Goals from open play

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Sothall_Blade I would imagine that Weir has raised the possibility of signing better full backs (or full backs better suited to his tactics) but my guess would be that McMahon and Hill are among the higher earners in the squad and the edict was likely to be sell first then buy.

You mention Weir's signings. I'd split them into two groups: those expected to have an impact this season (McGinn, Coady, Brandy, Taylor, Cuvelier, Baxter) and those for the future (Johns, McGinty, Bunn). Come December, I would have thought that all of the first group would be in the team bar Coady, with Johns and McGinty on the bench.

Come December!? We've only just begun September.
Why isn't he picking them all now if that's his plan?
Where is Taylor going to play if/when we sign another centre forward?

McGinty is the same age as Maguire who has been playing at this level for two years.
Bunn and Coady are both older and hardly ones for our future, they're not our players.
Whichever way you dress it up, a large proportion of his nine signings will not be in his first choice XI.
Not now, not in December and probably never.
 

He signed Lyle Taylor for the lone striker role. I know he's been poor so far but Weir, the scouts and Stephenson must have thought he could do it based on what they saw. I'm not convinced they got the right man personally but time will tell.

McMahon has pushed forward quite alot this season but his delivery has let him down so many times. I do agree that we need another centre half. Even if it's just to provide competition for places because Collins and Maguire know they're going to be picked every week.

Out of interest, who would you play out wide in a 4-4-2? Brandy and Murphy aren't suited to being played in a 4-4-2. Unless we go for a 4-2-2-2/4-2-4 (with who in centre midfield?) or a very adventurous 4-1-3-2 with Doyle, Coady or McGinn holding I don't see how it would get the most out of our best attacking minded players.

4-3-3 (with solid full backs, one holding midfielder, five creative/attacking players):-
___________Long
Coady Maguire Collins Hill
___________Doyle_______
_____Baxter___Cuvelier
Brandy___Porter____Taylor

4-4-2 (with solid full backs, one holding midfielder and five creative/attacking players)
___________Long
Coady Maguire Collins Hill
Brandy Doyle Cuvelier McFadzean
______Taylor Baxter
 
DazBlade88 it could be that Taylor is suited to a lone striker role - if that role is centred around reacting to incisive through balls. I've not seen him play so can't comment but it will take a while for the players who have been here a while to break the habit of aiming a long ball in the direction of a centre forward whose main role is to hold up play (Kitson, Cresswell, Porter).

Sothall_Blade McGinn has hardly played over the past two years, he's had a shocking time with injury and I wouldn't expect him to be 100% yet.

McGinty might be the same age as Maguire but their careers to date are very different; Maguire was fortunate in a way that we were desperate for a centre-half in the Adams disaster and he got his chance. Maybe if we'd signed McGinty aged 17 and he'd debuted for us at 18 they'd be in a more similar position.

I might be wrong but I think Bunn is on a glorified trial and if all goes to plan he'll join permanently, either in January or October if he's released by Citeh; Coady I would expect to take more of a back seat as McGinn builds form and fitness.

Finally, define a "large proportion". I've said above that I'd expect 5 of his 7 permanent signings to be in the starting XI come December with the other two on the bench - I don't know how much more you could expect.
 
Finally, define a "large proportion". I've said above that I'd expect 5 of his 7 permanent signings to be in the starting XI come December with the other two on the bench - I don't know how much more you could expect.

Well time will tell but I expect only 3 of his 9 signings to be in his starting XI as soon as we sign a new centre forward (Baxter, Cuvelier and Brandy). At least 5 or 6 out of 9 won't be and that is a large proportion.
 
Our strike rate is pathetic !
Whilst I applauded Weir's appointment I am getting fed up with the line ' There are goals in this side' or 'Today I have seen lots of positives'
If you do not score goals you ain't going to win matches - simple as !
Last night 13 shots - 3 on target - No Goals for the third match on the trot
Passing football is not necessarily attractive football - last night was a turgid affair by all accounts described in the press as lack lustre with United hardly creating a chance in the second half
Unfortunately Mr Weir is saddled with dross of the highest quality and until we get rid, the rot will continue - it doesn't matter what formation you play, unless you have footballers than can execute the basics you are doomed to fail - sadly we have an over capacity of overpaid, under performing players that lack heart, passion and the basic skills required by a professional footballer - I am at a loss that Mr Weir, with all his experience in top level football cannot see what we see from the stands week in week out !
 
