Big turn out on the cards from Saints fans.

[wizadry]

Have we been playing 4-2-3-1? You could have fooled me! I think it's more a 4-6-0 formation,attacking or defending.

 

[IOM Blade]

After watching (ok, hearing) us get the runaround by Oldham for an hour on Saturday, I'm a lot more skeptical about our chances then i was a week back.

 

[Pinchy]

Oh dear, oh dear.

Southampton are a good team, presently punching well above their weight. It won't last; they'll drift into mid-table by the end of the season though that will still be a remarkable achievement - well done to them.

But - they are not Titans of the Football Universe. They are likely to beat us but it's not David City against Goliath Athletic.

Aston Villa didn't 'spank' us; neither did Fulham nor Hull City. I'll tell you what - Southampton won't either.

Shall we just sit on our hands in silence and let their vast army of fans (where were they at The Dell? Don't cite the smaller capacity - they didn't fill it) roar them on to an eight goal spree?

Happily our team have a bit more bottle than some of you who follow them. Let's have a bit less sycophancy and a bit more pride, eh?

 

[Pinchy]

After watching (ok, hearing) us get the runaround by Oldham for an hour on Saturday, I'm a lot more skeptical about our chances then i was a week back.

We didn't. They were the better side first half; us the second. Over the 90 minutes we had more shots than them and more on target.

Don't worry though. The S2 cap-doffing inferiority complex is alive and well and that's all that matters. Let's have a good tremble about Southampton now.

 

[Kenilworth]

Ok Do you watch our games with your eyes closed?
I think you've contradicted yourself.
We constantly get into scoring positions. The fact we don't have a natural striker is the reason that we aren't hammering teams. How many times does JCR, Murphy or Flynn flash them across the 6 yard line but nobody punishes the oppo?.

Best to look up a definition of contradiction I think Matt

You've just corroborated my observation there, feller.

We constantly get into creating positions and then ......Flash - nobody there - no goal BOOOOOOM

 

[Kenilworth]

Oh dear, oh dear.

Southampton are a good team, presently punching well above their weight. It won't last; they'll drift into mid-table by the end of the season though that will still be a remarkable achievement - well done to them.

But - they are not Titans of the Football Universe. They are likely to beat us but it's not David City against Goliath Athletic.

Aston Villa didn't 'spank' us; neither did Fulham nor Hull City. I'll tell you what - Southampton won't either.

Shall we just sit on our hands in silence and let their vast army of fans (where were they at The Dell? Don't cite the smaller capacity - they didn't fill it) roar them on to an eight goal spree?

Happily our team have a bit more bottle than some of you who follow them. Let's have a bit less sycophancy and a bit more pride, eh?

The parallels have been drawn with Southampton, Pinchy, as that is a model for how I would like us to rise from the ashes. Good luck to them - it's good to see a decent club with decent fans up there rather than the plastic twats with the bulging wads of cash

As for Villa, Fulham and Hull - well the two former were struggling anyway so we showed more grit and determination (peppered with some good levels of skill) to overcome them with a terrific show of cup tartery and we did well up to a point vs Hull until their quality players (Livermore and Huddlestone) got a grip on us.

Southampton are a different proposition as they are flying and are brim full of confidence. Yes, at home we have a chance as it's a one off cup tie. I am more encouraged by the list that blade too long posted about their fixtures but then we don't have an easy run up to the tie either, relatively speaking. If it goes to form then a spanking is on the cards - if not and they are slightly below par then, Wahey - the tarts are at it again

 

[wizadry]

We didn't. They were the better side first half; us the second. Over the 90 minutes we had more shots than them and more on target.

Don't worry though. The S2 cap-doffing inferiority complex is alive and well and that's all that matters. Let's have a good tremble about Southampton now.

I take your point pinchy,but i wouldn't be too certain that we had more shots than them,infact i think it will have been pretty even on the shot count.

 

[Pinchy]

I take your point pinchy,but i wouldn't be too certain that we had more shots than them,infact i think it will have been pretty even on the shot count.

It was Wiz. 12 shots to 11. Possession 50-50. All according to the BBC website; not The Oracle I accept but it was an even game over the 90 minutes. From the usual ludicrous reactions on here you'd think it was very different, wouldn't you?

It's the Bladesfana' Way.

 

[wizadry]

It was Wiz. 12 shots to 11. Possession 50-50. All according to the BBC website; not The Oracle I accept but it was an even game over the 90 minutes. From the usual ludicrous reactions on here you'd think it was very different, wouldn't you?

It's the Bladesfana' Way.

You can't help but think if Cloughy would just stamp our authority on games earlier,we would have possibly gone on to win that one,plus many others.

Do you think it's Clough or the players fault for the lack lustre first halves?

 

[Kenilworth]

He's doing the best with what he has, is our Nigel.

I might have mentioned it a couple of times before but we are only a couple of decent strikers away from a pretty good outfit in this division.

It wouldn't be enough in the league above but if we added some decent fire power we could rip this league apart.

