My take

[Keen Blade]

So, what you're saying is, after possibly securing a point at Burnley, he just rearranges the whole team set up and any future points accumulation cos he just so does not wants Europa league?
Fukin give me strength.

Knew someone would bite !
I couldn't believe how slowly we jogged up for our corner after the equaliser.
Just struck me that we had the chance to win it but didn't really go for it.
Burnley even less so

 

[Keen Blade]

Too harsh Pommpey, especially on Norwood, hes been sublime at times this season.

Talking about today's match , not the season.
His standards have fallen since lockdown.
He ought to be raising them , given Berge's arrival !

 

[Keen Blade]

Agree totally with point 2. No idea why we do this so much. We look so good, keeping the ball, moving it from side to side and overloading them. The amount of long balls, balls over the top, in the channels etc, rarely work and then we have to work harder to get it back again.
Certain players are trying to do too much, play it simple and move

Fantastic example of pass & move by Osborn on left wing in first half.
But all too rare today.
At times I thought I was watching Harry Bassett percentage football with the incessant big punts over the top which their CBs just swallowed up without any problem.
Was this under instruction from CW or could the players not see what was happening + change it ?

 

[CopenhagenBlade]

Fantastic example of pass & move by Osborn on left wing in first half.
But all too rare today.
At times I thought I was watching Harry Bassett percentage football with the incessant big punts over the top which their CBs just swallowed up without any problem.
Was this under instruction from CW or could the players not see what was happening + change it ?

Not sure why we would do it so much today in the wind. It was just waste of the ball.
Boring game with no flow, too many free kicks, stoppages etc.
Let’s get to the bye line before we put crosses in, at least get past the 18 yard line. Crosses before this point are generally ineffective

 

[ATL Recs]

He did against Tottenham but not today.

Not ideal for aerial bombardment in that wind so what he did on the floor was excellent

 

[metalblade]

We could have been 2-0 up in 15mins the only two times we got behind the Burnley defence, far too many high balls that Tarkowski gobbled up. I though Norwood was shit today only one decent corner all game. The first Burnley chance was down to him to letting Vydra get away even if the ball didn't go to him initially Oli was 2 yards behind when it did a bad miss for them.
Hendo was very poor today too I know it was windy but a keeper should never pat the ball out to the penalty spot knock it over or to the sides if you can't catch it a chance and a sitter presented to Burnley. One shot he saved was going a yard wide did he lose his bearings or was he showboating?
I see there is still a bit of hatred about for McBurnie and Berge just because of the price tags, Mousset contributed nothing other than winning a free kick but always gets away with it.

 

[1973Blade]

In my opinion
Henderson was 6
Baldock 7
Basham 6.5
Egan 7.5
Robinson 5
Stevens 7
Berge 6.5
Norwood 5
Osborn 7
Didsy 8.
McBurnie 7
Sharp 6.5
O'Connell 7
Mousset 6
Roswell. 6ish. Wasn't on long enough or have enough to do to form a strong opinion.

The positives. Berge is showing flashes of class and is improving.
Osborn after a slow first half grew into the game. He is busy and works hard.
Evans goal was well taken.
Jack is back
Roswell got a run out which hopefully we will see more of so we can assess how good he is.
The negatives.
Norwood has had a dip in form and hopefully can recover it.
Robinson gave away the ball multiple times under no pressure and hasn't done enough to pressure Jack for the spot.

Tactically it will be interesting to see how we develop from here. We get on alot of ball down the wings. But if team sits in as Burnley did we struggle to create good chances as we are crossing into a crowded box.
I would like to see a bit of variety from the centre of the pitch. Playing a ball now and then into feet in the box.

The forwards are a real conundrum.
Didsy does a lot of work going deep. McBurnie works hard but isn't a real finisher.
Sharp is a real finisher but needs to work off a big man up top.
Mousset. Has pace and can finish but unless we can hit him in space on the counter he can struggle to make an impact.
Getting that balance right upfront next season will be crucial.
Anyway that's my tuppence worth

Evans goal? Is Ched back?!

 

[Nagima]

Evans goal? Is Ched back?!

Bloody autocorrect

 

[BladeFisher]

In my opinion
Henderson was 6
Baldock 7
Basham 6.5
Egan 7.5
Robinson 5
Stevens 7
Berge 6.5
Norwood 5
Osborn 7
Didsy 8.
McBurnie 7
Sharp 6.5
O'Connell 7
Mousset 6
Roswell. 6ish. Wasn't on long enough or have enough to do to form a strong opinion.

