Wilder really is a bottle merchant.

[Sean Thornton]

Key word you used there was ‘tempo’. Teams can only dictate the tempo of a game in possession of the ball, whether it’s speeding it up or slowing it down. First half an hour we had plenty of possession and upped the tempo and Leeds couldn’t handle it. When we inevitably sit back on a lead we give up ball possession and so can’t slow down the tempo to suit us. Maybe we don’t have the skill set to slow down the game when in possession of the ball.

“When we inevitably sit back on a lead”

You’d expect this issues arising from this tactic would be noticed by the manager and his coaching staff. But hey ho, Leeds are reyt good……..

 

[CaptainMorgans]

I don't think we bottled anything.
We did the best we could and came up short.

Our fans seem to work off a baseline assumption that there's a winning formula every time we play at this level and therefore, if we don't win someone did something wrong.
Could it not just be that we came up against a better team at their peak?

We went toe--to-toe and came up short.
Rather than sit back and go to a 3, Wilder decided the best form of defence was attack and sent on Hamer and Cannon..
...it didn't work out

But Leeds were coming back into the game regardless. They're absolutely relentless and they defend and attack in numbers. Once they'd equalised we started to get overran.
We're not the first and won't be the last team they do that to.

If we can keep that level of intensity up for the rest of the season then I'll be feeling quite optimistic about our chances.
We're not going to be in a title race with them, it's all about finishing above Burnley for 2nd.

 

[Iffy Onuora's Shiny Head]

Hindsight is wonderful but I do think the substitutions cost us.

Diaz was a good outball for us all match, and we lost that taking him off.
Hamer was always going to be a liability defending on the wing.

After the Substitutions I'd have lined us up:

Choud - Anel - JLT - Burrows
Souza - Peck
Diaz - Hamer/Davies - McCallum
Cannon/Moore


That would have provided protection to Burrows, and allow Hamer to orchestrate any counter attacks from the middle. If you wanted more mobility you could have put Davies central do run around like Ohare was.

 

[Tazzy]

Leeds looked outstanding in the last 20 mins .Cant fault the team in the end Leeds overran us and we looked well and truly fucked .i don't think wilder did anything wrong with his subs and we played really well for 60 mins .hopefully we win Saturday and get the 5 point gap back

 

[Snake]

Key word you used there was ‘tempo’. Teams can only dictate the tempo of a game in possession of the ball, whether it’s speeding it up or slowing it down. First half an hour we had plenty of possession and upped the tempo and Leeds couldn’t handle it. When we inevitably sit back on a lead we give up ball possession and so can’t slow down the tempo to suit us. Maybe we don’t have the skill set to slow down the game when in possession of the ball.

Fair points, but I don't think we simply sat back and gave up ball possession - Leeds simply upped their game from about 30 mins onwards. They started to win the midfield and kept the ball more effectively. Then in the second part of the second half spaces started to appear down the flanks as we were throwing bodies in the midfield area trying to regain possession of the ball.

Ok we certainly weren't gungho after we took the lead but that wasn't us sitting back - we were simply overpowered (particularly in the last quarter of the game) I'm afraid by a better set of players.

 

[Champagneblade]

Ironically, his vantage point from the stand probably helped him figure out what Leeds were doing wrong in that first half. But I also think we were the chief architects of our own demise.

Yep.

We didn’t track the runner who came all the way from left back and for the second, Flecky though it was how high it bounced, we still lost two headers at a set play.

 

[Champagneblade]

I don't think we bottled anything.
We did the best we could and came up short.

Our fans seem to work off a baseline assumption that there's a winning formula every time we play at this level and therefore, if we don't win someone did something wrong.
Could it not just be that we came up against a better team at their peak?

We went toe--to-toe and came up short.
Rather than sit back and go to a 3, Wilder decided the best form of defence was attack and sent on Hamer and Cannon..
...it didn't work out

But Leeds were coming back into the game regardless. They're absolutely relentless and they defend and attack in numbers. Once they'd equalised we started to get overran.
We're not the first and won't be the last team they do that to.

If we can keep that level of intensity up for the rest of the season then I'll be feeling quite optimistic about our chances.
We're not going to be in a title race with them, it's all about finishing above Burnley for 2nd.