If we don't then this debate will continue to ebb and flow between flirting with the play off berths and how far we are off the top two with x number of games in hand

 

[alcoblade]

It was Wiz. 12 shots to 11. Possession 50-50. All according to the BBC website; not The Oracle I accept but it was an even game over the 90 minutes. From the usual ludicrous reactions on here you'd think it was very different, wouldn't you?

It's the Bladesfana' Way.

No, I'm with you on this Pinchy. My gripe is that we are clearly good enough, as evidenced every time "we go for it". This was again true against Oldham when once again, we were easily the best team as the game progressed.

Clough's job is to extend this play over longer periods, rather than worry too much about formations and new signings.

UTB

 

[Pinchy]

You can't help but think if Cloughy would just stamp our authority on games earlier,we would have possibly gone on to win that one,plus many others.

Do you think it's Clough or the players fault for the lack lustre first halves?

Isnt it really down to the absence of a good quality centre-forward? One who would get a few himself and also help to ensure that team-mates have more (and more clear-cut) chances.

No doubt we would make games much more comfortable and the fans much less frustrated if we could get that elusive early goal. I fear recruitment is the only answer.

As to blame, I don't think we can fault the players for effort. Indeed, all the late goals speak volumes for their character and commitment. They just don't have enough of that goal poacher's instinct and it can't be taught. Nigel has the potential to be our best manager since John Harris but he has the Clough stubborn streak it seems. If he can't get the players he has identified he won't settle for fourth or fifth choice. He prefers to wait for one of his top two or three to become free. The trouble is that becomes very frustrating for us Blades. I don't accept, however, the current nonsense that he doesn't actually want a striker or even worse, foolishly doesn't realise that we need one. That's just silly.

 

[Blade56]

In many ways Southampton are like the Blades (apart from kit). They fell to the third tier, invested in youth, got promoted, then.... Errrrrrrrr oh, they invested in a team, got promoted again, bought better players, raced up the PL. Mmmmmmm

Edit - Southampton are a totally different club to us in many ways....

 

[wizadry]

No, I'm with you on this Pinchy. My gripe is that we are clearly good enough, as evidenced every time "we go for it". This was again true against Oldham when once again, we were easily the best team as the game progressed.

Clough's job is to extend this play over longer periods, rather than worry too much about formations and new signings.

UTB

This is so true alcoblade and this is what frustrates the hell out of me because we all know that when we go for it we look quite good and unstoppable at times this season,we've just not shown enough of it.

Good post Pinchy btw.I can't help but think you're talking about COG at the top of it

 

[Pinchy]

This is so true alcoblade and this is what frustrates the hell out of me because we all know that when we go for it we look quite good and unstoppable at times this season,we've just not shown enough of it.

Good post Pinchy btw.I can't help but think you're talking about COG at the top of it

If the cog fits.....

 

[Kenilworth]

If the cog fits.....

On the face of it you may be right.
Best to keep a careful watch on this one as only time will tell if anything springs forth for this particular second hand player. However, it B'Hove's me to surmise that nothing of the sort will tick over - it'll just be yet another wind up and we will inevitably miss out on the autos.

 

[Pinchy]

On the face of it you may be right.
Best to keep a careful watch on this one as only time will tell if anything springs forth for this particular second hand player. However, it B'Hove's me to surmise that nothing of the sort will tick over - it'll just be yet another wind up and we will inevitably miss out on the autos.

Another fine mesh you've got me into...

 

[Kenilworth]

Another fine mesh you've got me into...

It's all about the synchronisation of movement Pinchers.
Get that right and it runs like clockwork

 

[mattbianco1]

Best to look up a definition of contradiction I think Matt

You've just corroborated my observation there, feller.

We constantly get into creating positions and then ......Flash - nobody there - no goal BOOOOOOM

Don't think I need too. You said Southampton get into goal scoring positions because they play strikers.

I said, we already get into the positions, we just don't convert them because the players on the end aren't natural strikers.

I've not contradicted anything. It would be nice to have a free scoring striker, we all know that. BUT, the point you made is that we're not creating goal scoring chances. We are. In abundance too a lot of the time.

 

[mattbianco1]

After watching (ok, hearing) us get the runaround by Oldham for an hour on Saturday, I'm a lot more skeptical about our chances then i was a week back.

I think come the end of the season the Oldham game will be seen as a good point. They've surprised me to how well they play this season. They will turn some big teams over and could end up being this season's Yeovil or Stevenage.

 

[mattbianco1]

No matter how you dress it up
4-4-1-1 is a 4-4-2
4-2-3-1 is 4-5-1

If you believe that then you don't know how technical football is.

Have you read Bergen Blade 's summary of the Crewe game? It's well worth a read.

http://s24su.com/forum/index.php?threads/cloughs-tweaks-at-crewe.36753/

More to it than just putting Murphy on the Left and Flynn on the right and that's it.

 

[Kenilworth]

If you believe that then you don't know how technical football is.

Have you read Bergen Blade 's summary of the Crewe game? It's well worth a read.

http://s24su.com/forum/index.php?threads/cloughs-tweaks-at-crewe.36753/

More to it than just putting Murphy on the Left and Flynn on the right and that's it.