The positives. Berge is showing flashes of class and is improving.
Osborn after a slow first half grew into the game. He is busy and works hard.
Evans goal was well taken.
Jack is back
Roswell got a run out which hopefully we will see more of so we can assess how good he is.
The negatives.
Norwood has had a dip in form and hopefully can recover it.
Robinson gave away the ball multiple times under no pressure and hasn't done enough to pressure Jack for the spot.

Tactically it will be interesting to see how we develop from here. We get on alot of ball down the wings. But if team sits in as Burnley did we struggle to create good chances as we are crossing into a crowded box.
I would like to see a bit of variety from the centre of the pitch. Playing a ball now and then into feet in the box.

The forwards are a real conundrum.
Didsy does a lot of work going deep. McBurnie works hard but isn't a real finisher.
Sharp is a real finisher but needs to work off a big man up top.
Mousset. Has pace and can finish but unless we can hit him in space on the counter he can struggle to make an impact.
Getting that balance right upfront next season will be crucial.
Anyway that's my tuppence worth

Evans goal was well taken. I knew Ched would be back

 

[nickwr37]

A game of four quarters for me. First quarter, we looked very much likely to score and bossed them. Then, drinks break, as soon as they have fluids inside them they sit back and switch off, forget where 'ahead' is and concede. Third quarter we struggled to impose and let them boss us with at least three separate formations within 15 minutes. We got the goal we deserved but fuck me di we not make hard work of it or what?

Couple of things:

1. Norwood, and in fact most of the team who play in the positions out wide - learn some crossing skills, eh? With Norwood, as I have said, we have what people would have us believe a prodigious player with gifted feet. Sure, he can pick Baldock and Stevens out on the wing with a 40 yarder, but that is one trick ... where's the rest? Crossing - we have McB in the middle, a 6 foot 4 inch beanpole who feeds off that stuff and is his stock in trade. We have Sharp and McGoldrick who find half a yard or connect in the right places off balls in the box. Corners and balls in from wide are either lofted, too high, overhit or easy meat for the keeper. What happened to 'driven crosses' and smacks to the far post which are dummied, deflected and catch everyone ball watching? Nothing today going in from wide was productive, save for Ossie's pop up for Sharp to nod on. Burnley's defence was not exactly rock solid and I feel that more attention to detail is needed to get the ball hit at pace into the triangle from penalty spot to both posts. That is the action zone.

2. Balls down the wing into channels. Pretty evidently not working. Enda and GB (and Berge) trying to send Billy or McB down wide when they have to chase two players already on the ball is achieving nothing. We did make so much more progress with the 10-15m pass into the feet of McG and then go wide or short to feet to move forward. It was an area today when we surrendered too many possessions. Part of the problem was the lack of movement in midfield for options for people on the ball.

Henderson 6.5/10. No real chance with the goal, it was so close and unexpected. McB did allow Tarkowski a gift to get in front of him, and he knows that.
Baldock 7/10. I have yet to see GB have a really poor game this season. His concentration and fitness is impressive and he did contribute to the wide threat well, if the end product wasn't so good
Basham 7/10. Thought he was doing okay to be honest. Got his head in the fight and made some key interventions and as usual, ran himself out. I can understand if Wilder needed to change the line up, but he moved Bash into MF last year v Weeds and look what happened there
Egan 8/10. Back at his best. Committed and competitive and a sweetly taken strike.
Robinson 7/10. Again, did okay considering. Marshalled Rodriguez well and started to move up as an overload attacker. But he is still 'not JO'C'
Stevens 6/10. He's still on three cylinders
Osborn 8/10. Thought he had a great game TBH. Harried, made space, played neat 1-2s and showed great energy. Fleck might struggle a bit when he is fit again to replace Osborn
Norwood 4.5/10. Becoming the man-to-replace for me. Either put Berger in there or try Lunny. Norwood isn't what we thought he was, and I doubt never will be. There's a reason why clubs jettison him on promotion to the PL
Berge 5/10. Another disappointing performance. A couple of flourishes, but I counted four passes in the second half that were easily read and intercepted. And he still doesn't like 'mixing it up', seemingly a bit nesh.
McGoldrick 8.5/10. For a senior player, his experience in gaining control and creating movement forward is exemplary. Again, ran his arse off in three different formations today for nowt. He so deserves his PL goal
McBurnie 6/10. Should have buried the first shot. Didn't have much else to go on TBH, so poor was the service, once again.

