United 1 Coventry 0 - report

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

Personally I was delighted with the way we played today. For once, they worked hard, ran, harried, tackled, covered and pressed. We had a bit of luck with our goal hitting Billy on the shoulder and the ref for once giving us decisions, not sending off Jay and Hammond, not giving them a penalty or a goal and sending off one of theirs. Yep, absolutely delighted, why? because I'm so used to us being on the wrong end of these things. The amount of games I've seen last 2 seasons where we've tried to play and got booted off the park, had no protection from the fucking awful officials we always get (including the one today) and lost 1-0. So I couldn't care fucking less that we didn't play like Brazil, we showed some steel today, some desire, guts and passion and long may it continue.
 

What? He was one of our best players today. Very strong on shielding the ball and plays more completed passes than the rest of the team!

I thought he had a good game too. I was apprehensive seeing he was starting wide as I think he's been weak there before, but credit to him, I thought he was neat and tidy.
 
I think a couple of players were trying to get some of the Christmas period off :)

The ref wasn't having any of it though :)
 
I thought he had a good game too. I was apprehensive seeing he was starting wide as I think he's been weak there before, but credit to him, I thought he was neat and tidy.
Well I guess that's football & we all have different views - for me I don't see any creativity nor do I see him beat his man, I have not seen him with any pace or speed of movement in terms of passing & I still maintain he looks unfit.

Am keen to hear your take on him?
 
Brayford likes to have Coutts in front of him which is important


I think that is important and was a reason why Clough was so keen to gamble on Coutts' fitness/ condition when he signed him ( on good wages I would think). The two had a "telepathic understanding" playing in that partnership for Derby in the club's best season in recent years. However I'm not sure Coutts will ever be fully fit or mobile again and is a passenger for long periods.

I take the point about partnerships to a degree and fully understand that, whilst Coutts can rarely make a run up the wing, Brayford will do it all game and is in effect the defender and the winger and Coutts is the "wall" he plays the ball off to go on a run. Coutts is then the willing one to hold back and cover.

That's OK but if we do regard that as a vital partnership then the rest of the composition and balance of midfield has to complement them. Playing Coutts along with Hammond, Basham and Woolford in his present form is a dreadful selection at so many levels. Only Basham arrives in the final third and even he does it without any real intent or conviction because his "on the ball confidence is very low". As a result the striker/s lack any sort of support or service. Second balls in the final third of the pitch are mopped up comfortably by their defence just as they were last season. Strikers need men around them at times.

Hammond and Basham put a shift in but Coutts gets nowhere near doing so. He is knackered after 15 minutes and stays in his comfort zone for long periods. "Always tidy with the ball" and I say "tidy" because he is certainly not a big player for forward progressive balls to anyone but Brayford.

My view is that Coutts is not fit enough to be on the pitch and everyone makes allowances for his "condition".

Flynn would have done twice the job in that role yesterday and is surely capable of keeping an eye out for Brayford's overlaps but more importantly he would take the opposition space away from them, win a few balls and get up into the final third. Play Coutts by all means ( and a few on here thought he played well while I spent the game infuriated by his lack of involvement) but not with Hammond, Woolford and Basham please.
 
Only watched from TV, but here is how I'd grade them:

Long 7 – A smart save in the first half, and an excellent reaction from a Collins blunder in the second. Lucky on the goal line incident but it was at very close range. I'm happy he is in instead of Howard, whether he is a long term fix depends on his development. Hopefully this run in the team will bring him on.

Brayford 6 – Solid defensively save for being skinned once and pretty much the only wide outlet we had when we went forward. He'll get better with a run of games, it's good to see him back in his rightful position.

McEveley 6 – No doubt should have been red carded, slow and reckless. Just no need to put that challenge in. At best he is a squad player to cover injuries, which he was of course yesterday, not sure how that qualifies him to be captain. His other mistake was being too deep and playing Armstrong onside for his shot in the first half. Other than this, he was steady at least and managed to avoid another yellow card which was an achievement...

