily compared to something he'd done in lets say the 20th minute, whether that be good or bad.

The way Brayford plays will always mean he needs support down his side, this gets more and more obvious week after week. Playing him as a wing back would be a perfect slot for him but perhaps we don't have the players for this, who knows.

Him and Coutts have played well together recently but I think if we are to look forwards a little we could play someone else on the right hand side and get Coutts in the middle, that's if we aren't going to play with wing backs.

Ultimately, even though I think he could be playing better, along with many others I may add, it would be complete madness to get rid of one of our best players, that is not the way forward and never has been.

 

[Treeton Blade]

Yet another goal down the right. And I can't remember the last time he put a half decent cross in.

This is nothing new though, he's been shit ever since he joined permanently.

An absolute waste of money.

The substitutions exposed Brayford.

He has to track the Robert, who was his man, Ormonde-Ottewell then had the freedom of Bramall Lane to run down the left.
The strange decision to put Reed right of a diamond backfired, and listening to Adkins after, he knew he had got it wrong.

Thought he got a couple of decent crosses in myself, but he is struggling for form a bit.

 

[Cyprus Blade]

Brayford lost a man in front of him and a midfield that lost all tackling ability, Baxter is never a defensive midfielder and I have no idea what Flynn was doing.

I agree about the enigma that is Baxter (he tracked their no 4 and ended up well out of position). Their no 3 was offside though when the pass was played, but not given. Louis Reed is culpable here though - he was supposed to be covering no 3 but forgot what position he was playing and left us wide open. The substitutions undid us big time but we were struggling before that in MF. Taking Hammond off because of the suspension risk was a mistake with Basham off injured. Flynn in the middle was a nonsense, especially when we were struggling down our right flank defensively. Seems to me a new midfield with no enforcers and weaker defensively was a calculated risk (hoping we could force them back by attacking more ??) and it blew up in Adkins' face. The composition of the bench looked a bit bereft of defenders. Is Wallace injured? I would have sooner he had come on instead of Reed as a DMF.

Him and Coutts have played well together recently but I think if we are to look forwards a little we could play someone else on the right hand side and get Coutts in the middle, that's if we aren't going to play with wing backs.

In attack I agree Brayford/Coutts looks about our most potent MF threat since Murphy left, but not defensively. Very little comes through the middle or down the left going forwards. Coutts looking better going forward is a lot to do with Brayford I think. Can't say the same about Coutts for Brayford defensively. Coutts IS looking better but he is still blowing out of his arse after an hour and he should have set up the second for us (unmarked and in their box early second half with Sharp with an open goal) but poor control and no left foot meant he screwed it up. That cost us the game as much as the defensive frailties.

 

[wizadry]

I agree about the enigma that is Baxter (he tracked their no 4 and ended up well out of position). Their no 3 was offside though when the pass was played, but not given. Louis Reed is culpable here though - he was supposed to be covering no 3 but forgot what position he was playing and left us wide open. The substitutions undid us big time but we were struggling before that in MF. Taking Hammond off because of the suspension risk was a mistake with Basham off injured. Flynn in the middle was a nonsense, especially when we were struggling down our right flank defensively. Seems to me a new midfield with no enforcers and weaker defensively was a calculated risk (hoping we could force them back by attacking more ??) and it blew up in Adkins' face. The composition of the bench looked a bit bereft of defenders. Is Wallace injured? I would have sooner he had come on instead of Reed as a DMF.



In attack I agree Brayford/Coutts looks about our most potent MF threat since Murphy left, but not defensively. Very little comes through the middle or down the left going forwards. Coutts looking better going forward is a lot to do with Brayford I think. Can't say the same about Coutts for Brayford defensively. Coutts IS looking better but he is still blowing out of his arse after an hour and he should have set up the second for us (unmarked and in their box early second half with Sharp with an open goal) but poor control and no left foot meant he screwed it up. That cost us the game as much as the defensive frailties.

Good observations, mate. Nothing to add there really, great post.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Yet another goal down the right. And I can't remember the last time he put a half decent cross in.

This is nothing new though, he's been shit ever since he joined permanently.

An absolute waste of money.

Saturday. First half. Put a very decent cross in but we don’t have anyone up front who attacks aerial balls.



He’s been far from shit. We’ve lost 1 in 8 (I think) league games since he came back. He does get exposed at times and isn’t fantastic at defending but he always gives us an outlet of the ball and if we’re going to create anything in a game I always fancy that it will come down the right side with Brayford, Coutts and Sharp linking up. As for “since he joined permanently”, look at his contribution at CB last season. Look how we did after he got injured.



It’s no coincidence that we’re a better team when he’s available. But still, McEveley’s picked up his game and Sammon’s not playing so we have to find someone to hate.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Fuck all.

Alternatively, you might say immediately following his arrival (on loan), we went on one of the best runs we’ve been on going from relegation front runners to just missing the playoffs in less than half a season whilst he also played a significant part in us reaching a Wembley semi-final. Let’s not forget that Howard, Brayford, Collins and Harris who are all now supposedly shit made up the majority of the defence that kept something like 10 clean sheets on the bounce.



For the poster above that blamed him for costing us a replay at Old Trafford. We’d have already been behind if it wasn’t for his great diving block in the box. Plus he didn’t force Hammond to dive in. He just got beat in the 93rd minute by a the fresh legs of a £30million winger. It happens.



He plugged a gap for us last season doing an admirable job at CB when we were so short before suffering a bad injury making a goal saving challenge. Then, we can’t buy a result and are conceding goals for fun. He comes back. We win 4 on the bounce conceding one goal (and he had a goal wrongly chalked off). Coutts suddenly starts looking like a footballer (wonder why?). But he got skinned late on by a fresh Peterborough sub (as did Edgar and Hammond btw). I’ve not seen the Swindon goal back but it looked like we were very stretched before the ball got to Brayford’s man and that we were at full stretch trying to recover.



I really do despair at some of our support sometimes.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Did we keep a standard 4-4-2 at that stage or switch to a diamond?

We switched to the diamond from the start of the 2nd half.


--------Hammond

Basham--------Woolford

----------Coutts


It worked quite well for the first 10 minutes or so but then we lost Basham and they made a couple of changes bringing on the very impressive Traore who seemed to run the midfield from then on.


Baxter replaced Hammond at the base of the diamond. When Reed came on, he was on the right with Flynn most advanced (I’d have had them the other way round) but they lost their shape after the changes. Reed and Flynn looked very uncomfortable in the roles they were given. I’m surprised we made 3 changes and left Done on because I thought he really struggled and what he was doing letting that ball go out on the touchline after Baxter’s 60 yard pass only he knows. They scored immediately from that turnover in possession.


For all those who want Basham as a centre half, just look how we struggle whenever we don’t have his legs in midfield.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

It was there fullbacks that were out wide not wingers, they were obviously told to stay out wide, on the touchline, for me it was the wide midfielders job close them down not our fullbacks, a tactic we used early in cloughs reign, we have a wide pitch, a fantastic new surface and we play so narrow we hardly ever use the wings, thought that was part of the reason for the new pitch,playing quick attacking football, I, like most everybody else am bored to tears, confidence may come from results but for me it comes from performances and that is why I have little confidence at the moment, down to hope and luck I'm afraid

I think even before the subs, there were a few occasions where Coutts and Brayford were a little confused as to who should go to their wing back and it nearly led to a chance once in the first half.


Woolford, for all his limitations on the ball, is a good defender in front of McEveley. Our left side is designed to be solid defensively. Our right side is designed to be our main creative outlet. Not surprising that more goals come (both for and against) down our right side.