Praise for the Youngsters Today

[Sean Thornton]

Don't get the point of this, it seems obvious.



But somehow magically(?) playing this rubbish we created chance after chance after chance.

A real mystery.

What purpose does it serve:

• control the ball you control the game,
• the opposition can't score if you've got possession
• how hard it is physically and mentally to play without the ball - which brings its rewards later in the game as the opponents tire - requires patience.

etc.

For me our best game in this style was Fleetwood - another 3-0 canter, set against a chorus of half-time boos.

Plenty of teams haven't been tired at BL and quite a few have been taking the game to United as the game ends.

It's all very well posting the theory when what's actually happening on the pitch doesn't match.

 

[Punk Blade]

For me our best game in this style was Fleetwood - another 3-0 canter

Not sure I managed to stay awake to see all three goals...

 

[Finnieston]

Holding midfielders don't have to be pedestrian and lose men as easily as Hammond does either.
You might have seen Whitemans pass to Reed for the goal as well. Positivity from a young lad compared to the experienced bloke on PL wages who can't dominate in L1 and would have taken the easy option as he almost always does.

But he is not a holding midfielder.....who stays where he is to plug the gap in case Whiteman or Reed lose posession. Seems funny how the score altered when he went off. Ide make Hammond Captain next season and build round him. He,s a class player. We all hold different views which is what makes it a great game. I totally respect yours.

 

[finlaytheblade]

Holding midfielders dont run around like blue arse flies. They supply the ball to people like Reed and Whiteman.Mostly simple passes. If they get it wrong after receiving who gets it in the neck.mmmmm The Holding Midfielder. Monty got it. Gannon got it. Booker got it. Rogers got it. Doyle got it. Hockey got it.Speight got it........Seems to be a pattern forming.

Spot on Finnieston you go right back through the ages there naming a lot of players and probably the only one to be really appreciated was Hockey,
and what he brought wernt skill but leadership which was badly lacking at the time.Ime not classing Hammond with Hockey as he was a legend during the few years he was here.Hammond has been captain at 3 different clubs and been successful so he must have leadership qualities. Ok you might say his legs have gone ( obviously not as mobile as when in his prime) his stats obviously show he covers the ground Adkins has commented on this a few times,( no hiding place for players now with the GPS vests
Which measures every inch covered during a match).
McCabe and Adkins have stated how important the academy is going forward, to get the best from any group of young players experienced players are a necessary part as leadership is very important.We do have some real quality coming through but they need experienced players around them ( minders if you want another term) . Adkins in my opinion beleave Hammond is ideal for this roll maybe McEveley and Sharp are 2 others,we do need a few more,but we can see surely what Adkins is trying to achieve and it excites me to think we could build a team with a good number of home grown players on the pitch..
If you are sceptical about this theory
Just look at yesterday's bench, 5 academy lads out of 7.
Iwatch the kids 21s&18 s they are good but as we know all won't make it but it my opinion a good few will it's keeping the process going which is difficult as the competition for good young footballers is fierce and money always plays a part in this

 

[Woodwardfan]

It's like a life lesson on who can be the most smug and condescending.

It's a smug-off.

How can I describe a smug comment about a smug-off without being even more smug? I'll just say thanks for taking part Pete and adding value as usual, oh buggar, that's definitely smug and condescending. The cricket's distracting me otherwise I'd be more original (smug).

 

[Woodwardfan]

But he is not a holding midfielder.....who stays where he is to plug the gap in case Whiteman or Reed lose posession. Seems funny how the score altered when he went off. Ide make Hammond Captain next season and build round him. He,s a class player. We all hold different views which is what makes it a great game. I totally respect yours.

Hammond went off as soon as Crewe scored their first goal.

If he's not a holding midfield player then what is he?

 

[Bladesman]

Hammond went off as soon as Crewe scored their first goal.

If he's not a holding midfield player then what is he?

A traffic cone?

 

[PeteBlade]

How can I describe a smug comment about a smug-off without being even more smug? I'll just say thanks for taking part Pete and adding value as usual, oh buggar, that's definitely smug and condescending. The cricket's distracting me otherwise I'd be more original (smug).

Calm down Woodward, only joking, no need to get on the sauce and start going crazy again...

 

[Woodwardfan]

Don't get the point of this, it seems obvious.



But somehow magically(?) playing this rubbish we created chance after chance after chance.

A real mystery.

What purpose does it serve:

• control the ball you control the game,
• the opposition can't score if you've got possession
• how hard it is physically and mentally to play without the ball - which brings its rewards later in the game as the opponents tire - requires patience.

etc.