Rodwell 5/10. He's obviously match rusty and his position changed three time as we went 3-5-3 to 3-4-3 to 4-3-3 then to 5-3-2.
Sharp 7.5/10. You can always count on 100% from Billy. He battled for possession, gained ground, chased down and dug out to get us forward. But his action zone is in the box. And when he is on other duties, their defence's job is made easy.
Mousett 6/10. Ran a bit, but he feeds of % chances, doesn't he? And he had nowt. Him and Sharp shouldn't play together. He needs better midfield feed channels and opportunities to light the afterburner and latch onto chances
O'Connell 7/10. Welcome back Jack. Showed much more cohesion and solidity at the back with him on the field

Wilder 7/10. A point is a point. Europe now is lost, but we have regained some impetus in our mission for a good finish.

pommpey

Quarters is like American to me. Don't like that term. Sorry. Content of your post decent. Good result after reviewing the match and highlights. Onward and forward.

 

[cc1]

Talking about today's match , not the season.
His standards have fallen since lockdown.
He ought to be raising them , given Berge's arrival !

Nothing against Pommpey and each to their own, but there was a general comment made that a) he's not who we thought he was and b) clubs have binned him when they've got to the prem. I would say a) we've had plenty of time to see how good he is and, b) if clubs sack a player because they think he's unable to perform at a level before even giving them a chance they're probably falling into the same trap as many of the big spending promoted teams. It's possibly the most recognisable feature of CWAK time here, the ability to know and nurture those that can make the step-up without past pedigree.

Game of opinions

 

[ormester]

Berge was a 7 for me

 

[pommpey]

Nothing against Pommpey and each to their own, but there was a general comment made that a) he's not who we thought he was and b) clubs have binned him when they've got to the prem. I would say a) we've had plenty of time to see how good he is

Yep. And really, apart from some games and some crossfield balls, he's proven to be frustratingly vanilla in his output. Trevor Hockey or Michael Brown he isn't. For all his vaunted ball playing ability, his distribution from set-pieces has been underwhelming. He's a good 'link' player sat in front of the back four, but the rest of that job - see Nicky Butt and Matic at Chelsea - has far more contribution. Both of those two for example were difficult to shrug off the ball. At five-eleven, Norwood seems incredibly easy to dispossess under pressure and isn't good in the tackle, look at his Spurs booking and elbow on Son sixty seconds later.

and, b) if clubs sack a player because they think he's unable to perform at a level before even giving them a chance they're probably falling into the same trap as many of the big spending promoted teams. It's possibly the most recognisable feature of CWAK time here, the ability to know and nurture those that can make the step-up without past pedigree.

He's been at the club now since 2018 and over seventy games in red and white. We bought Sander Berge who ostensibly plays in his CDM role, so you'd think here would be an uplift in his output, given we'd spent £22m on a replacement. Watching him overhit crosses and hit the first defender with corners today tells me everything I need to know about 'giving him a chance', given he has turned out 36 times this season in almost every match. It's disappointing, but there's some wisdom in Brighton for example, sidelining him in their PL seasons until he was sold.

Game of opinions

Indeed

pommpey

 

[Greasy Chap Butty]

Talking about today's match , not the season.
His standards have fallen since lockdown.
He ought to be raising them , given Berge's arrival !

Maybe CW has told him to ease off to stop us getting a Europa spot

 

[ReeceofBDTBL]

Berge looks much more confident and whilst not hitting the heights of the Spurs game, still played better than at any time before the arsenal game last Sunday

6.5/10 for me and again, not in his best position

 

[BettingBlade]

Some of those ratings are bipolar.

 

[LenTednTony]

McB won nowt in the air - and anyway that's not his game - we played high punts against their big defenders - bad tactics by CW - needed to be more on the deck

We have been playing a lot more long ball with McBurnie since we came back from lockdown. Not all......but a lot more.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Agree totally with point 2. No idea why we do this so much. We look so good, keeping the ball, moving it from side to side and overloading them. The amount of long balls, balls over the top, in the channels etc, rarely work and then we have to work harder to get it back again.
Certain players are trying to do too much, play it simple and move

We do look good down the sides, but it often gives opposition centre halves plenty of times to prepare for the crosses coming in. We do try to work an opening, but if we can't, we either go back to start again or we pull it back to Norwood who crosses from deeper. But it takes superb precision to pick out our strikers when defenders have been allowed time to prepare for it. I think these attacks are extra difficult if we're chasing games, i.e. the opposition is happy to defend deep and prevent us from finding space. There's a danger that these attacks become predictable.