Our strike rate is pathetic !
Whilst I applauded Weir's appointment I am getting fed up with the line ' There are goals in this side' or 'Today I have seen lots of positives'
If you do not score goals you ain't going to win matches - simple as !
Last night 13 shots - 3 on target - No Goals for the third match on the trot
Passing football is not necessarily attractive football - last night was a turgid affair by all accounts described in the press as lack lustre with United hardly creating a chance in the second half
Unfortunately Mr Weir is saddled with dross of the highest quality and until we get rid, the rot will continue - it doesn't matter what formation you play, unless you have footballers than can execute the basics you are doomed to fail - sadly we have an over capacity of overpaid, under performing players that lack heart, passion and the basic skills required by a professional footballer - I am at a loss that Mr Weir, with all his experience in top level football cannot see what we see from the stands week in week out !

I'm pretty sure he can see it, he even said as much yesterday. Having the means at his disposal to do anything about it is a different matter entirely.

For all intent and purposes he's still working with the crap we've accumulated over the past 3 years. Can we at least give him opportunity to address that? I've been very impressed with the majority of his signings so far.
 
Unfortunately, being a football manager means having to mould and direct the players at your disposal - Bassett didn't have world beaters in midfield so he just by-passed it by utilising long ball tactics
Unfortunately we don't have that luxury as our weekness is scoring goals or the lack of it - one thing is clear that Ironside, Porter, Flynn, Murphy and by the looks of it Taylor are all out of there depth
I will repeat 'If you don't score goals you do not have a snowflake in hell of ever winning a football match - no matter how pretty and technical the build up '!
 
I'd like to see the occasional use of the crossfield ball, from the full back to the winger/wide midfielder on the opposite side. Obviously this won't always work, but when it does it can really open up teams. It's not hoof, either - it's a long pass.
 
The second biggest issue at the moment is the chronic lack of pace at centre half - that's part of the reason why we don't commit the full backs forward. Get a pacey central defender in and we can hold the defensive line 10-15 yards further up the pitch.



Great point about the centre halves Balham.

Also, it strikes me as very odd that the full backs don't get forward more anyway under this system as there are two holding midfield players providing cover as well as two wide midfielders who seem very keen on helping out in defence.
 
MK Dons was my first game this season, apart from N County on TV here in Germany. My assessment of both games is simple. There is lots of movement, but none seems to have a reason. They seem to be moving for moving's sake with no idea of a longer term plan of what to do with the ball. On the basis of what I have seen I am a tad worried.
One thing I will say is I saw something in Taylor, he could well turn out to be our saviour.
 
We don't actually seem to use the forward when we're attacking, it's generally pshed out wide or we get suffocated in midfield. Can't remember too many times when we've played it into the strikers feet, whether that be Taylor, Porter or Ironside. I don't know whether this is deliberate or not but they've not seen much of the ball.
 
4-3-3 (with solid full backs, one holding midfielder, five creative/attacking players):-
___________Long
Coady Maguire Collins Hill
___________Doyle_______
_____Baxter___Cuvelier
Brandy___Porter____Taylor

4-4-2 (with solid full backs, one holding midfielder and five creative/attacking players)
___________Long
Coady Maguire Collins Hill
Brandy Doyle Cuvelier McFadzean
______Taylor Baxter

I take it you're not a fan of McMahon and Murphy? :)

I'd prefer the 4-3-3 out of those so that you can really utilise Cuvelier and Baxter.

DazBlade88 it could be that Taylor is suited to a lone striker role - if that role is centred around reacting to incisive through balls. I've not seen him play so can't comment but it will take a while for the players who have been here a while to break the habit of aiming a long ball in the direction of a centre forward whose main role is to hold up play (Kitson, Cresswell, Porter).

I was hoping the same, but after watching him closely I'm a bit concerned that I can't find a stand out attribute that you'd associate with a striker. For his size, he is surprisingly lightweight but he doesn't seem that quick and I've not noticed any anticipation and his first touch seems poor. It's still early days though and he's trying to settle in. I'm hoping the penalty the other night might just galvanise him.

