For me it was the formation.

[mattbianco1]

We set up with 3-1-4-2 when all last season we played 3-4-1-2.

For me that was the problem. I understand the reasons for lining up like that as they do have a very good championship midfield. But it doesn't seem to work for us.

Setting up with the formation means Fleck is the furthest forward and that's not his position, for me he was absent from the game.

We didn't have the link up play between midfield and attack that Duffy or Woodburn (apparently) would provide. I would see today's formation as an away formation, not a home formation.

The subs were unlucky. He was bringing Woodburn on for McG just before they equalised. He then stuck to his decision and made that change anyway despite us conceding the equaliser. He should've at that point, in my opinion brought Sharp and Woodburn on together. He didn't and the formation was set to kind of see the game out, but now we're level so usually he'd be going for it if you get what I mean...

So then he has to bring on BOTH Duffy AND Sharp to really go for it. It didn't work.

I also think the partnership of Clarke and McG will not work at this level. They're too similar. Sharp should be alongside one of them. I'm not sure what Sharp has done wrong but he is clearly our 3rd choice striker now and "IF" we bring in Waghorn or A.N.Other, he'll be 4th choice, despite being the best finisher in the squad.

For me, at home we MUST start with Duffy or Woodburn behind the strikers, too defensive minded in midfield with the midfield orcheastrator (Fleck) being to far forward not getting in the game.

That, for me is the first time Wilder has got a selection wrong for knocking on 2 years.

 

[Esablade]

Good take on the game...

 

[bartman]

We set up with 3-1-4-2 when all last season we played 3-4-1-2.

For me that was the problem. I understand the reasons for lining up like that as they do have a very good championship midfield. But it doesn't seem to work for us.

Setting up with the formation means Fleck is the furthest forward and that's not his position, for me he was absent from the game.

We didn't have the link up play between midfield and attack that Duffy or Woodburn (apparently) would provide. I would see today's formation as an away formation, not a home formation.

The subs were unlucky. He was bringing Woodburn on for McG just before they equalised. He then stuck to his decision and made that change anyway despite us conceding the equaliser. He should've at that point, in my opinion brought Sharp and Woodburn on together. He didn't and the formation was set to kind of see the game out, but now we're level so usually he'd be going for it if you get what I mean...

So then he has to bring on BOTH Duffy AND Sharp to really go for it. It didn't work.

I also think the partnership of Clarke and McG will not work at this level. They're too similar. Sharp should be alongside one of them. I'm not sure what Sharp has done wrong but he is clearly our 3rd choice striker now and "IF" we bring in Waghorn or A.N.Other, he'll be 4th choice, despite being the best finisher in the squad.

For me, at home we MUST start with Duffy or Woodburn behind the strikers, too defensive minded in midfield with the midfield orcheastrator (Fleck) being to far forward not getting in the game.

That, for me is the first time Wilder has got a selection wrong for knocking on 2 years.

A big problem was also Basham at RCB. He was reckless going forward and they kept getting behind him. The majority of their attacks came due to him out of position

 

[Fanny magnet]

We set up with 3-1-4-2 when all last season we played 3-4-1-2.

For me that was the problem. I understand the reasons for lining up like that as they do have a very good championship midfield. But it doesn't seem to work for us.

Setting up with the formation means Fleck is the furthest forward and that's not his position, for me he was absent from the game.

We didn't have the link up play between midfield and attack that Duffy or Woodburn (apparently) would provide. I would see today's formation as an away formation, not a home formation.

The subs were unlucky. He was bringing Woodburn on for McG just before they equalised. He then stuck to his decision and made that change anyway despite us conceding the equaliser. He should've at that point, in my opinion brought Sharp and Woodburn on together. He didn't and the formation was set to kind of see the game out, but now we're level so usually he'd be going for it if you get what I mean...

So then he has to bring on BOTH Duffy AND Sharp to really go for it. It didn't work.

