My take on yesterday

[Iceybabey]

Wilder would also agree that Duffy makes us better going forward. The question mark regarding playing him behind two strikers is always going to be about whether we can cope defensively.

To help us yesterday we made the following tweaks:

• Put the experience of Stearman back in at the heart of the defence
• Used a defensively minded right centre back
• Didn't push our wide centre halves forward like we normally do
• Used our defensively strongest possible option (Basham) as Fleck's partner
• Pulled back Duffy to form a three man midfield at times

QPR are predicted to be one of the struggling sides this, YET they did have the chances to score at least a couple of goals in the first half, especially as they found space between our defence and midfield. If they'd got two goals first, who knows if we'd been able to fight back.

An example, showing Duffy pulled back to help us out. He's got a danger man who he's in a good position to stop, but just lets him run away from him. Luckily Henderson makes a good save from this player's shot:



Our brilliant goal showed what Duffy can give us, but he does tend to be a little sloppy defensively. In some games we can afford this, in others we probably can't.

Fans need to realise that Wilder's responsible for us coping offensively and defensively. Personally I don't think he got it right in the first two games, but there were valid reasons behind his choices.

Spot on.

 

[Dnblade]

It presumably depends on what role Duffy has been asked to play. The fact that at no point, even when it’s clear there is the runner, does he make any attempt to track back might suggest he’s been asked to remain high up so that we have a possible option to counter? If there had been an alarmed Duffy scampering back after the play I might have agreed that it was his responsibility. He doesn’t even come back into the frame!

Glad Duffy was back in the side,but he's switched off there for me...he's ball watching...should have gone with his man,it could easily have resulted in a goal,he shouldn't be unmarked in that amount of space on the edge of our box.

 

[Eric Cartman]

We didn’t need those tweaks to bring Duffy into the side. He should be playing anyway

 

[Eric Cartman]

Yes let him and Stevens just knock it into those areas, don't think so much about it do it quickly, Sharp has a tendency to read it well and get on it whether it's the 3 yard knock in or a 20 yard volley

That’s what I expect our wing backs to do when playing on the counter

They’re not European level wingers so they can’t pick out pin point crosses every time like they try to. They aren’t good enough. Much better when they put it in areas instead.

 

[Bergen Blade]

It presumably depends on what role Duffy has been asked to play. The fact that at no point, even when it’s clear there is the runner, does he make any attempt to track back might suggest he’s been asked to remain high up so that we have a possible option to counter? If there had been an alarmed Duffy scampering back after the play I might have agreed that it was his responsibility. He doesn’t even come back into the frame!

Rather than putting blame on anybody, I'd like to focus on what you get with

• 3 across midfield
• Duffy being part of the 3 across midfield
• Duffy advanced (no 10) behind two strikers

When Wilder went with three across midfield against Inter, Swansea and Middlesbrough it was to help the team cope against good players who often look to find space between our midfield and defence. I used these images to illustrate the difference between a 3 man midfield and 2 +1 (Duffy) like this:



Lundstram isn't doing anything of note in the above photo, just being in a position which prevents a few Inter players finding space in that area.




While with Duffy advanced, and bypassed, a big gap opens up, which the Inter players could have exploited. I think this happened a few times at QPR. We were only punished for it once, thankfully.