What I did consider about his goal record north of the border is the league he was playing in. We signed him from the league that Aaron Barry is currently on loan in and seemingly doing quite well, and he's a player that can't even get near our first team. It might be not be too relevant and a positive in the long term, but it might say something about the standard he was up against whilst he was at Falkirk.

I do agree about the second point and I'm certain it's part of the reason we're struggling for goals. I'm sure that the additions of Baxter and Cuvelier can help us stop that though.
 
Whats everyones favourite goal from open play this season ?
Maybe we should have a poll ?
 
One thing I will say is I saw something in Taylor, he could well turn out to be our saviour.

I have only seen a couple of occasions when Taylor has made runs and the ball needed to be played sooner but other than that I haven't seen anything yet in Taylor which gives me any hope. I hope I'm wrong!
 

A throw into the box, then a good finish from Baxter; is there agreement among us that this was another set piece goal?
 
A throw into the box, then a good finish from Baxter; is there agreement among us that this was another set piece goal?

Against County we didn't have a problem creating chances from open play...Westlake was getting forward from RB and got around the back on quite a few occasions,aswell as providing the pass pulled back for McD to score.He slipped Coady in for his chance and I think he could have ended up with 4 assists that day.The only other player who has got to the byline and round the back is Brandy...oh yeah ..Baxter for Brandy's miss v MK.
When Dw1 was in charge,we had Lowton linking up with Willo and creating loads of chances.
We also had Doyle and Mcginn with a couple of shots each from the edge of the box v County,and at times had 7 players in the final third.
I think if we can get two Full Backs who can get into the final third and provide crosses and get to the byline,and an alround striker with a bit of presence,and who can find the back of the net and also play with his back to goal...then we'll be looking in far better shape for me.
 
A throw into the box, then a good finish from Baxter; is there agreement among us that this was another set piece goal?
I'd have to disagree. The set piece was the throw in, there was too much to do to class it as a set play.

It was a quickly thought move by the looks of it and Baxter did well/ got some luck
 
I'd have to disagree. The set piece was the throw in, there was too much to do to class it as a set play.

It was a quickly thought move by the looks of it and Baxter did well/ got some luck

I agree that there's not always easy to distinguish between a set piece goal and an open play goal. I'm sorry, but I struggle to find good English expressions, so bear with me, but for analytical purposes it's normal to split goals in football into these:


  • After set pieces (i.e. corners/free kicks/penalties/throw ins, pre-planned or not)
  • After open play against a 'waiting' team/defence (got men behind ball) (i.e. when we start building from the back)
  • After open play against a team who is not waiting/ready/got (enough) men behind the ball (i.e. counter attacks/breaks)
Using these (poorly described) categories I don't think the move belongs to any of the other ones either.

Like Doyle's long shot vs Burton and Maguire's long shot vs Colchester I'd say it was a quickly taken set piece, exploiting a second of sloppiness from the opposition, nevertheless a set piece goal.
 
I agree that there's not always easy to distinguish between a set piece goal and an open play goal. I'm sorry, but I struggle to find good English expressions, so bear with me, but for analytical purposes it's normal to split goals in football into these:


  • After set pieces (i.e. corners/free kicks/penalties/throw ins, pre-planned or not)
  • After open play against a 'waiting' team/defence (got men behind ball) (i.e. when we start building from the back)
  • After open play against a team who is not waiting/ready/got (enough) men behind the ball (i.e. counter attacks/breaks)
Using these (poorly described) categories I don't think the move belongs to any of the other ones either.


Like Doyle's long shot vs Burton and Maguire's long shot vs Colchester I'd say it was a quickly taken set piece, exploiting a second of sloppiness from the opposition, nevertheless a set piece goal.


I'm struggling to think of the last time we scored a goal by launching a quick counter attack
 
I'm struggling to think of the last time we scored a goal by launching a quick counter attack

I'm struggling to think of the last time we did a quick anything, other than conceding those goals yesterday in quick succession.
 
Agree with you, we've never been very good at that.