For me our best game in this style was Fleetwood - another 3-0 canter, set against a chorus of half-time boos.

How about you name me the chance after chance after chance and I think you imply more than just the three by that comment, and maybe name me a few saves their keeper made from open play which is what we are talking about. We scored one against a very poor, tentative team heading for relegation and lacking spirit before half time.

All the fans round me were sat on their hands without any excitement. It was like a friendly such was the atmosphere.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

How about you name me the chance after chance after chance and I think you imply more than just the three by that comment, and maybe name me a few saves their keeper made from open play which is what we are talking about. We scored one against a very poor, tentative team heading for relegation and lacking spirit before half time.

All the fans round me were sat on their hands without any excitement. It was like a friendly such was the atmosphere.

From memory:

The goal
Billy hits the post
Coutts crosses and Billy has a shot blocked from about 8 yards out
The Beard's header and a great save
Coutts shot across the goal from the right towards the far top corner
Coutts drags a left foot shot wide from the edge of the box
Billy pulls it back to Che about 6 or 7 yards out, he drags it horribly wide - either should've scored, best chance of the half and not on any highlights

If the contention is we didn't totally dominate the first half and create more than enough to finish the game off then there's not much point to this conversation.

Second half was much more exciting - when they had lots if the ball.

Were they bad or did we make them look ordinary? Same v Oldham.

Maybe some credit is due to the manager and the players for controlling and dominating a game. Or half a game.

I wonder if the people sitting on their hands booed at half time v Fleetwood.

 

[PeteBlade]

Were they bad or did we make them look ordinary? Same v Oldham.

.

League positions say they are both really bad.

 

[raul]

Fleetwood must be near the top though given the amount of mentions they are getting?

 

[Woodwardfan]

From memory:

The goal
Billy hits the post
Coutts crosses and Billy has a shot blocked from about 8 yards out
The Beard's header and a great save
Coutts shot across the goal from the right towards the far top corner
Coutts drags a left foot shot wide from the edge of the box
Billy pulls it back to Che about 6 or 7 yards out, he drags it horribly wide - either should've scored, best chance of the half and not on any highlights

If the contention is we didn't totally dominate the first half and create more than enough to finish the game off then there's not much point to this conversation.

Second half was much more exciting - when they had lots if the ball.

Were they bad or did we make them look ordinary? Same v Oldham.

Maybe some credit is due to the manager and the players for controlling and dominating a game. Or half a game.

I wonder if the people sitting on their hands booed at half time v Fleetwood.

I meant proper chances not attempts on goal and off target. One keeper save.

The contention was not that we didn't dominate, it was that we did not play well enough or direct enough to put the game out of sight against a dispirited and worried team. They were bad and we looked ordinary, we should have filled our boots.

We were very fortunate to win the game and you know that full well.

Our keeper made saves and we cleared all sorts of situations by all sorts of means right in front of our goal line. We were playing Crewe on a bad run.

There is no credit to our manager after that game, none whatsoever. He wanted to talk about the first half, it was a diversion. Crewe were all over us at the business stage of the game. We got off the hook.

I admire positivity in fans but not just for the sake of it. I am known as a clapper but come on WHF, we were awful.

 

[Woodwardfan]

From memory:

The goal
Billy hits the post
Coutts crosses and Billy has a shot blocked from about 8 yards out
The Beard's header and a great save
Coutts shot across the goal from the right towards the far top corner
Coutts drags a left foot shot wide from the edge of the box
Billy pulls it back to Che about 6 or 7 yards out, he drags it horribly wide - either should've scored, best chance of the half and not on any highlights

If the contention is we didn't totally dominate the first half and create more than enough to finish the game off then there's not much point to this conversation.

Second half was much more exciting - when they had lots if the ball.

Were they bad or did we make them look ordinary? Same v Oldham.

Maybe some credit is due to the manager and the players for controlling and dominating a game. Or half a game.

I wonder if the people sitting on their hands booed at half time v Fleetwood.

BBC Game Statistics versus bottom club at home:

Attempts on goal 13 each team
On target 5 United 7 Crewe
Corners 8 United 9 Crewe
Fouls 12 against United 9 Crewe

Maybe no "credit is due to the manager and the players", according to the solid facts and not just the manager's spin.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Despite his glowing references to the first half performance in the interview, I'd like to think he'd spend more time on the second half performance when we were under the cosh when he goes through the game with the players although he's likely to gush about the first half again, blame Reed for the goal a few times and probably criticise Whiteman for not being Hammond.

