United 2 Preston 1 - report

[Fulwood Blade]

Baxter played deeper than both Doyle and Scougall and was involved much more than usual, I thought he was brilliant and well worth his rating by fans on the Ratings section. Some fans question Baxter's work-rate but in this position he has to be involved all game and maybe he is there to stay.

I am one of those critics - but justification comes from Baxter doing exactly what he did yesterday - anything less is cheating his fellow professionals who probably all appreciate his ability, but like the fans need that little bit extra from him.

If he has now found consistency then he can be first on the team sheet for me as he has great potential - and as for critics, he has too many for us all to be wrong.

Keep it up Mr Baxter, that's all we ask.

A number of us remember the story of the poor start to Bob Bookers time at BDTBL - wisely he asked what he had to do to win over the fans - show 100% commitment, that's all they ask. The rest is history.....................over to you, Mr Baxter.

UTB

 

[Woodwardfan]

I am one of those critics - but justification comes from Baxter doing exactly what he did yesterday - anything less is cheating his fellow professionals who probably all appreciate his ability, but like the fans need that little bit extra from him.

If he has now found consistency then he can be first on the team sheet for me as he has great potential - and as for critics, he has too many for us all to be wrong.

Keep it up Mr Baxter, that's all we ask.

A number of us remember the story of the poor start to Bob Bookers time at BDTBL - wisely he asked what he had to do to win over the fans - show 100% commitment, that's all they ask. The rest is history.....................over to you, Mr Baxter.

UTB

Due allowances should always be made when a player is played blatantly out of his preferred position. For months Baxter has toiled up front as lone striker in a role that was totally unsuited to his physique, pace and height. Fans round me would barrack him week in week out without any latitude for the fact it was probably the last position on the pitch he would choose to play.

Maybe McNulty or a.n.other will play regularly up front now and Baxter can establish himself in the deep point of the diamond. If his big mate Wallace is in that diamond too just watch the pair of them rock and roll. That will be a good time to judge Baxter who has taken far too much stick just because he is not a lone striker but played it uncomplainingly for the team ( and the fans). Some never wanted to understand that. Other than that role, Baxter has not played in a set position for a sequence of games and was often pushed out wide. It is up to him to demand a set position through his performances. Playing in the deep role any player has to run around a lot and tackle a lot as well, then lo and behold he can suddenly become a favourite - he's not trying any harder though, hard to believe isn't it.

 

[Cyprus Blade]

Just one thing please Deadbat . What does "slinked" mean?

it means run over by one of these

 

[Bergen Blade]

Sometimes I miss who gives free kicks away in the melee of the moment. I take it, it was Flynny who conceded the one from which they scored from Sitwell ?.

Yes it was Flynn, but I think he actually got the ball.

I'm not great at assessing goalkeepers, but Howard used his wrong arm when trying to stop the shot. Diving for a high ball to his left, he should use his right hand, which enables him to reach higher. He was wrong footed as the shot was hit:

 

[Foxy]

Yes it was Flynn, but I think he actually got the ball

I've not seen the replays, but in real time, from John Street, he got the ball and it wasn't a foul.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Excellent report Deadbat and oh so sweet. After 25 minutes yesterday I thought it was men v boys and the men weren't playing to any rules and reminded me of Dirty Leeds of yesteryear.

At that point of the game it was Doyle v Preston at times but gradually the opposition slowed a little, the fouling slowed a little, Baxter started to be influential and by half time we were in the game - largely thanks to the skipper I'd say.

Baxter played deeper than both Doyle and Scougall and was involved much more than usual, I thought he was brilliant and well worth his rating by fans on the Ratings section. Some fans question Baxter's work-rate but in this position he has to be involved all game and maybe he is there to stay.

Clough got his tactics right simply because this game was ideal for 4-5-1 and the game game to us for a change at home.

Is this the turning point? Let's hope so. Maybe the postponement of the Scunthorpe game was a good break, look at their result yesterday. Seasons can change on little quirks that happen.

We started with Doyle in the holding role in our usual 4-5-1. After 15 minutes Doyle and Baxter swapped positions. I think the reasons were:

• Wanting to get Baxter on the ball in a position where he has more space and isn't closed down so aggressively. Unlike most teams Preston played 4-4-2. Their central midfielders were rather deep and their strikers didn't track back a lot, which meant Baxter could get on the ball and start off moves with his good passing.
• Playing Doyle in a more advanced role gave us a better tackler and more aggression against the mentioned two Preston central midfielders, who are not creative, but very competitive guys who try to win the midfield battle. It meant we stood up to them. It was probably not the right game to play Scougall and Reed in these positions.