To be honest even then we had a couple of good chances we fluffed.

One where Meslier almost handled outside the box; if the pass had been better it could have been a relatively simple chance.

Pretty much everything they got on target went in for the last 20 mins apart from that low save to his left and the top over form Gnonto. Ok 3/5 then!

But header right in corner form the cross, header looped high up and under the bar, shot from edge of area. All low percentage to be so clinical on all three I’d envisage.

A better pass when Meslier almost handled and a shot from Souza that matched the one of Piroe and game over.

Maybe not quite a smash and grab but even 1-0 half time flattered them. We have to put teams to the sword more when on top.

Fine margins.

 

[Rufus Smalls]

Fair points, but I don't think we simply sat back and gave up ball possession - Leeds simply upped their game from about 30 mins onwards. They started to win the midfield and kept the ball more effectively. Then in the second part of the second half spaces started to appear down the flanks as we were throwing bodies in the midfield area trying to regain possession of the ball.

Ok we certainly weren't gungho after we took the lead but that wasn't us sitting back - we were simply overpowered (particularly in the last quarter of the game) I'm afraid by a better set of players.

Agreed, Leeds upped their game but the times we were wanting the ball quickly out of Copper’s hands and take possession when we were 1-0 up were almost non existent.

 

[CarlMcBlade]

Wilder prefers Campbell to Cannon: that’s why he started Campbell.
He also told the team to play with high intensity and press from the front and try to get up the pitch quickly, which we did extremely well, particularly in early periods of the first half.
The result was we took the lead and really had Leeds pinned back for periods.
The other result was that it used up a lot of energy in the forward line; Campbell was never still for a moment. I assume the change was planned and Campbell had been told to hold nothing back and go for it energy-wise for 60 minutes?

In fairness to Wilder the subs were all like for like replacements and shouldn’t have affected our performance…Unfortunately they did, we suddenly lost our intensity and the press just seemed to fizzle out, we slowed things and let them play their game further up the pitch. Against such a quality team we needed a 90+ minute performance, sadly we couldn’t manage it.

 

[Bladesman]

In fairness to Wilder the subs were all like for like replacements and shouldn’t have affected our performance…Unfortunately they did, we suddenly lost our intensity and the press just seemed to fizzle out, we slowed things and let them play their game further up the pitch. Against such a quality team we needed a 90+ minute performance, sadly we couldn’t manage it.

Davies is a winger is he?

 

[AWetFlannel]

It's time for the self important tactically inept dinosaur to go.

It's time to get rid.

This applies far more to you and many on this forum than the manager.

 

[Tom Bott]

Diaz was causing em all sorts of probs and to take him off for an unfit Hamer, was daft

Even though Diaz was injured ?

 

[AWetFlannel]

First half we had the game. Second half Farke changed tactics and slowly got a toe hold. Wider tried to respond to tactical changes and got it all wrong.

Wilder is an accident waiting to happen if we do get into PL, as others have said new owners have shown their nativity giving him a new contract

What tactics did Farke change in the second half?

 

[AWetFlannel]

Probably by attacking their defence with an overload and not having 1 v 2/3 all the time. There was next to no movement going forward and when we eventually lost the ball, 3/4 players were way out of position which led to their wide men having the red carpet rolled out for them to do whatever they wanted to do with it which caused us serious problems because our wingers were nowhere to be seen to protect their overload of Clarke & Burrows which then led either peck/Souza being pulled out of position so they had one man free all the time in the middle of the park with all the time in the world to find a killer pass.

CW taking off our full forward line was just absolutely fucking ridiculous and played right into their hands as we then had no structure going forward. Hope this helps

Seems like you're criticising our first half tactics, which looked pretty good to me and had us well on top. Very strange.

Then you criticise taking off our forward line, despite having zero knowledge regarding their fitness levels. Let's hear it again though from the 'experts': "they're professional footballers so they should be able to play 90 minutes!" Proper embarrassing.

 

[AWetFlannel]

Sorry, but even in possession I hold my breath when the ball needlessly works it way to back JLT. When are we going to learn this pedestrian defence can’t comfortably play it out from the back…It just allow the opposition to play their game much further up the pitch.

We played it out the back brilliantly yesterday, what on earth were people watching? We created chances from exactly this, inviting their press on and then cutting through them in three or four passes.

 

[AWetFlannel]

In all due respect that’s rubbish Wilder threw it last night with his bonkers substitutions
JRS and Diaz had there wing backs on the back foot - Diaz is not as effective on the right - Davis comes in plays him out wide as a winger ffs
Once we lost our width we were there for the taking
All on the manager that

They got tired, just like the Leeds winger who got brought off for the same reason. Why are fans so incapable of grappling with this fact? It's not a video game where you can keep holding R2 and they'll keep running all game.

 

[ATL Recs]

They got tired, just like the Leeds winger who got brought off for the same reason. Why are fans so incapable of grappling with this fact? It's not a video game where you can keep holding R2 and they'll keep running all game.

A minute or so after he went passed three to the bye line and wasn’t keen on coming off Yeh ok

 

[AWetFlannel]

A minute or so after he went passed three to the bye line and wasn’t keen on coming off Yeh ok

Hurting my brain trying to understand this, you're saying one of our players looked fit before they came off and unhappy when they were hooked? And?

Wilder started the players he thought would work best in Campbell, JRS and BBD. He didn't take them off for a laugh, they all pressed relentlessly in the first half an hour which then dropped off. As Leeds started to settle in possession and control the game, those forwards found it harder to press at the same intensity. Campbell hasn't been fit and ready to complete a 90 in over a year, BBD is clearly not match fit, JRS might be but got tired, just like Solomon for them who was taken off.

 

[Nedski]

He was on a loser whatever happened unless we won with some of our "fans" Look at the table, we are still in the box seat, play like that for the rest of the season and we will be up.

That's the problem, we rarely play like that.
Play like we did for the first 30 against Leeds, and the full 90 against Boro and we could still catch Leeds!

But unfortunately the Portsmouth, Luton and Derby performances are far more likely. Yes we won those but we won't always be so lucky.

 

[Vass Borbokis]

Love it how Wilder was questioning fans for not staying behind 5-10 minutes a few games ago, yet last night he didn't even acknowledge the fans, just headed straight down the tunnel.
He really was woeful in his decision making in that second half.
It seems bonkers, but should we get promoted, we need a change.

 

[RWE]

The problem for me are his subs always seem to be square pegs in round holes (a phrase Wilder himself used when he took over the first time). Hate it when Diaz goes onto the right, Hamer is on the left instead of a 10, and playing Choudhury at RB, and Davies as winger??

 

[Addison]

A positive starting eleven concentrating on Weeds weak links Meslier and Bogle, shame Ampadu was injured. A high press, disciplined, even BBD and JRS were doubling up, ensured we were on top for 30 minutes. We had chances to get the all important second, we didn't. They came back into the game but despite the disruption of losing Clarke we were matching them in a game played at EPL pace and for the neutral a good advert for the Championship.

The wheels came off in the 58th minute. Enter Rothwell the Sunderland game changer and we feel the need to respond immediately. Why is the question? they were not on top and surely Campbell and JRS had another 5/10 minutes in them. We replaced the work rate, movement and discipline of these two with the indiscipline, lack of movement and intensity of Hamer and Cannon. Where they fully fit? Even worse by moving BBD over to the right from the left where he had ragged Bogle all game we opened up a chasm as Hamer drifted inside.

It was obvious after 5 minutes the changes weren't working. Bogle and James had free licence to run at us. Changing BBD back to where he started moving Hamer to the right or middle was an option but we persisted with the change giving Weeds the momentum and the first goal which inevitably came from down our left. We then make matters worse bring Davies on down the right completely open up both flanks and Weeds take complete control of the game. Again better options imo would have been McCallum to shore up the left or Holding to go into a 5 to bring organisation and aerial prowess. We didn't and inevitably our weakness in the air and at the back against raw pace were highlighted again.

Really disappointing after a good hour where we didn't look out of place at the divisions top table. Game management killed us and that has to be a concern. Only 1 win in 5 the other 4 losses against top sides. Our inability to field a regular starting eleven compounded by our poor injury management facilities were a factor. Weeds have had 5 regular first team starters all season compared to our 1. Yet despite these contributing factors they way we crumbled in terms of poor substitutions, tactical changes and fitness levels has to be concerning for the run in.