Edgar 7 - A steady Division 3 centre half. Does the simple things pretty well and with our playing deep he was under little danger against the pace, but when he was it showed and he had to take a booking.

Collins 4 – A horror show, slow in thought and deed and a mistake waiting to happen. And the problem is you don't normally have to wait long. If we are to play from the back we can't do so with him in the team, he's so ponderous it must be a simple tactic to put pressure on him as errors will follow. Adkins needs to realise that if we are to stop conceding so many goals then Collins has to go.

Basham 5 – Perhaps a harsh grade as defensively he did OK, but a midfielder Bash is not. He simply doesn't have the passing ability and isn't mobile enough to cover the ground required. At the back is his position in my view where he can do the things he does well.

Hammond 7 – On the positive, he was decent in possession, passed the ball pretty well and was clearly the organising force in the team, and god knows we've needed that. He was aggressive too, and if he can stay on the right side of the law then Adkins' faith in him may prove to be justified. But the booking was needless and cynical, and he could have walked later on so has to be more careful in that regard.

Coutts 6 – Good in possession and can pick a pass as well as anyone we have, but lacks mobility. OK if we have players alongside we compensate for that but presently we don't. Perhaps that will improve as he continues in the side, I think he's worth sticking with this season as we can't expect to tear the side apart in January. But long term is he the kind of player that will get us out of L1? Hand on heart I'd say no.

Woolford 3 – Painful to watch. A winger without a trick with no pace to boot. As signings go, this one is a total bust and Adkins would be mad to have him anywhere near the team again. That he lasted 55 minutes was a mystery to me, I fully expected him to be subbed at half time.

Done 6 – I like Done, he has pace and heart and gives everything he has. Yesterday was tough for him and he battled hard for very little reward but I'd forgive that as it will come good for him.

Sammon 3 – I thought we'd found a cult hero in "The Fish", but it would appear that we'd spelt cult incorrectly. The complete opposite of the hard working Done, Sammon ambled through the game and won nothing. He'd be backup for me going forward, there can't be any chance of our wanting to sign him permanently in the summer.

Subs

Scougall 7 – So much more like the Scougs of old, and while not up to that standard as yet he caused Coventry problems and they had to respond by kicking the shit out of him. I hope he can continue this and force his way back into the 11, if he can get a run in the side he can offer the pace and skill that no one else in our midfield can.

Sharp 6 – I think he needs to trust his own game more. He puts a shift in, but has been snatching at shots recently when he'd usually be cool and slot home without a worry. The great news of his new born son will hopefully help him relax and do what we all know he is capable of. I totally agree with Deadbat in that Sharp and Done need to be our front pairing.

Flynn – Good to see him back. He has limitations but is a good squad player and gave us the energy we needed late on. Shame he couldn't convert after an excellent run late on.

Overall, it was mainly awful to watch, but right now I'll take awful and a few more 3 pointers. It smacks of Clough's philosophy, but step one has to be ensuring you avoid defeat, and from there look to win the game. If we can have a decent Christmas period and edge back into the play off frame then with a couple of additions in January our season is far from over.
 
Better. :)

Woolford simply must be a better player than his performances suggest. He's utterly anonymous, and when he does get the ball he doesn't carry it and doesn't deliver it either.

What got him substituted was a rare moment where he and McEv had the ball in a good attacking area with Coventry stretched, and Woolford twice offloaded it to McEv when it was his job to dribble, turn or cross. At least try something. He plays with fear and takes no responsibility whatsoever. Clearly an unhappy man.
Must realise He needs to retire sfter that particular sequence of events
 
I agree with most of what has been said here. Wasn't hopeful of that midfield when I saw the team, but at least it made us solid. It did totally isolate the forwards however.

McEveley should have walked, probably Hammond too. Coutts on the wing is a waste. Woolford is a waste full-stop. We got lucky with the goal from Sharp and the disallowed goals.