 

[groveblade]

Yes it was Flynn, but I think he actually got the ball.

I'm not great at assessing goalkeepers, but Howard used his wrong arm when trying to stop the shot. Diving for a high ball to his left, he should use his right hand, which enables him to reach higher. He was wrong footed as the shot was hit:

I thought Howard could have saved it - but also Wallace (J) I think could have headed it clear if he'd stood tall rather than ducking out of the way..at least that's what it looks like to me from the replays of their goal I've seen.

(not being negative here btw - thought Howard had a decent game and the whole team were excellent in carving out a great win against an awkward, niggly and aggressive Preston team - UTB!)

 

[Bergen Blade]

Extra point for Baxter and at least 1 less for Scougall IMO.

Though Baxter was influential at times and showed so e excellent passing. He looks a much better player in the deeper role. The through ball or Scougall's one-on-one was perfect.

As for Scougall, I just don't think he does enough for a number 10. He barely registers on the scoresheet and can't remember many assists or defence-splitting passes from this season. 10/10 for effort. But I'd personally be giving Reid a go in his place and using his as an impact, as suggested in the OP. The one-on-one was a pretty poor effort by all accounts, and he isnt capable of dictating attacks like Baxter can. Reid's been superb recently, and was surprised to not see him even given a few minutes yesterday..

I know Scougall's shirt number is 10, but his role in the team includes far more than just creating. His defensive work is underestimated. While Doyle got (rightly) credit yesterday for a lot of good, strong tackles, Scougall also put in a tremendous amount of work, although he does it a little differently. As he is so light weight he can't outmuscle opponents, but he does prevent them from going forward, makes them go sideways and backwards as they can't get rid of him. As a first defender he's brilliant and I'm certain that the likes of Doyle and the centre halves love him.

One example, Baxter played a bad cross field pass, which was intercepted by a Preston player. Now this is how a lot of teams score from breaks. A team is going forward, have few players back and gets hit on the break:




But thanks to Scougall's quick backtracking, he catches up with the man on the ball and the counter attack has been stopped:



Seconds later after the above Scougall got on the ball (helped by Doyle) won a free kick, and moments later Murphy had played Doyle through for his big chance. Well done to them for stopping a dangerous situation, and turning it into a dangerous attack for us.

Regarding Scougall's offensive input it's frustrating that he's not been able to convert more chances, but I think it'll come. He missed one chance from a corner. Regarding his "poor" one on one effort, bear in mind that he ran the length of the pitch, and moments before he'd been chasing around like he does constantly. A classic number 10, who reserves his energy for certain special moments of magic, may have scored that one, but Scougall's role instruction extends far beyond that and you can't expect it all from one player.

There was an occasion in the first half where Scougall tried playing a 1-2 with McNulty, but didn't get the ball back. McNulty chose to go for goal himself, but if he'd played Scougall in I'd expect him to score:




I think Scougall has played well of late and think he'll be an important part of the team that will climb the table and do well in the cups in the second half of the season.

 

[Woodwardfan]

I know Scougall's shirt number is 10, but his role in the team includes far more than just creating. His defensive work is underestimated. While Doyle got (rightly) credit yesterday for a lot of good, strong tackles, Scougall also put in a tremendous amount of work, although he does it a little differently. As he is so light weight he can't outmuscle opponents, but he does prevent them from going forward, makes them go sideways and backwards as they can't get rid of him. As a first defender he's brilliant and I'm certain that the likes of Doyle and the centre halves love him.

One example, Baxter played a bad cross field pass, which was intercepted by a Preston player. Now this is how a lot of teams score from breaks. A team is going forward, have few players back and gets hit on the break:


View attachment 10193

But thanks to Scougall's quick backtracking, he catches up with the man on the ball and the counter attack has been stopped:

View attachment 10194

Seconds later after the above Scougall got on the ball (helped by Doyle) won a free kick, and moments later Murphy had played Doyle through for his big chance. Well done to them for stopping a dangerous situation, and turning it into a dangerous attack for us.