 

[finlaytheblade]

I meant proper chances not attempts on goal and off target. One keeper save.

The contention was not that we didn't dominate, it was that we did not play well enough or direct enough to put the game out of sight against a dispirited and worried team. They were bad and we looked ordinary, we should have filled our boots.

We were very fortunate to win the game and you know that full well.

Our keeper made saves and we cleared all sorts of situations by all sorts of means right in front of our goal line. We were playing Crewe on a bad run.

There is no credit to our manager after that game, none whatsoever. He wanted to talk about the first half, it was a diversion. Crewe were all over us at the business stage of the game. We got off the hook.
The
I admire positivity in fans but not just for the sake of it. I am known as a clapper but come on WHF, we were awful.

A lot of truth in what you say Woody but if yu allow Crewe to play they are talented and can punish any team in this division.We unfortunately allowed them to get a foothold in the game and even though we went 2 up that didn't damp there flow and after they scored we got edgy and the fans followed suit.As I say Crewe can play and we lost midfield totally .Adkins gets the blame for us sitting deep but he kept urging us forward with no real response
until the game was tyde at 2-2. Crewe changed there tactics at half time and the edgy ness we show at the lane became very evident (this is a major problem and has been since Wilson 2nd season ) .We seem to stop doing all the things we are doing well and this gives teams encouragement as they
sniff nervousness amongst our team,this is something Adkins has to solve but maybe if we as fans relax a bit more the players will respond.It's a big problem as opposing managers use this to good advantage.

 

[Sean Thornton]

A lot of truth in what you say Woody but if yu allow Crewe to play they are talented and can punish any team in this division.We unfortunately allowed them to get a foothold in the game and even though we went 2 up that didn't damp there flow and after they scored we got edgy and the fans followed suit.As I say Crewe can play and we lost midfield totally .Adkins gets the blame for us sitting deep but he kept urging us forward with no real response
until the game was tyde at 2-2. Crewe changed there tactics at half time and the edgy ness we show at the lane became very evident (this is a major problem and has been since Wilson 2nd season ) .We seem to stop doing all the things we are doing well and this gives teams encouragement as they
sniff nervousness amongst our team,this is something Adkins has to solve but maybe if we as fans relax a bit more the players will respond.It's a big problem as opposing managers use this to good advantage.

That's happened with other struggling teams at BL through the season. Adkins hasn't been able to stop that whichever system he's played. No one is afraid of us at home.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

I think they call it pass and move, something some of our players haven't got the first clue about. They pass and make it hard for someone to pass it back to them due to their lack of movement, it's embarrassing at times. Next season i'd play Whiteman, Reed and a mobile midfield destroyer only if they can prove to they can add goals otherwise we need 2 possibly 3 new midfielders next season, not fucking Hammond who single handedly destroyed our FA cup run, we'd have beaten Man Utd at the lane, they were pants.

It's funny, the goal being rightly lauded on here is nearly a carbon copy of the winner against Port Vale, just with slicker execution. Both were dispatched by Sharp in front of the Kop, Adams in that instance took two touches to lift the ball to Hammond, whose first-time cross eventually reached Sharp for the finish.

 

[finlaytheblade]

That's happened with other struggling teams at BL through the season. Adkins hasn't been able to stop that whichever system he's played. No one is afraid of us at home.

As I said Sean it's something that surfaced in Wilson 2nd season and we have to beat it.I can recall other periods like this and we do get over it in the end
This time it's lasted a long time and we as fans need to help ( we have become quite critical witch is understandable ) it's hard to sit there and not be critical with what's happened over the last few years but it would go a long way to solving the problem if we could.When things start going pair shaped it's a natural reaction to berate, unfortunately that works against us and players lose confidence.

 

[Sean Thornton]

As I said Sean it's something that surfaced in Wilson 2nd season and we have to beat it.I can recall other periods like this and we do get over it in the end
This time it's lasted a long time and we as fans need to help ( we have become quite critical witch is understandable ) it's hard to sit there and not be critical with what's happened over the last few years but it would go a long way to solving the problem if we could.When things start going pair shaped it's a natural reaction to berate, unfortunately that works against us and players lose confidence.

That's the problem. Adkins has been unable to do anything about it. Apologists for Hammond pointed out what happened when he went off, forgetting what has happened numerous times when he wasn't subbed.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I meant proper chances not attempts on goal and off target. One keeper save.

The contention was not that we didn't dominate, it was that we did not play well enough or direct enough to put the game out of sight against a dispirited and worried team. They were bad and we looked ordinary, we should have filled our boots.

