View From Scunthorpe

[Roygbiv]

https://roysviewfrom.wordpress.com/2015/03/15/view-from-scunthorpe/

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

And there you have it, a Scunny defence that included Marcus Williams and we only breached it once. Fair enough comments by the look of it.

 

[Kenilworth]

Turner didn't bow his head he was clearly demonstrating that his shirt was pulled and the ref made a similar action.

Turner had more to do than their keeper.

 

[blade62]

https://roysviewfrom.wordpress.com/2015/03/15/view-from-scunthorpe/

Bit of a contradiction on their disallowed goal. One says none of our players claimed a foul, but then next one says we surrounded ref to object. I couldn't see a foul myself.

Thanks Roy

 

[WhiteHawk]

Couldn't see a foul myself either, also don't recall our players surrounding the ref. Then again, I was too busy hurling abuse at Turner so we might have done.......

 

[Kenilworth]

Couldn't see a foul myself either, also don't recall our players surrounding the ref. Then again, I was too busy hurling abuse at Turner so we might have done.......

Avar

 

[DazBlade88]

And there you have it, a Scunny defence that included Marcus Williams and we only breached it once. Fair enough comments by the look of it.

That's because we effectively played without a right hand side. I said at half time with Scunny doubling up on Murphy that I'd have gone one up front, pushing Done left and moving Murphy to the right to run at Williams. To know how limited Williams is defensively and not look to take advantage of that was one of the biggest frustrations for me yesterday.

 

[grafikhaus]

“thats 3 points from 18 now. Shocking – I can’t believe people were talking about a play off spot, we will do well to avoid relegation.
And I do we wish Mr XXXXXX would stop saying how disappointed he is with the result in his aftermath interview and saying we should have won he’s becoming boring and XXXXXX like.”

“Set up for draw and that is what we got”

Today's quiz. Which forum is the above from?

 

[Bergen Blade]

That's because we effectively played without a right hand side. I said at half time with Scunny doubling up on Murphy that I'd have gone one up front, pushing Done left and moving Murphy to the right to run at Williams. To know how limited Williams is defensively and not look to take advantage of that was one of the biggest frustrations for me yesterday.

Spot on. I think JCR would also have enjoyed playing against Williams.

We are struggling generally for movement. Like under Weir, when our players receive the ball they are usually standing still. This makes it a lot more difficult to get past players. Far too often we play it sideways and backwards after winning possession and allow the opposition to get behind the ball. This was what made Murphy ineffective pre Clough, and although he's more confident now, we must aim to give him the ball quicker and when running into space.

We've lost tenacity and mobility when our midfield mainly consist of Doyle and Coutts, and that probably explains some of the above. We don't win the ball in good positions often enough and we don't take advantage when we do.

 

[cooperblade]

That's because we effectively played without a right hand side. I said at half time with Scunny doubling up on Murphy that I'd have gone one up front, pushing Done left and moving Murphy to the right to run at Williams. To know how limited Williams is defensively and not look to take advantage of that was one of the biggest frustrations for me yesterday.

Spot on. I think JCR would also have enjoyed playing against Williams.

We are struggling generally for movement. Like under Weir, when our players receive the ball they are usually standing still. This makes it a lot more difficult to get past players. Far too often we play it sideways and backwards after winning possession and allow the opposition to get behind the ball. This was what made Murphy ineffective pre Clough, and although he's more confident now, we must aim to give him the ball quicker and when running into space.

We've lost tenacity and mobility when our midfield mainly consist of Doyle and Coutts, and that probably explains some of the above. We don't win the ball in good positions often enough and we don't take advantage when we do.

The biggest, of many, problems for me on Saturday was exactly what you've both talked about. Our central midfield 3 (or central 2 plus right side - was hard to tell what it was meant to be) was limited in so many ways. No strong running, no height, no goalscoring threat, no penetration (although Reed did well in this regard initially), no width, no movement, no invention - nothing. Although many have criticised him this season, I think we're really missing Scougall. I appreciate there are no tangibles in terms of goals and assists but his ability to carry the ball forward, his clever off the ball running and his ability to regain possession high up the pitch are things we just don't have at the moment. Holt looks like the only player who can perform a similar role.

I think that, as soon as we possibly can (Port Vale?), we need to use Basham and Scougall in midfield whether that's as a 2 or in a 3.

That of course leaves a problem at centre-back - a huge one whilst Kennedy's injured and still a pretty big one when he returns. The back 4 looked all over the place on Saturday, not helped I'm sure by a 'keeper who looks to be falling to pieces mentally. Even allowing for the re-shuffle, the marking for Scunthorpe's goal was totally unacceptable. No-one got close to Bishop at any point. Clough said 'Bishop's been making those runs for 15 years' but he barely moved, he just stood bang central on the 6 yard line and we ignored him. McEveley is having a prolonged wobble, Kennedy is both a little bit raw and injury prone and Basham is probably needed elsewhere. We desperately need a commanding, experienced centre-back to dominate, lead and add physicality - a good version of Paddy McCarthy would be nice.

A very rare positive to come out of the game was Steven Davies. I missed the Fleetwood game so it was the first time I'd seen him. The Scunthorpe defenders really struggled to deal with his strength and he eased them off the ball very comfortably on a few occasions. He was unlucky not to score in the 2nd half and I think he can prove very useful in the run-in.

I'm not totally despondent because I think we've got players to return who can make a big difference (Howard, Scougall and Basham in particular) and there's the likes of Brayford whose form can only improve. There are lots of problems for Clough to solve though and it's going to be a battle to make the top 6.