People tend to over complicate it with talk of formations and, whilst I respect Bergers knowledge and enjoy many of his posts, I am not sure when he last won a major championship and became the authority on all things tactical to refer to

 

[Kenilworth]

Don't think I need too. You said Southampton get into goal scoring positions because they play strikers. I said, we already get into the positions, we just don't convert them because the players on the end aren't natural strikers.
I've not contradicted anything. It would be nice to have a free scoring striker, we all know that. BUT, the point you made is that we're not creating goal scoring chances. We are. In abundance too a lot of the time.

I beg to differ - the point is that the crosses and balls into the box may be coming in but the lads that are playing in the forward positions or breaking from midfield are not timing the runs or making the appropriate runs or gaining the space required to get on the end of them. If they were then we would be witnessing more saves by the opposition GK, more shots on target from closer in or more glaring misses in front of goal. So, whilst the delivery is coming in - a chance is not created because there is no one there on the end of them. A cross does not equal a chance unless it results in a player getting a strike on goal.

 

[JJBlade]

Harry / Ox
Lowton / Shaw
Reed / Lallana
Porter / Lambert
Chalk / Cheese
different / gravy

And don't forget they sold Dean Richards to Tottenham for the same combined fee that we got from Tottenham for Walker and Naughton.
This might not seem so bad except they sold Dean Richards in about 1927 and he was shit.

 

[Bergen Blade]

People tend to over complicate it with talk of formations and, whilst I respect Bergers knowledge and enjoy many of his posts, I am not sure when he last won a major championship and became the authority on all things tactical to refer to

Hey! You can only beat what's in front of you and I took my hospital side from 6th division to fourth in the top division!

 

[Bergen Blade]

Have we been playing 4-2-3-1? You could have fooled me! I think it's more a 4-6-0 formation,attacking or defending.

People need to remember formations in football usually describe how a team lines up defensively when the opposition start an attack. 4-6-0 would assume that Baxter dropped down alongside the midfielders. He doesn't.

 

[DazBlade88]

People need to remember formations in football usually describe how a team lines up defensively when the opposition start an attack. 4-6-0 would assume that Baxter dropped down alongside the midfielders. He doesn't.

I think people are struggling to differentiate between a formation and the players on the pitch. 4-5-1 is the formation, 4-6-0 is the selection of players.

We are playing a midfielder up front, and surprisingly, for the most part he's not as good as a natural centre forward. It's as simple as that.

 

[Kenilworth]

People need to remember formations in football usually describe how a team lines up defensively when the opposition start an attack. 4-6-0 would assume that Baxter dropped down alongside the midfielders. He doesn't.

Oh Bergers you little Scandinavian beauty. You've just stuck a large spanner in mattbianco1's argument by stating that formations are how teams line up defensively - just as I said earlier - and that after Matty B cited you as the formation Oracle.



(Well done with the hospital team promotions btw - top job)
Keep up he good posts

 

[PeterNdlovu081]

Oh dear, oh dear.

Southampton are a good team, presently punching well above their weight. It won't last; they'll drift into mid-table by the end of the season though that will still be a remarkable achievement - well done to them.

But - they are not Titans of the Football Universe. They are likely to beat us but it's not David City against Goliath Athletic.

Aston Villa didn't 'spank' us; neither did Fulham nor Hull City. I'll tell you what - Southampton won't either.

Shall we just sit on our hands in silence and let their vast army of fans (where were they at The Dell? Don't cite the smaller capacity - they didn't fill it) roar them on to an eight goal spree?

Happily our team have a bit more bottle than some of you who follow them. Let's have a bit less sycophancy and a bit more pride, eh?

Hull did spank us at Wembley.

But that's by the by.

 

[Bergen Blade]

I think 4-2-3-1 is a much more attacking formation than 4-4-2.

4-4-2 is a dying formation and has been for a while. Even teams that play the formation these days play 4-4-1-1 (which could work for us and we have seen this season too).

Playing 4-2-3-1 is great when attacking and worked incredibly well for us particularly in last seasons FA Cup run. We had Flynn, Murphy, Baxter and Scougall running all over the place getting the defending team all confused. When it works, it works well.

When we are defending it is also extremely easy to revert to 4-5-1.

For the sake of arguments, i'll use the same set of players but here is how i see the various formations above.

4-2-3-1 (when on the ball)
Howard
Alcock Basham McEveley Harris
Doyle Wallace
Flynn Baxter Murphy
Higdon

4-5-1 (when defending)
Howard
Alcock Basham McEveley Harris
Flynn Doyle Baxter Wallace Murphy
Higdon

4-4-1-1
Howard
Alcock Basham McEveley Harris
Flynn Doyle Wallace Murphy
Baxter
Higdon
​

I personally think that going 4-4-2 would make us too flat and would restrict Murphy and Flynn (Murphy in particular) from attacking.

The way I see it, the formation we've played most under Clough is the 4-1-4-1 variant of 4-5-1. Doyle has usually been anchoring, deeper than the other two central midfielders.