Last season was particularly bad, but over the last two seasons we have had quite a slow squad. With Brandy and others (Cuvelier maybe, though I haven't been to the last two games) in the squad now we should be more capable of those kind of moves. But with an approach seemingly based on controlling possession it seems unlikely we will become any better at counter-attacking.

In 10/11 when we had Yeates, Evans, and Ward as a front three, I felt we were developing under Speed into a side that played on the counter, albeit not very well at that time.

Returning to the debate, full-backs as many others have said is the obvious problem, but central midfield the other. Good teams who play 4-2-3-1 usually have quite flexible players as the 'holding' two, but we rarely see Coady and to an even larger extent Doyle popping up in attacking positions or running into the box from deep. I listened to the first half on commentary at the weekend and it sounded like even though we approached the opposition goal well, it was only Porter in the penalty box to aim at. We should be looking at getting 3/4 minimum in there - the striker, the winger from the opposite side of the pitch, the number 10, and if the number 1o has pulled wide to set up the cross/pass, then one of the central midfield pair has to get up in support.

Alternatively, all of that could be utter tosh.
 
Last season was particularly bad, but over the last two seasons we have had quite a slow squad. With Brandy and others (Cuvelier maybe, though I haven't been to the last two games) in the squad now we should be more capable of those kind of moves. But with an approach seemingly based on controlling possession it seems unlikely we will become any better at counter-attacking.

In 10/11 when we had Yeates, Evans, and Ward as a front three, I felt we were developing under Speed into a side that played on the counter, albeit not very well at that time.

Returning to the debate, full-backs as many others have said is the obvious problem, but central midfield the other. Good teams who play 4-2-3-1 usually have quite flexible players as the 'holding' two, but we rarely see Coady and to an even larger extent Doyle popping up in attacking positions or running into the box from deep. I listened to the first half on commentary at the weekend and it sounded like even though we approached the opposition goal well, it was only Porter in the penalty box to aim at. We should be looking at getting 3/4 minimum in there - the striker, the winger from the opposite side of the pitch, the number 10, and if the number 1o has pulled wide to set up the cross/pass, then one of the central midfield pair has to get up in support.

Alternatively, all of that could be utter tosh.


No, good points, valid and relevant.
 
Now that we have the likes of Flynn, Murphy, Taylor and Baxter we should be able to get some movement amongst these boys and play the ball around.
flynn and murphy are the reason that we 'don't' get any movement because they are totally powder puff and in fact are almost identical players.. flynn would struggle in a game of under 11's in graves park.. these two need to be scrapped immediately.. followed closely by Doyle who i am now sure is Monty after a face reconstruction.. it took me ten years of moaning to get rid of monty. .the worst footballer i've ever seen.. and then we replace him with doyle who is the same.. and then get this.. make him fucking captain.
we need a Shaun Derry type in midfield who will run around and kick some fucking ass.. our own players included.
 
A number of posters have mentioned the lack of pace at the back meaning the back four are tending to sit very deep as they don't want to be exposed for pace (despite having 2 defensive midfielders as well!). I think the lack of pace means that the midfield and forwards are too far apart making it hard to get the ball forward and keep it there. Anybody else got a view on this?
 
it's a good point actually.. if we did have someone with pace they'd end up marooned on their own up the field.. the name Nick Blackman comes to mind
 

I agree that there's not always easy to distinguish between a set piece goal and an open play goal. I'm sorry, but I struggle to find good English expressions, so bear with me, but for analytical purposes it's normal to split goals in football into these:


  • After set pieces (i.e. corners/free kicks/penalties/throw ins, pre-planned or not)
  • After open play against a 'waiting' team/defence (got men behind ball) (i.e. when we start building from the back)
  • After open play against a team who is not waiting/ready/got (enough) men behind the ball (i.e. counter attacks/breaks)
Using these (poorly described) categories I don't think the move belongs to any of the other ones either.


Like Doyle's long shot vs Burton and Maguire's long shot vs Colchester I'd say it was a quickly taken set piece, exploiting a second of sloppiness from the opposition, nevertheless a set piece goal.

I think the expression you are looking for Bergers is, "Out of the Blue" i.e. unexpected, spontaneous.
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom