No great mystery in recognising what the consensus seems to be.
The season's still early, the players are just getting into a groove and becoming familiar with each other, and as they've
grown together Chris Wilder decides that changes are necessary. I don't think anyone would quibble with CW's right to make
changes if he feels they'll benefit our chances of securing points, but from early in the game, around the 20 minute mark, we were
found wanting. My question is why hesitate in making changes when it was clear that we were conceding ground and momentum
to Leeds? We offered little threat going forward, but the gradual creep of Leeds gaining ground and dominance was something we
failed to address. The selection for this game suggested a mismatch, and so it proved.
We seemed to have built a solid defensive unit. Firstly a very good goalie in Cooper, then two centre-backs gelling well, with Souttar especially
dominant, and Burrows and Gilchrist looking more than capable of doing their jobs to good effect. That said, the changes made for this game
appear to have undermined that cohesion and understanding. Football's a confidence game, and by this puzzling tinkering of the team
it became a clear case of back to the drawing board, or should that be a return to what's worked so well for so far?
I don't expect perfection in life let alone football, mistakes happen and questions are asked, it's a familiar story that isn't restricted to the Blades.
Yet our concerns are to do with how we're shaping up, how we're managing to cope, what areas of the teams need strengthening (unsurprisingly the clamour
for a greater goal threat up front is becoming louder). Perhaps I'm a little too old school in that I like to see the same eleven players, barring injury or
a loss of form, take the pitch for each game. It builds understanding and confidence, and it contributes to the team's ability to cope when presented with
tactical problems. Of course there's sometimes a case for a change of personnel, but for this game? Hindsight's a wonderful thing of course, so when I saw the
team announcement before the game I was surprised, but with my usual stoicism I thought that Wilder must know best so settled in for a game of cat and mouse.
Sadly, from quite early on we looked ineffective, and as the game progressed we were on the back foot and were incapable of offering a threat that might worry Leeds.
On the night the better team won. We now go onto the next game with questions to be asked and hopefully solutions found.
Finger's crossed this was a case of human error and poor team selection. Going forward we have exciting young talent in Brooks and JRS, but even with the introduction
of JRS it was a case of too little too late. We were poor, well below the performance levels that have served us well this far. This will be a test of Wilder and his coaching staff,
as well as the players and whether they can rise above such a poor performance.