To mix it up we play some longer balls, often down the channels. This gives variation and can force centre halves out of their comfort zone, rather than staying in front of goal all the time. It's also sometimes the best way out of a tight situation for a defender and at least prevents losing the ball in dangerous situations, as happened three times with Robinson first half. Even if the defender gets to the ball first it often brings a throw in higher up the pitch, or a poor clearance that we can pick up.

Even if it looks wasteful I think we should realise that it can be a small part within our tactics that we feel helps us dictate what happens in the game. Apart from the last 15 minutes of the first half I think we controlled most of that match.

 

[Houston_Blade]

We do look good down the sides, but it often gives opposition centre halves plenty of times to prepare for the crosses coming in. We do try to work an opening, but if we can't, we either go back to start again or we pull it back to Norwood who crosses from deeper. But it takes superb precision to pick out our strikers when defenders have been allowed time to prepare for it. I think these attacks are extra difficult if we're chasing games, i.e. the opposition is happy to defend deep and prevent us from finding space. There's a danger that these attacks become predictable.

To mix it up we play some longer balls, often down the channels. This gives variation and can force centre halves out of their comfort zone, rather than staying in front of goal all the time. It's also sometimes the best way out of a tight situation for a defender and at least prevents losing the ball in dangerous situations, as happened three times with Robinson first half. Even if the defender gets to the ball first it often brings a throw in higher up the pitch, or a poor clearance that we can pick up.

Even if it looks wasteful I think we should realise that it can be a small part within our tactics that we feel helps us dictate what happens in the game. Apart from the last 15 minutes of the first half I think we controlled most of that match.

A couple of times yesterday (and every other game) we had the ball in a decent shooting position on the edge of their box (Osborn once and Berge once) and we played the ball backwards or sideways. I find it bizarre that the players are obviously being told not to shoot from low probability positions, however we sometimes lob crosses into the box from 35/40 yards from the byline. The crosses have a much lower probability of coming to something than a well hit shot in windy conditions.

 

[Bergen Blade]

A couple of times yesterday (and every other game) we had the ball in a decent shooting position on the edge of their box (Osborn once and Berge once) and we played the ball backwards or sideways. I find it bizarre that the players are obviously being told not to shoot from low probability positions, however we sometimes lob crosses into the box from 35/40 yards from the byline. The crosses have a much lower probability of coming to something than a well hit shot in windy conditions.

Yes. We don't often shoot from long range, and when we do most shots are too high.

 

[georgebernardshaw]

From this morning’s Telegraph

 

[BettingBlade]

From this morning’s Telegraph

View attachment 84838

Should show the commentators from yesterday who were convinced we rarely come from behind to take points.

 

[Roygbiv]

Should show the commentators from yesterday who were convinced we rarely come from behind to take points.

Was this actually said?! Its one of our best traits! We're 3rd best in the league at getting points from a losing position (credit Beans )

 

[Beans]

Was this actually said?! Its one of our best traits! We're 3rd best in the league at getting points from a losing position (credit Beans )

*4th best

 

[Isaw Joeshaw]

Was this actually said?! Its one of our best traits! We're 3rd best in the league at getting points from a losing position (credit Beans )

It was said more than once , to which Mrs.Joe remarked " That's bollocks".

Naturally , I concurred .

 

[BettingBlade]

Was this actually said?! Its one of our best traits! We're 3rd best in the league at getting points from a losing position (credit Beans )

Honestly couldn’t believe my ears. Me and my dad reeled off about 6 straight off the bat straight after he’d said it.

 

[Sheff de party]

A game of four quarters for me. First quarter, we looked very much likely to score and bossed them. Then, drinks break, as soon as they have fluids inside them they sit back and switch off, forget where 'ahead' is and concede. Third quarter we struggled to impose and let them boss us with at least three separate formations within 15 minutes. We got the goal we deserved but fuck me di we not make hard work of it or what?

Couple of things:

1. Norwood, and in fact most of the team who play in the positions out wide - learn some crossing skills, eh? With Norwood, as I have said, we have what people would have us believe a prodigious player with gifted feet. Sure, he can pick Baldock and Stevens out on the wing with a 40 yarder, but that is one trick ... where's the rest? Crossing - we have McB in the middle, a 6 foot 4 inch beanpole who feeds off that stuff and is his stock in trade. We have Sharp and McGoldrick who find half a yard or connect in the right places off balls in the box. Corners and balls in from wide are either lofted, too high, overhit or easy meat for the keeper. What happened to 'driven crosses' and smacks to the far post which are dummied, deflected and catch everyone ball watching? Nothing today going in from wide was productive, save for Ossie's pop up for Sharp to nod on. Burnley's defence was not exactly rock solid and I feel that more attention to detail is needed to get the ball hit at pace into the triangle from penalty spot to both posts. That is the action zone.