I also think the partnership of Clarke and McG will not work at this level. They're too similar. Sharp should be alongside one of them. I'm not sure what Sharp has done wrong but he is clearly our 3rd choice striker now and "IF" we bring in Waghorn or A.N.Other, he'll be 4th choice, despite being the best finisher in the squad.

For me, at home we MUST start with Duffy or Woodburn behind the strikers, too defensive minded in midfield with the midfield orcheastrator (Fleck) being to far forward not getting in the game.

That, for me is the first time Wilder has got a selection wrong for knocking on 2 years.

I agree with all that except the last sentence as I think he's been Making the same mistakes for a while now

I excitedly thought at the halfway point last season that we were looking to bring in players to be able to change to 3-4-3 during a game to counteract the by now formulate system every team sets up against us at the lane but unfortunately I was over excited

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Wilder has apparently said in post match interview that we tried to match them up in midfield - well it failed miserably particularly 2nd half, so who didn't do their job?

Well, it has to be the midfield.

Seems we CHANGED our style to suit them with the team selection, which is negative minded and does this now show that our management is running out of positive ideas? We sadly picked a side not to lose...........except we did lose.

UTB

 

[Going t lane]

We set up with 3-1-4-2 when all last season we played 3-4-1-2.

For me that was the problem. I understand the reasons for lining up like that as they do have a very good championship midfield. But it doesn't seem to work for us.

Setting up with the formation means Fleck is the furthest forward and that's not his position, for me he was absent from the game.

We didn't have the link up play between midfield and attack that Duffy or Woodburn (apparently) would provide. I would see today's formation as an away formation, not a home formation.

The subs were unlucky. He was bringing Woodburn on for McG just before they equalised. He then stuck to his decision and made that change anyway despite us conceding the equaliser. He should've at that point, in my opinion brought Sharp and Woodburn on together. He didn't and the formation was set to kind of see the game out, but now we're level so usually he'd be going for it if you get what I mean...

So then he has to bring on BOTH Duffy AND Sharp to really go for it. It didn't work.

I also think the partnership of Clarke and McG will not work at this level. They're too similar. Sharp should be alongside one of them. I'm not sure what Sharp has done wrong but he is clearly our 3rd choice striker now and "IF" we bring in Waghorn or A.N.Other, he'll be 4th choice, despite being the best finisher in the squad.

For me, at home we MUST start with Duffy or Woodburn behind the strikers, too defensive minded in midfield with the midfield orcheastrator (Fleck) being to far forward not getting in the game.

That, for me is the first time Wilder has got a selection wrong for knocking on 2 years.

 

[Smirth]

I was a little surprised to see Basham still in the starting 11. I thought with the arrival of Egan, Stearman would have been moved to RCB and Basham benched.

I like him but we have better options.

 

[Addison]

We set up with 3-1-4-2 when all last season we played 3-4-1-2.

For me that was the problem. I understand the reasons for lining up like that as they do have a very good championship midfield. But it doesn't seem to work for us.

Setting up with the formation means Fleck is the furthest forward and that's not his position, for me he was absent from the game.

We didn't have the link up play between midfield and attack that Duffy or Woodburn (apparently) would provide. I would see today's formation as an away formation, not a home formation.

The subs were unlucky. He was bringing Woodburn on for McG just before they equalised. He then stuck to his decision and made that change anyway despite us conceding the equaliser. He should've at that point, in my opinion brought Sharp and Woodburn on together. He didn't and the formation was set to kind of see the game out, but now we're level so usually he'd be going for it if you get what I mean...

So then he has to bring on BOTH Duffy AND Sharp to really go for it. It didn't work.

I also think the partnership of Clarke and McG will not work at this level. They're too similar. Sharp should be alongside one of them. I'm not sure what Sharp has done wrong but he is clearly our 3rd choice striker now and "IF" we bring in Waghorn or A.N.Other, he'll be 4th choice, despite being the best finisher in the squad.

For me, at home we MUST start with Duffy or Woodburn behind the strikers, too defensive minded in midfield with the midfield orcheastrator (Fleck) being to far forward not getting in the game.