Regarding Scougall's offensive input it's frustrating that he's not been able to convert more chances, but I think it'll come. He missed one chance from a corner. Regarding his "poor" one on one effort, bear in mind that he ran the length of the pitch, and moments before he'd been chasing around like he does constantly. A classic number 10, who reserves his energy for certain special moments of magic, may have scored that one, but Scougall's role instruction extends far beyond that and you can't expect it all from one player.

There was an occasion in the first half where Scougall tried playing a 1-2 with McNulty, but didn't get the ball back. McNulty chose to go for goal himself, but if he'd played Scougall in I'd expect him to score:

View attachment 10196


I think Scougall has played well of late and think he'll be an important part of the team that will climb the table and do well in the cups in the second half of the season.

I hope you are right and agree that Clough is trying to develop his all round game.

Whether defensive duties are his strong point is a matter of opinion. I really love to see Scougall pick up a loose ball and even if it comes unexpectedly he always has a move in mind. In other words he is aware of all around him. Invariably he is straight on the move when he collects the ball and always moves it along. It often hits the nearest man but if not he is free. He has real pace over 10 yards and then usually passes the ball crisply. It's up to his colleague to continue the move but he is always there for the return. It is high level play and worthy of a bigger stage.

This season he started very poorly but has been better of late. I think he is too lightweight for week in week out league 1 matches but watch with interest as Clough patiently develops the lad. I think he lasts longer during games and he could come good this season I agree.

Whether he will be picked above Wallace if he gets fit I would doubt. Then it's between Scougs and Baxter for the other place. Interesting.

 

[BeatleBlade]

Does anyone know why Flo was dropped?

 

[Wards]

Got a calf strain

 

[blader]

I know Scougall's shirt number is 10, but his role in the team includes far more than just creating. His defensive work is underestimated. While Doyle got (rightly) credit yesterday for a lot of good, strong tackles, Scougall also put in a tremendous amount of work, although he does it a little differently. As he is so light weight he can't outmuscle opponents, but he does prevent them from going forward, makes them go sideways and backwards as they can't get rid of him. As a first defender he's brilliant and I'm certain that the likes of Doyle and the centre halves love him.

One example, Baxter played a bad cross field pass, which was intercepted by a Preston player. Now this is how a lot of teams score from breaks. A team is going forward, have few players back and gets hit on the break:


View attachment 10193

But thanks to Scougall's quick backtracking, he catches up with the man on the ball and the counter attack has been stopped:

View attachment 10194

Seconds later after the above Scougall got on the ball (helped by Doyle) won a free kick, and moments later Murphy had played Doyle through for his big chance. Well done to them for stopping a dangerous situation, and turning it into a dangerous attack for us.

Regarding Scougall's offensive input it's frustrating that he's not been able to convert more chances, but I think it'll come. He missed one chance from a corner. Regarding his "poor" one on one effort, bear in mind that he ran the length of the pitch, and moments before he'd been chasing around like he does constantly. A classic number 10, who reserves his energy for certain special moments of magic, may have scored that one, but Scougall's role instruction extends far beyond that and you can't expect it all from one player.

There was an occasion in the first half where Scougall tried playing a 1-2 with McNulty, but didn't get the ball back. McNulty chose to go for goal himself, but if he'd played Scougall in I'd expect him to score:

View attachment 10196


I think Scougall has played well of late and think he'll be an important part of the team that will climb the table and do well in the cups in the second half of the season.

Whilst the analysis is interesting, I am sceptical. For the same reasons you can't judge a new signing on a Youtube video, or the post-match analysis on MOTD. It's fine picking moments such as that, but the critical moments such as the one-on-one, or the numerous times he is in possession within 30 yards of goal, he fails to deliver. Really, as a midfielder in a 4-5-1, he doesn't score and very rarely creates good opportunities for our other forwards. Certainly seen more from Reed in his few appearances to suggest he is more capable, at least in the creative sense.

I personally can't see past a 4-2-3-1 of:

Flynn Mceveley Basham Harris
Doyle Reed
JCR Baxter Murphy
McNulty

and can't really see how Scougall fits into our current system (or what system he best suits at all really). The lad is a 100% trier, and no one can knock his effort, but in terms of how he affects the game with the ball, he doesn't do an awful lot. I think he could be much more effective as an impact sub off the bench to inject some energy against tired legs, but for me he just isn't doing enough to hold down a first team place at the moment, particularly as an attacking midfielder. Even if it's just a case of him needing a rest, I think Reed has looked more effective and deserved a run in the team ahead of Scougall.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Whilst the analysis is interesting, I am sceptical. For the same reasons you can't judge a new signing on a Youtube video, or the post-match analysis on MOTD. It's fine picking moments such as that, but the critical moments such as the one-on-one, or the numerous times he is in possession within 30 yards of goal, he fails to deliver. Really, as a midfielder in a 4-5-1, he doesn't score and very rarely creates good opportunities for our other forwards. Certainly seen more from Reed in his few appearances to suggest he is more capable, at least in the creative sense.

I personally can't see past a 4-2-3-1 of:

Flynn Mceveley Basham Harris
Doyle Reed
JCR Baxter Murphy
McNulty

and can't really see how Scougall fits into our current system (or what system he best suits at all really). The lad is a 100% trier, and no one can knock his effort, but in terms of how he affects the game with the ball, he doesn't do an awful lot. I think he could be much more effective as an impact sub off the bench to inject some energy against tired legs, but for me he just isn't doing enough to hold down a first team place at the moment, particularly as an attacking midfielder. Even if it's just a case of him needing a rest, I think Reed has looked more effective and deserved a run in the team ahead of Scougall.

Actually Blader it's not fine to pick out a freeze frame of one incident to support a big point, thank goodness our legal system in this country does not use such isolated evidence to convict people. Having said that Bergen puts up the skittles for others to knock down or re-arrange and it often leads to good debate. I'm sure Bergen knows that one freeze-frame can be interpreted numerous ways, like last week when Baxter turned out to be well down the list of villains in the incident Bergen castigated him for.

I agree with much you say about Scougall and would regard him as one of those "development players". The difference is that Scougall's development is mainly in the first team when other development players like Reed, McNulty and Kennedy have a drip feed of appearances. Why that should be I don't know. It's not just the fact that Clough signed him because he signed McNulty too. It's not the fact that we don't have various alternatives because we have dozens of options in midfield. The lad has the manager's eye and I hope it is justified in the fullness of time.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Actually Blader it's not fine to pick out a freeze frame of one incident to support a big point, thank goodness our legal system in this country does not use such isolated evidence to convict people. Having said that Bergen puts up the skittles for others to knock down or re-arrange and it often leads to good debate. I'm sure Bergen knows that one freeze-frame can be interpreted numerous ways, like last week when Baxter turned out to be well down the list of villains in the incident Bergen castigated him for.

Yes, I noticed you using the expression "patent nonsense" regarding my analysis of Walsall's goal.

Analyses should try to be neutral, it's not about blaming, or castigating, or making villains out of, anybody. It's about finding out where we ought to be doing something differently in order to improve; to make opposition teams work even harder to score goals against us.

There are certain guidelines in a zonal marking system and if we're being sloppy the analyses should highlight that.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Yes, I noticed you using the expression "patent nonsense" regarding my analysis of Walsall's goal.

Analyses should try to be neutral, it's not about blaming, or castigating, or making villains out of, anybody. It's about finding out where we ought to be doing something differently in order to improve; to make opposition teams work even harder to score goals against us.

There are certain guidelines in a zonal marking system and if we're being sloppy the analyses should highlight that.

Patent nonsense was a bit heavy, let's say it covered maybe a fraction of the full story which came out in the subsequent discussion and was very interesting and worthwhile.

Anyway, this week's includes a couple of big leaps in which you build up the case for all the unseen and unappreciated defensive work which Scougall undertakes and which, by implication, you must think that any player chosen in his place would not undertake. Interesting perspectives on that have ensued in discussion but really did not need two snapshots of microseconds in a game of 95 minutes to kick-off the debate. In the full game don't you think every player in the team makes numerous contributions like that? Couldn't you or I select a similar snapshot sequence for every player on a day they all worked their socks off?

As for his productivity where it matters i.e. assisting and scoring goals, I'm afraid it's not just about the other players not giving him the service, he snatches at his chances to feet and he is a poor header of the ball at goal. He has played 24 games this season and has scored 1 goal and has provided no assists. That is an appalling record for an advanced midfield player.

As I've said above, the lad has potential but surely those statistics paint a truer picture than your highly selective snapshots.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Patent nonsense was a bit heavy, let's say it covered maybe a fraction of the full story which came out in the subsequent discussion and was very interesting and worthwhile.

Anyway, this week's includes a couple of big leaps in which you build up the case for all the unseen and unappreciated defensive work which Scougall undertakes and which, by implication, you must think that any player chosen in his place would not undertake. Interesting perspectives on that have ensued in discussion but really did not need two snapshots of microseconds in a game of 95 minutes to kick-off the debate. In the full game don't you think every player in the team makes numerous contributions like that? Couldn't you or I select a similar snapshot sequence for every player on a day they all worked their socks off?

As for his productivity where it matters i.e. assisting and scoring goals, I'm afraid it's not just about the other players not giving him the service, he snatches at his chances to feet and he is a poor header of the ball at goal. He has played 24 games this season and has scored 1 goal and has provided no assists. That is an appalling record for an advanced midfield player.

As I've said above, the lad has potential but surely those statistics paint a truer picture than your highly selective snapshots.

The Walsall analysis contained a detailed description on what happened before that goal, focusing on where our organisation slipped up according to basic zonal marking principles. If these principles are not familiar at all, then I can see it being difficult to understand the analysis.

Regarding Scougall, I've noticed a growing misappreciation from posters ("not sure what he offers at the moment"), so thought I'd give some examples of things I think he actually does well. I'm hopeful that he'll be back to his best pretty soon as long as our line ups remain well balanced. I find it easier to explain things when using screen shots. If that's a problem for you, feel free to put me on ignore.

 

[Woodwardfan]

The Walsall analysis contained a detailed description on what happened before that goal, focusing on where our organisation slipped up according to basic zonal marking principles. If these principles are not familiar at all, then I can see it being difficult to understand the analysis.

Regarding Scougall, I've noticed a growing misappreciation from posters ("not sure what he offers at the moment"), so thought I'd give some examples of things I think he actually does well. I'm hopeful that he'll be back to his best pretty soon as long as our line ups remain well balanced. I find it easier to explain things when using screen shots. If that's a problem for you, feel free to put me on ignore.

OK Bergen, the Walsall partial analysis covered a tenth of what happened in the build up to the goal, so be it.

"Misappreciation" is a pompous word to use frankly.

"Zonal marking principles" in midfield is simply jargon. A team's midfield is organised to protect the back line by a combination of man marking, holding position and filling space - call part of it "zonal marking" if you like, but I think it's jargon. I like your "rubber band" illustration a lot, but whatever the jargon, it's the sweeping conclusions which you draw from the flimsy evidence of a moment in time which I find misleading, almost fanciful.

How do I find "ignore" please?

 

[Bergen Blade]

OK Bergen, the Walsall partial analysis covered a tenth of what happened in the build up to the goal, so be it.

"Misappreciation" is a pompous word to use frankly.

"Zonal marking principles" in midfield is simply jargon. A team's midfield is organised to protect the back line by a combination of man marking, holding position and filling space - call part of it "zonal marking" if you like, but I think it's jargon. I like your "rubber band" illustration a lot, but whatever the jargon, it's the sweeping conclusions which you draw from the flimsy evidence of a moment in time which I find misleading, almost fanciful.

How do I find "ignore" please?

If zonal marking in midfield is a new concept to you and you're not interested in learning about it, it's a waste of time arguing that topic with you.

Click on my profile photo and you'll see the Ignore option.

 

[SwindonBladeJnr]

OK Bergen, the Walsall partial analysis covered a tenth of what happened in the build up to the goal, so be it.

"Misappreciation" is a pompous word to use frankly.

"Zonal marking principles" in midfield is simply jargon. A team's midfield is organised to protect the back line by a combination of man marking, holding position and filling space - call part of it "zonal marking" if you like, but I think it's jargon. I like your "rubber band" illustration a lot, but whatever the jargon, it's the sweeping conclusions which you draw from the flimsy evidence of a moment in time which I find misleading, almost fanciful.

How do I find "ignore" please?

Did you just accuse someone else of being pompous?

I've seen it all now.

All Bergen is doing is offering his perspective on games/player contributions to vital moments in games. From what I have seen in his posts, he is never rude or condescending to others in expressing his opinions and as you have yourself already pointed out, they often encourage interesting debate.

There is no need for you to chuck your toys out of the pram because you might have an opposing opinion, or because you don't agree with the method that Bergen uses to express his opinion. (Taking offence at screenshots of games - now I really have seen it all).

Grow up.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Did you just accuse someone else of being pompous?

I've seen it all now.

All Bergen is doing is offering his perspective on games/player contributions to vital moments in games. From what I have seen in his posts, he is never rude or condescending to others in expressing his opinions and as you have yourself already pointed out, they often encourage interesting debate.

There is no need for you to chuck your toys out of the pram because you might have an opposing opinion, or because you don't agree with the method that Bergen uses to express his opinion. (Taking offence at screenshots of games - now I really have seen it all).

Grow up.

A point of detail, all I said was that "misappreciation" was a pompous word to use.

As for the snapshots, I actually said I didn't like the "sweeping conclusions drawn " from the snapshots.

Let's be fair, if you are having a pop get your facts right.

 

[SwindonBladeJnr]

A point of detail, all I said was that "misappreciation" was a pompous word to use. No I don't think Bergen actually is pompous.

As for the snapshots, I actually said I didn't like the "sweeping conclusions drawn " from the snapshots.

Let's be fair, if you are having a pop get your facts right.

We could get into a circular debate where we both exercise pedantry to its limits, but I'm sure like me you have better things to do at this time of night. You are clearly not a stupid man and obviously know that the way a message is delivered/received is not solely determined by the literal meaning of a word/words, but the 'tone' and the chosen combination of words used. That's all I'm prepared to say in response.

I just find your reaction to Bergen's contributions in this instance completely unnecessary, and contrary to my better judgment I commented.

What I will apologise for is being a bit on the 'personal' side in my response - arguably hypocritical given what I was posting about. I could have made my point using a bit more subtlety.

UTB

 

[Balham]

A point of detail, all I said was that "misappreciation" was a pompous word to use.

Let's also not forget that Bergen Blade is writing in a language which isn't his first. I doubt using a word in a pompous fashion crossed his mind at all.

 

[grafikhaus]

Let's also not forget that Bergen Blade is writing in a language which isn't his first. I doubt using a word in a pompous fashion crossed his mind at all.

Damn right! When I see Bergen post, I always think 'Jeg forstår ikke et ord han sier.'

Bergs offers solid tactical insights and I, for one appreciate his input.

Plus, anybody who's from Bergen is alright by me!

 

[Grecian2000]

This thread has become nearly as amusing as the time Bergs put Monty in the frame for an error and all hell broke loose. Still makes me laugh when I think of it.

Can't believe anyone has a problem with Bergs putting the effort in to start this sort of discussion to be honest (a bit like slagging Deadbat for taking the time to knock reports up for everyone). Keep it up Bergs!

 

[Bergen Blade]

Let's also not forget that Bergen Blade is writing in a language which isn't his first. I doubt using a word in a pompous fashion crossed his mind at all.

Correct, looked it up now:

misappreciation (plural misappreciations)

1. A failure to correctly and completely understand; an incorrect notion or belief that is a result of such a failure.
2.  [dated) An observed failure to appreciate the proper worth of a person, an act or a thing.

Didn't know it was pompous, or dated, or wrong to use in that context.

 

[Grecian2000]

Didn't know it was pompous, or dated, or wrong to use in that context.

It might be dated, but it certainly wasn't pompous or used out of context at all.

I agree with the point you were making in that I think people are becoming frustrated that he isn't pulling up the trees we thought he might last season from an attacking standpoint and his defensive duties are, somewhat, overlooked as a result. His lack of height/weight can be a huge disadvantage at our level because referees tend to overlook quite a lot of aggressive play which would get punished at a higher level (e.g the extraordinary incident at Valley Parade).

 

[Bergen Blade]

It might be dated, but it certainly wasn't pompous or used out of context at all.

I agree with the point you were making in that I think people are becoming frustrated that he isn't pulling up the trees we thought he might last season from an attacking standpoint and his defensive duties are, somewhat, overlooked as a result. His lack of height/weight can be a huge disadvantage at our level because referees tend to overlook quite a lot of aggressive play which would get punished at a higher level (e.g the extraordinary incident at Valley Parade).

Yes, opposition players bully him a lot off the ball, often when he's trying to make runs forward and into the box. Why get exhausted trying to track him when a little shove will do? He is so slight that it doesn't take a lot of force to get him off balance either, meaning referees overlook those things even though they're cynical.

 

[Dkc]

Zonal marking is a common concept, but all team tactics allow for flexibility. No one is forced to back off and stay in their assigned area of the pitch if an advantage can be gained from straying out of position on certain occasions.

I too appreciate Bergen's analyses, but agree that only so much can be deduced from still frames which just show part of the pitch. But it's the best we have. Keep it up Bergs