We were very fortunate to win the game and you know that full well.

Our keeper made saves and we cleared all sorts of situations by all sorts of means right in front of our goal line. We were playing Crewe on a bad run.

There is no credit to our manager after that game, none whatsoever. He wanted to talk about the first half, it was a diversion. Crewe were all over us at the business stage of the game. We got off the hook.

I admire positivity in fans but not just for the sake of it. I am known as a clapper but come on WHF, we were awful.

Well, for me, this is through the looking glass.

 

[finlaytheblade]

That's the problem. Adkins has been unable to do anything about it. Apologists for Hammond pointed out what happened when he went off, forgetting what has happened numerous times when he wasn't subbed.

Adkins will be well aware of it Sean he said when he came in about getting Bramall Lane rocking he has to solve it cus it is holding us back.
A reasonable home record would have seen us piss it into the play offs.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

no "credit is due to the manager and the players"

At least that bit's clear.

 

[wizadry]

It's funny, the goal being rightly lauded on here is nearly a carbon copy of the winner against Port Vale, just with slicker execution. Both were dispatched by Sharp in front of the Kop, Adams in that instance took two touches to lift the ball to Hammond, whose first-time cross eventually reached Sharp for the finish.

I can't remember that goal but I bet Hammond found himself in that position rather than passed the ball off and moved into it? Genuine question 'btw' and I'd love to see it, mate!

 

[Woodwardfan]

I can't remember that goal but I bet Hammond found himself in that position rather than pass the ball off and move into it. Genuine question 'btw' and I'd love to see it, mate!

Hammond has a single assist since he arrived here.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

I can't remember that goal but I bet Hammond found himself in that position rather than passed the ball off and moved into it? Genuine question 'btw' and I'd love to see it, mate!

I'm going to be accused of being a Hammond apologist at this rate. The goal is from 0:50 here:



It to be honest isn't a great cross at all, but the point of moving the ball quickly is there to see, including Hammond moving to receive the ball rather than finding himself there:



It's become very easy to just lump some of the turgid negative decisions some players make as being part of the Adkins game plan, but what he actually states as being his own approach is the type of quick incisive play that brought us the winner on Friday. I see in another thread he gets the blame for Done being less of an attacking threat 2nd half, when Adkins in fact says that Done sat far too deep than they'd wanted him to. We appear, at the very least, to be trying to move the ball quicker and be more positive. Too often though players seem to revert back to their default mode of unadventurous easy options.

 

[wizadry]

I'm going to be accused of being a Hammond apologist at this rate. The goal is from 0:50 here:



It to be honest isn't a great cross at all, but the point of moving the ball quickly is there to see, including Hammond moving to receive the ball rather than finding himself there:

View attachment 16676

It's become very easy to just lump some of the turgid negative decisions some players make as being part of the Adkins game plan, but what he actually states as being his own approach is the type of quick incisive play that brought us the winner on Friday. I see in another thread he gets the blame for Done being less of an attacking threat 2nd half, when Adkins in fact says that Done sat far too deep than they'd wanted him to. We appear, at the very least, to be trying to move the ball quicker and be more positive. Too often though players seem to revert back to their default mode of unadventurous easy options.

I couldn't tell if the ball bypassed him or whether he dummied it or not but the fact of the matter is, he did move after that happened, although your quite right, the cross was shite. Why can't he get into them positions more often is the question I'd then ask?

 

[Sean Thornton]

I couldn't tell if the ball bypassed him or whether he dummied it or not but the fact of the matter is, he did move after that happened, although your quite right, the cross was shite. Why can't he get into them positions more often is the question I'd then ask?

That ball in was deemed to be a "great" cross by some until it was pointed out the defender got his head to it.

 

[wizadry]

That ball in was deemed to be a "great" cross by some until it was pointed out the defender got his head to it.

Yes, it was shite.

 

[Sirius]

I think we have some potential there, but is Adkins really the man to bring it out? Most of the players seem to dislike him. Changing the team every week, often for no obvious sensible reason, doesn't seem like a great way to build team spirit. Every game there's 2 or 3 changes that appear to be completely random. I think he's right to be moving players on and bringing the youngsters into it, but i'm not convinced he can actually motivate them.

If we were starting out next season, with the youngsters the priority, building a new team. Would Adkins be the appointment, if he wasn't already here? I'm pretty sure he wouldn't be. And i'm pretty sure he wouldn't want to come into that kind of situation either. It's a totally different mission, to the one he was brought in to do.

'
'Most of the players seem to dislike him' ??????? Who, for instance? and why?