That, for me is the first time Wilder has got a selection wrong for knocking on 2 years.

The formation was wrong but more like 3-5-1-1 with Goldie playing off Clarke and three deep lying midfielders who put no pressure whatsoever on Swansea when they had the ball in front of their back four. Its the same formation we played towards the end of last season when we failed to close games out and lost points. Nothing has changed.

With the players we have you have to start with a number 10 at home behind two forwards. You make a good point about Fleck he is no Duffy and doesn't have the game to get in between the lines between midfield and defence. He is best further back looking to dictate play in front of him. Probably one of his poorest games for us but the system was the problem not the player. I just hope CW sees this and reverts to a more attacking formation at Home. Swansea were no great shakes but tactically by pushing their wide men onto our wing backs they negated our offensive play far too easily.

 

[Rodley]

Need to start with Fleck and Lundstram with either Woodburn or Duffy in front of them.

 

[mattbianco1]

Worth mentioning that Jefferson Montero tore George Baldock at least 1 new one after he came on. He's far too good for this division.

 

[BigBed]

Need to start with Fleck and Lundstram with either Woodburn or Duffy in front of them.

I disagree, we need to start without Lundstrum, we need Fleck, Evans and Duffy.
Our issue today, was we played more of a 3-1-4-2, and that cost us last season too.
Egan just wasn't good enough, I'd rather have seen Stearman today, and I'm not a Stearman fan!!.
Duffy is our only creative midfielder, and he didn't start!?, Lundstrum is defensive and did!??, I thought we were supposed to play, high tempo, attacking football, not defensive bollocks, that doesnt work for us.
The team selection cost us again today.
Woodburn doesn't fit our style of play yet, that will come with training though.
I thought Stevens was, for want of a better word, Wank!, and I'm praying, this young lad, Bryan, takes his place!, I really don't see what Wilder does!!?
FFS, start with Duffy instead of Lundstrum, Sharp instead of Mcgoldrick, and Stearman in for Egan on Tuesday, I'm sure that would be a better starting line up against Borough.

 

[HolmesfieldBlade]

It was bizzare at times yesterday. Our midfield was further forward at times than our deeper striker (McGoldrick)

 

[Ecco1889]

They had a player(McKay)unmarked on the right hand side at least half a dozen times..we worked very hard to take the lead,then were very sloppy in the last 20 mins

 

[bromtom]

Worth mentioning that Jefferson Montero tore George Baldock at least 1 new one after he came on. He's far too good for this division.

Baldock's movement for the goal was outstanding though. If Clarke moved like that we'd be well away.

 

[Willie Carlin]

We set up with 3-1-4-2 when all last season we played 3-4-1-2.

For me that was the problem. I understand the reasons for lining up like that as they do have a very good championship midfield. But it doesn't seem to work for us.

Setting up with the formation means Fleck is the furthest forward and that's not his position, for me he was absent from the game.

We didn't have the link up play between midfield and attack that Duffy or Woodburn (apparently) would provide. I would see today's formation as an away formation, not a home formation.

The subs were unlucky. He was bringing Woodburn on for McG just before they equalised. He then stuck to his decision and made that change anyway despite us conceding the equaliser. He should've at that point, in my opinion brought Sharp and Woodburn on together. He didn't and the formation was set to kind of see the game out, but now we're level so usually he'd be going for it if you get what I mean...

So then he has to bring on BOTH Duffy AND Sharp to really go for it. It didn't work.

I also think the partnership of Clarke and McG will not work at this level. They're too similar. Sharp should be alongside one of them. I'm not sure what Sharp has done wrong but he is clearly our 3rd choice striker now and "IF" we bring in Waghorn or A.N.Other, he'll be 4th choice, despite being the best finisher in the squad.

For me, at home we MUST start with Duffy or Woodburn behind the strikers, too defensive minded in midfield with the midfield orcheastrator (Fleck) being to far forward not getting in the game.