 

[Revolution]

The biggest, of many, problems for me on Saturday was exactly what you've both talked about. Our central midfield 3 (or central 2 plus right side - was hard to tell what it was meant to be) was limited in so many ways. No strong running, no height, no goalscoring threat, no penetration (although Reed did well in this regard initially), no width, no movement, no invention - nothing. Although many have criticised him this season, I think we're really missing Scougall. I appreciate there are no tangibles in terms of goals and assists but his ability to carry the ball forward, his clever off the ball running and his ability to regain possession high up the pitch are things we just don't have at the moment. Holt looks like the only player who can perform a similar role.

What we are really missing is the Scougall of last season. Sadly, he has done none of the things that we saw from him last season with any regularity this year.

 

[cooperblade]

What we are really missing is the Scougall of last season. Sadly, he has done none of the things that we saw from him last season with any regularity this year.

Don't think anyone could argue he's done as consistently well as he did last season. Think that's probably a combination of injury and playing in a weaker side. There's been plenty of signs that he was starting to regain that form though and he's still doing a lot of things right, albeit without much reward.

He's not played with Matt Done yet and I think having someone in front of him with really good movement will help him no end. Done stretches opposition defences but we've no-one centrally at the moment to exploit the gaps this creates. Done and Scougall are both pests as well and opposition defenders aren't going to get any time on the ball with those two closing them down. Throw in Davies' strength, Murphy's pace from wide and even Basham's runs into the box and it starts to look like other teams will have a lot to worry about.

Hopefully, in the not too distant future, we might see something like

Howard
Brayford McEveley Kennedy Harris
Flynn Basham Scougall Murphy
Done Davies

Or maybe Done wide right and an extra central midfielder (any one of Reed, Baxter, Doyle or Coutts) in a 4-5-1 / 4-2-3-1 if the 4-4-2 leaves us getting over-run in midfield. I think either of those sides looks a lot stronger than the one we had out on Saturday.

 

[Silent Blade]

Howard
Brayford McEveley Kennedy Harris
Flynn Basham Scougall Murphy
Done Davies

.

James Wallace was in his training kit at the Lane last Friday. Hope his return to the 1st team will be soon

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

And there you have it, a Scunny defence that included Marcus Williams and we only breached it once. Fair enough comments by the look of it.

We breached their defence at least 5 or 6 times but didn' t put the ball in the net.

Done's header
Reed's 1v1
Holt's two attempts from the edge of the 6 yard box
The Beard's air shot

There were a few others from the first half.

Just imagine how many we'd've created if the manager wasn't so negative and we hadn't played so pitifully bad it was worth abusing the team at the end.

 

[Kenilworth]

We breached their defence at least 5 or 6 times but didn' t put the ball in the net.

Done's header
Reed's 1v1
Holt's two attempts from the edge of the 6 yard box
The Beard's air shot

There were a few others from the first half.

Just imagine how many we'd've created if the manager wasn't so negative and we hadn't played so pitifully bad it was worth abusing the team at the end.

Sorry but they ain't anywhere near enough for 60% possession and the only shot that troubled their keeper was Freeman's goal.

Really, that is a shocking stat.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Sorry but they ain't anywhere near enough for 60% possession and the only shot that troubled their keeper was Freeman's goal.

Really, that is a shocking stat.

The contention was we had breached their defence only once. There is strong evidence against that.

Having hopefully established that we weren't negative and did create chances.

1) What would be a reasonable number of chances to create in return for 60% possession?

2) Given that all the above were chances which didn't require anything exceptional to convert what would have been a not "shocking" outcome?

 

[Kenilworth]

The contention was we had breached their defence only once. There is strong evidence against that.

Having hopefully established that we weren't negative and did create chances.

1) What would be a reasonable number of chances to create in return for 60% possession?

2) Given that all the above were chances which didn't require anything exceptional to convert what would have been a not "shocking" outcome?

I expect at least 5-6 saves made by their keepe for 60% possession and triple the amount of "breaches" for that level of dominance. Unfortunately most of that possession is sideways and backwards and that is why it is negative.

Again, I applaud your optimism but I don't believe 5-6 "breaches" is anywhere near enough at this level. It shows we don't deliver enough quality into the box at set pieces and from open play and it shows that either there is very little movement or that any good movement is just ignored. It's clearly not good enough and that's why we are winning so few games - we just cannot outscore mediocre teams.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

I expect at least 5-6 saves made by their keepe for 60% possession and triple the amount of "breaches" for that level of dominance. Unfortunately most of that possession is sideways and backwards and that is why it is negative.

Again, I applaud your optimism but I don't believe 5-6 "breaches" is anywhere near enough at this level. It shows we don't deliver enough quality into the box at set pieces and from open play and it shows that either there is very little movement or that any good movement is just ignored. It's clearly not good enough and that's why we are winning so few games - we just cannot outscore mediocre teams.

So for 60% possession we should have created upwards of 20 decent chances. And I'm the optimist.

 

[Kenilworth]

So for 60% possession we should have created upwards of 20 decent chances. And I'm the optimist.

"Breaches" pleas read what I have stated.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

"Breaches" pleas read what I have stated.

I have read what you've said - and I'm reverting to terminology I prefer.

 

[borbokis]

Hopefully, in the not too distant future, we might see something like

Howard
Brayford McEveley Kennedy Harris
Flynn Basham Scougall Murphy
Done Davies

Am I right in thinking Kennedy will never be able to play a full season due to knee cartilage issues? Or is he just working his way back to full fitness. Personally I can't see the value in a CH that can only play every other week.

 

[grafikhaus]

I expect at least 5-6 saves made by their keepe for 60% possession and triple the amount of "breaches" for that level of dominance. Unfortunately most of that possession is sideways and backwards and that is why it is negative.

At least that's in an away game. Your observations could easily apply to any home game. In fact, five or six saves by the opposition goalie would be an incredible achievement. For us.