Bell4
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2016
- Messages
- 8,052
- Reaction score
- 14,095
Thanks for the detailed and thoughtful responseThere is a presumption (and misconception IMHO) that going to 3 at the back was a negative and more defensive move. I don’t necessarily agree.
I thought with Hamer and or Cal OH combining with a higher up the pitch LWB rather than a LB, we would expose the known defensive frailties of Bogle.
It can also be argued that, putting square pegs in square holes, all of the back 5 players are specialists in their respective positions.
Burrows IS a LWB.
Alfie is not a RWB. Shacks is.
Harry plays as the central CB in a 3 for his country.
Anel is the best RCB in the division.
If Robbo was fit, he would have been LCB. RND is an able deputy albeit I’m personally unsure whether his best position is LCB, LB or LWB.
THAT would have been the gaffers thinking. Also freed up Gus to be a bit more central although he was well marshalled all game and had limited impact. Can’t imagine why Farke tasked his players to watch Gus like a Hawk.
Moore started superbly but faded as the service and our overall possession waned.
The gaffer made a judgement call. I for one was not as surprised by this as others seem to be as it compacted the space in the middle areas of the pitch, where Leeds can hurt any side in the division.
We have lost a game of football. One shortly after a the desperately sad loss of a much loved recently ex player that has had a profound effect on management, players and supporters alike.
A few might do well to take a different perspective in this before jumping with both feet into the “blame game”.
We all experts after the event.
Except we are not. Emphatically not in fact !
UTB
Good on yer
IMO
He fkd up