That, for me is the first time Wilder has got a selection wrong for knocking on 2 years.

. Swansea sussed is out. They know our two full backs go on attacking runs and could be caught out with breaking quickly. It’ll happen again if our backs don’t get cover when they go forward. We were very naive when we went in front. Should have played keep ball for a while.

 

[From the pig end]

Wilder has apparently said in post match interview that we tried to match them up in midfield - well it failed miserably particularly 2nd half, so who didn't do their job?

Well, it has to be the midfield.

Seems we CHANGED our style to suit them with the team selection, which is negative minded and does this now show that our management is running out of positive ideas? We sadly picked a side not to lose...........except we did lose.

UTB

Is that really what he said!? Fuck their midfield! I thought Wilder was of the mind set we would worry about our game and not the opposition's? I'm still fuming we started with Lunny and Evans to be honest.
So so negative for our first game at home.
One up front with Woodburn or Duffy as a number 10 would have been better.
Really dissapointed with that selection.

 

[mattbianco1]

. Swansea sussed is out. They know our two full backs go on attacking runs and could be caught out with breaking quickly. It’ll happen again if our backs don’t get cover when they go forward. We were very naive when we went in front. Should have played keep ball for a while.

I read about Swansea manager yesterday morning as I hadn't heard of him.

He took a team in the Swedish 4th tier to 5th in their top tier. I know it's different but that Is good going. They could surprise a lot this year.

If they keep Montero, they have every chance

 

[LS16Blade]

They had a player(McKay)unmarked on the right hand side at least half a dozen times..we worked very hard to take the lead,then were very sloppy in the last 20 mins

Spot on.

And, as many others have said on numerous other threads, this has been the theme since the second half of last season.

It is incontrovertible that without Coutts, we have lost any semblance of being able to manage games. The repeated fade-outs and loss of leads in the final quarter of games, though, suggests an additional problem which is that many of our players are simply not as fit as many of our opponents, irrespective of the claims that our coaching staff may make.

How many late goals do we score? In fact, when was the last time we turned a game around in the final quarter to get a point or 3? I don't recall any last season. By contrast, we can all remember countless damaging late goals that we conceded which killed off last season.

Worth noting too, that McKay was excellent for Swansea. Only arrived at the club in the week and pitched straight into the side on the Saturday. You can do that with good players and it's what most teams do with new players. For some reason, though, there is a reluctance to do it at Bramall Lane. There is a good chance that by the time we feel able to give Woodburn a start, he'll be coming into a side in a mini-crisis.

 

[Fanny magnet]

Worth mentioning that Jefferson Montero tore George Baldock at least 1 new one after he came on. He's far too good for this division.

Thing with montero is i saw him play his first game for swansea in the premiership ( against chelsea i think )and he was amazing ,hes done nothing since ,until yesterday

 

[mattbianco1]

I stand by my OP.

The midfield 3 of Fleck, Lundstram and Evans just does t work.

I understand why we have played them - freshly relegated team and one of the favourites for the league, however it hasn't work and hopefully we'll never see it again. I imagine Wilder was expecting a tough midfield battle and rightly so. But...

We need Duffy and/or Woodburn to play Saturday.
The 3 chances shown v Boro on Sky Sports highlights are all created by Duffy or Woodburn.

The balance isn't there without an attacking creative midfielder

 

[brownie4583]

I would play Duffy,Fleck and Leonard in midfield on Saturday.
Billy and McGoldrick up front and Stearman,Egan and O’Connell back 3.
I would give Stevens a couple more games to improve,if not try Bryan or Lafferty at LWB,he does get in good positions but his crossing is poor.

 

[HolmesfieldBlade]

I would play Duffy,Fleck and Leonard in midfield on Saturday.
Billy and McGoldrick up front and Stearman,Egan and O’Connell back 3.
I would give Stevens a couple more games to improve,if not try Bryan or Lafferty at LWB,he does get in good positions but his crossing is poor.

That’s a proper midfield. Then woodburn in the 10 role with Clarke or sharp!!