The thing that gets me though is that some of the decisions Adkins is making at the minute are absolutely baffling. He started yesterday with a single winger on the pitch - but a worthless one - and three defensive CMs, one of whom he played on the other wing. I don't know what K. Wallace and K.Freeman have done wrong, but i'd've started both of them both on the wings before I played that midfield. Then there were the subs, which were odd. Scoogs for Woolford is understandable, even though Scoogs isn't the player he was, but Flynn for Done with five minutes left and playing him up-top? Bonkers! Especially when he could have swapped him for Hammond, moved Coutts into the middle and had an actual winger on the wing.

I know we have weaknesses, and i know we need to improve the squad, and I know the transfer window is shut and all that, but surely you then at least play round pegs in round holes?

We got lucky. We were outclassed by Coventry - a team that as of last season couldn't even afford to play at their home ground and were struggling to stay up - and there were a few sat round me admiring their style of play and some of their squad. We were incredibly lucky, but I'll take it.

We can't rely on it though. We've had our good fortune this season.
 
I thought Coutts shielded the ball well and generally moved it about as well as he could without too many players bombing on ahead of him (only Brayford). He was guilty of one bad give away in the 2nd half when he just needed to complete a 1-2 with Woolford but dithered and got caught in possession and his lack of pace is generally a problem. I thought that our problem though was that we didn’t have a winger that could beat a man on either side. I don’t mind Coutts on the right (supported by Brayford) if we have a JCR or Adams on the left to vary our play but that Woolford/McEveley duo down the left is wretched to watch. Hopefully JCR will be back soon. In the meantime, I would play 2 from K. Wallace, Freeman and Flynn down that left side.
 

I agree with most of what has been said here. Wasn't hopeful of that midfield when I saw the team, but at least it made us solid. It did totally isolate the forwards however.

McEveley should have walked, probably Hammond too. Coutts on the wing is a waste. Woolford is a waste full-stop. We got lucky with the goal from Sharp and the disallowed goals.

The thing that gets me though is that some of the decisions Adkins is making at the minute are absolutely baffling. He started yesterday with a single winger on the pitch - but a worthless one - and three defensive CMs, one of whom he played on the other wing. I don't know what K. Wallace and K.Freeman have done wrong, but i'd've started both of them both on the wings before I played that midfield. Then there were the subs, which were odd. Scoogs for Woolford is understandable, even though Scoogs isn't the player he was, but Flynn for Done with five minutes left and playing him up-top? Bonkers! Especially when he could have swapped him for Hammond, moved Coutts into the middle and had an actual winger on the wing.

I know we have weaknesses, and i know we need to improve the squad, and I know the transfer window is shut and all that, but surely you then at least play round pegs in round holes?

We got lucky. We were outclassed by Coventry - a team that as of last season couldn't even afford to play at their home ground and were struggling to stay up - and there were a few sat round me admiring their style of play and some of their squad. We were incredibly lucky, but I'll take it.

We can't rely on it though. We've had our good fortune this season.

Regarding the team selection, Adkins just seemed to go with the biggest and strongest XI he could and hoped we'd be able to stop them from playing. The substitutions were also more about getting more runners into the side to chase and press. I thought both Scougall and Flynn did well.

I think this illustrates our tactics. Our strikers prevents their two holding midfielders to get on the ball. If they tried to find one of their attacking players, our midfield and defence would be all over them, tackling or making them go backwards again. Adkins probably hoped they'd start going long, knowing that our back four would be superior in the air. Coventry are known for their ability to counter attack, but by dropping deep and taking few risks we didn't give them many chances to do that.

Tactics vs Coventry.jpg

From an attacking perspective, our plan was to go forward quickly when we did win the ball, hoping we could thread a ball through to Done. However it's difficult when

a) Done had so much defensive work to do, he'd often be a long distance from their last man
b) Our selected midfielders lacked pace, energy and vision to bomb forward and thread the ball through​

Here's an example. We win the ball well, but Done, although sprinting, hasn't got far enough when Basham could have attempted a pass:

Counter attack vs Coventry.jpg
Basham dwelled and the chasing Coventry player caught up with him.

So, although we had the aggression in midfield to win the ball, coupled with a pacey front man and the intention to play it through to him, we failed to do it. This is the disadvantage with Saturday's player selection and our lack of ability when it comes to the phase between winning the ball and playing the through ball. We tried the quick, long punt in behind, but it became too easy for the Coventry defenders to read.

Set pieces was our best chance of scoring, as we had some reasonable height in the side.


Gaining confidence by grafting and winning may be necessary, although it's embarrassing for a club with our resources to have to resort to such tactics. It's difficult to see that a few wins is going to make those eleven start playing positive attacking football. I doubt we'll make the play offs with Saturday's approach. At some stage there has to be a change to add more ability and mobility. Nigel Clough did that successfully in his first season, and hopefully Adkins can do it eventually as well.
 
Gaining confidence by grafting and winning may be necessary, although it's embarrassing for a club with our resources to have to resort to such tactics. It's difficult to see that a few wins is going to make those eleven start playing positive attacking football. I doubt we'll make the play offs with Saturday's approach. At some stage there has to be a change to add more ability and mobility. Nigel Clough did that successfully in his first season, and hopefully Adkins can do it eventually as well.

I wonder how much his approach was influenced by the opposition and how much it was a reaction to the situation / form we're in? Would he have gone with the same line-up and tactics if we'd been playing Crewe?

It will be interesting to see how we line up in the next 4 matches. I think Long, Brayford, Edgar, Collins, Coutts, Basham and Hammond are pretty much certain starters and it's about whether he adds the likes of K.Wallace, JCR, Adams, Flynn, Scougall, Done etc to make it quicker and more attacking or the likes of McEveley, Sammon, Woolford, Sharp to make it more solid and physically stronger.
 
I wonder how much his approach was influenced by the opposition and how much it was a reaction to the situation / form we're in? Would he have gone with the same line-up and tactics if we'd been playing Crewe?

It will be interesting to see how we line up in the next 4 matches. I think Long, Brayford, Edgar, Collins, Coutts, Basham and Hammond are pretty much certain starters and it's about whether he adds the likes of K.Wallace, JCR, Adams, Flynn, Scougall, Done etc to make it quicker and more attacking or the likes of McEveley, Sammon, Woolford, Sharp to make it more solid and physically stronger.

Probably a combination, and Adams, JCR (and Baxter? is he still injured, suspended or finished with us?) being unavailable may have affected his thinking as well.
 
You listen to Keef Edwards constant moaning, watch 'highlights' and read comments on here, but you don't realise how bad it is until you see it with your own eyes.

Yesterday was embarrassing. No pace, no skill, no technique. A few people have said we played with renewed passion and energy, but constantly kicking or pulling shirts because you're too lazy or slow to chase a player is not showing either.

Yes, we won, but I didn't see any green shoots yesterday and have never felt so nonplussed after a victory. If we stick with that same team of talent-less cloggers, then this is going to be a long, hard, miserable season.
 
quite the opposite
It doesnt really say anything at all does it

But Judgey....

The smile on your face lets me know that you need me
There's a truth in your eyes saying you'll never leave me
The touch of your hand says you'll catch me wherever I fall
You say it best, when you say nothing at all

xx
 
I think that is important and was a reason why Clough was so keen to gamble on Coutts' fitness/ condition when he signed him ( on good wages I would think). The two had a "telepathic understanding" playing in that partnership for Derby in the club's best season in recent years. However I'm not sure Coutts will ever be fully fit or mobile again and is a passenger for long periods.

I take the point about partnerships to a degree and fully understand that, whilst Coutts can rarely make a run up the wing, Brayford will do it all game and is in effect the defender and the winger and Coutts is the "wall" he plays the ball off to go on a run. Coutts is then the willing one to hold back and cover.

That's OK but if we do regard that as a vital partnership then the rest of the composition and balance of midfield has to complement them. Playing Coutts along with Hammond, Basham and Woolford in his present form is a dreadful selection at so many levels. Only Basham arrives in the final third and even he does it without any real intent or conviction because his "on the ball confidence is very low". As a result the striker/s lack any sort of support or service. Second balls in the final third of the pitch are mopped up comfortably by their defence just as they were last season. Strikers need men around them at times.

Hammond and Basham put a shift in but Coutts gets nowhere near doing so. He is knackered after 15 minutes and stays in his comfort zone for long periods. "Always tidy with the ball" and I say "tidy" because he is certainly not a big player for forward progressive balls to anyone but Brayford.

My view is that Coutts is not fit enough to be on the pitch and everyone makes allowances for his "condition".

Flynn would have done twice the job in that role yesterday and is surely capable of keeping an eye out for Brayford's overlaps but more importantly he would take the opposition space away from them, win a few balls and get up into the final third. Play Coutts by all means ( and a few on here thought he played well while I spent the game infuriated by his lack of involvement) but not with Hammond, Woolford and Basham please.
That is simply not true as Coutts got stronger as the game went on ,he was at his strongest in the last 10 minutes when Sharp and Scougall were on.
 
That is simply not true as Coutts got stronger as the game went on ,he was at his strongest in the last 10 minutes when Sharp and Scougall were on.


You may believe that Sitwell but the main point I made was that he was knackered after 15 minutes which is frighteming really. He might well have got a second wind by the last 15 minutes but I disagree with that as well ( I thought a lot of the Coventry danger came from their left second half), but it is entirely possible because he takes his "time outs" from early in the game.
 
That is simply not true as Coutts got stronger as the game went on ,he was at his strongest in the last 10 minutes when Sharp and Scougall were on.
My biggest issues with Coutts are his lack of fitness - he has no turn of pace & very often ambles when off the ball, watch him & notice how often he has his hands on his hips catching his breath.

I also don't see him make any defence splitting passes to play our strikers in, nor do I see him break the opposition play up through a physical challenge, neither do I ever see him make a run off the ball to make himself available.

I don't really get him - by way of comparison (and also how I would like us to play) did you see Bournemouth play against MU?
 
My biggest issues with Coutts are his lack of fitness - he has no turn of pace & very often ambles when off the ball, watch him & notice how often he has his hands on his hips catching his breath.

I also don't see him make any defence splitting passes to play our strikers in, nor do I see him break the opposition play up through a physical challenge, neither do I ever see him make a run off the ball to make himself available.

I don't really get him - by way of comparison (and also how I would like us to play) did you see Bournemouth play against MU?


Coutts season stats:

Appearances 13
Goals 1
Assists 0
Shots 1


Not surprising at all. However I reiterate my point which is not that he shouldn't be picked, but if he is, then the rest of midfield should compensate for his immobility and limitations. On Sunday Hammond, Woolford and Basham just did not do that.
 
Coutts season stats:

Appearances 13
Goals 1
Assists 0
Shots 1
My view is that the team lacks balance and that the selection policy is governed by accommodating the players NA deems are his biggest names rather than selecting those who provide a balance i.e. Basham, Hammond & Coutts in the middle all very similar players with no obvious width or attacking flair - notice the distance between the front 2 & the midfield 3/4.
 

You may believe that Sitwell but the main point I made was that he was knackered after 15 minutes which is frighteming really. He might well have got a second wind by the last 15 minutes but I disagree with that as well ( I thought a lot of the Coventry danger came from their left second half), but it is entirely possible because he takes his "time outs" from early in the game.
Where do you get this from ? He will be monitored as all players are and the stats acted on ,if he wasn't fit he wouldn't be playing as we have a bench full of replacements ,including Reed and Scougall who are like Duracell bunnies. All sportsmen get a second win in any sport after 10-20 minutes so I don't get your point really. I also thought Hammond had a good game and showed great levels of fitness.
 

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