2. Balls down the wing into channels. Pretty evidently not working. Enda and GB (and Berge) trying to send Billy or McB down wide when they have to chase two players already on the ball is achieving nothing. We did make so much more progress with the 10-15m pass into the feet of McG and then go wide or short to feet to move forward. It was an area today when we surrendered too many possessions. Part of the problem was the lack of movement in midfield for options for people on the ball.

Henderson 6.5/10. No real chance with the goal, it was so close and unexpected. McB did allow Tarkowski a gift to get in front of him, and he knows that.
Baldock 7/10. I have yet to see GB have a really poor game this season. His concentration and fitness is impressive and he did contribute to the wide threat well, if the end product wasn't so good
Basham 7/10. Thought he was doing okay to be honest. Got his head in the fight and made some key interventions and as usual, ran himself out. I can understand if Wilder needed to change the line up, but he moved Bash into MF last year v Weeds and look what happened there
Egan 8/10. Back at his best. Committed and competitive and a sweetly taken strike.
Robinson 7/10. Again, did okay considering. Marshalled Rodriguez well and started to move up as an overload attacker. But he is still 'not JO'C'
Stevens 6/10. He's still on three cylinders
Osborn 8/10. Thought he had a great game TBH. Harried, made space, played neat 1-2s and showed great energy. Fleck might struggle a bit when he is fit again to replace Osborn
Norwood 4.5/10. Becoming the man-to-replace for me. Either put Berger in there or try Lunny. Norwood isn't what we thought he was, and I doubt never will be. There's a reason why clubs jettison him on promotion to the PL
Berge 5/10. Another disappointing performance. A couple of flourishes, but I counted four passes in the second half that were easily read and intercepted. And he still doesn't like 'mixing it up', seemingly a bit nesh.
McGoldrick 8.5/10. For a senior player, his experience in gaining control and creating movement forward is exemplary. Again, ran his arse off in three different formations today for nowt. He so deserves his PL goal
McBurnie 6/10. Should have buried the first shot. Didn't have much else to go on TBH, so poor was the service, once again.

Rodwell 5/10. He's obviously match rusty and his position changed three time as we went 3-5-3 to 3-4-3 to 4-3-3 then to 5-3-2.
Sharp 7.5/10. You can always count on 100% from Billy. He battled for possession, gained ground, chased down and dug out to get us forward. But his action zone is in the box. And when he is on other duties, their defence's job is made easy.
Mousett 6/10. Ran a bit, but he feeds of % chances, doesn't he? And he had nowt. Him and Sharp shouldn't play together. He needs better midfield feed channels and opportunities to light the afterburner and latch onto chances
O'Connell 7/10. Welcome back Jack. Showed much more cohesion and solidity at the back with him on the field

Wilder 7/10. A point is a point. Europe now is lost, but we have regained some impetus in our mission for a good finish.

pommpey

Europe is now lost?

If City lose their appeal and Arsenal don’t win the cup, we are literally in a European spot.

 

[Bladepicker]

Was this actually said?! Its one of our best traits! We're 3rd best in the league at getting points from a losing position (credit Beans )

Yup. Though I think it may have been in realtion to us going on to win ganes but even then, Norwich and Bournemouth are 2 we have done that in which isn't bad by any stretch. Given we have kept a lot of clean sheets we haven't had the opportunity for a lot of our wins.

 

[HoodedClaw]

Even if it looks wasteful I think we should realise that it can be a small part within our tactics that we feel helps us dictate what happens in the game. Apart from the last 15 minutes of the first half I think we controlled most of that match.

I certainly didn't think that. Certainly second half I felt I was watching the Spurs match but reversed. We had the ball but didn't really do anything with it, they controlled our possession and had two counters that I would've been disappointed not scoring at least one if they were our chances.

It looked like it was Burnley's gameplan, get one up then sit back, defend and hit on the counter. Almost worked to perfection.

I don't think we had any real control after 30 mins, certainly none that Burnley weren't prepared to concede. The aimless high balls in swirling conditions made it easy for them.

 

[Bennyand the Blades]

I know their professional footballers but their still human beings, and wouldn't you say the fact they had had a tough game against Spurs 3 days earlier where they had most certainly left it all out on the field, and Burnley, the home side, hadn't played for six days ? could have also had some effect on how some of the lads played ?.....