If we play at the same level of intensity we did in the first hour we will progress. The worry is our ability to maintain it over the next 12 games. If we fail to acknowledge what has been staring us in the face since Boxing day that we have defensive frailties, so apparent last night, Holding has to be given an opportunity over JLT and our best starting forward is Campbell, not Cannon then I fear we will struggle. How we react against QPR will answer the questions.

 

[CaptainMorgans]

A positive starting eleven concentrating on Weeds weak links Meslier and Bogle, shame Ampadu was injured. A high press, disciplined, even BBD and JRS were doubling up, ensured we were on top for 30 minutes. We had chances to get the all important second, we didn't. They came back into the game but despite the disruption of losing Clarke we were matching them in a game played at EPL pace and for the neutral a good advert for the Championship.

The wheels came off in the 58th minute. Enter Rothwell the Sunderland game changer and we feel the need to respond immediately. Why is the question? they were not on top and surely Campbell and JRS had another 5/10 minutes in them. We replaced the work rate, movement and discipline of these two with the indiscipline, lack of movement and intensity of Hamer and Cannon. Where they fully fit? Even worse by moving BBD over to the right from the left where he had ragged Bogle all game we opened up a chasm as Hamer drifted inside.

It was obvious after 5 minutes the changes weren't working. Bogle and James had free licence to run at us. Changing BBD back to where he started moving Hamer to the right or middle was an option but we persisted with the change giving Weeds the momentum and the first goal which inevitably came from down our left. We then make matters worse bring Davies on down the right completely open up both flanks and Weeds take complete control of the game. Again better options imo would have been McCallum to shore up the left or Holding to go into a 5 to bring organisation and aerial prowess. We didn't and inevitably our weakness in the air and at the back against raw pace were highlighted again.

Really disappointing after a good hour where we didn't look out of place at the divisions top table. Game management killed us and that has to be a concern. Only 1 win in 5 the other 4 losses against top sides. Our inability to field a regular starting eleven compounded by our poor injury management facilities were a factor. Weeds have had 5 regular first team starters all season compared to our 1. Yet despite these contributing factors they way we crumbled in terms of poor substitutions, tactical changes and fitness levels has to be concerning for the run in.

If we play at the same level of intensity we did in the first hour we will progress. The worry is our ability to maintain it over the next 12 games. If we fail to acknowledge what has been staring us in the face since Boxing day that we have defensive frailties, so apparent last night, Holding has to be given an opportunity over JLT and our best starting forward is Campbell, not Cannon then I fear we will struggle. How we react against QPR will answer the questions.

I agree with you.

I do think the right move at 1-0 was to bring on Holding, McCallum and Moore.
Go a little bit more direct and shut down their width.

But as many have said, Leeds still would have probably scored and Wilder would have been absolutely crucified for "tinkering."

The team I'd like to see finish the season is as follows:

.......................Cooper
Seriki....Holding.... Anel.....Burrows
...............Hamer....Souza
..........JRS......O'Hare.......BBD
.....................Campbell

I think there's so much potential in that side and (in my opinion) puts everyone in their best positions.
I want to see us go forward in numbers and swarm the opposition (similar to the first 30 last night). I don't want to see us being too defensive and relying on individual moments. We're a better side, with more potential than our setup often allows us to show.

 

[Sharp as a blade]

There's a lot of captain hindsights on this thread.

Yeah, I think Wilder probably should have brought Holding on and gone to a back 5. But had he done that and we'd not won there would be people slagging him off for being negative. I wonder if the same people slagging him off for not doing this are the same ones who slagged him off for doing it in the reverse fixture.

For 60 minutes we gave a hell of a performance. He then brings on the best player in the squad and it turns out to be the wrong decision because we were wide open on our left. But fans are going off like he's took Cooper off and stuck Brewster in the net.

- Had he not brought Hamer on he would have been criticised if we didn't win.

- Had he gone to a back 5 he would have been criticised if we didn't win.

- Had he not made any changes whilst Farke did, he would have been criticised if we didn't win.

- He was criticised for bringing Cannon on but had he left Campbell on and he got injured.... he would have been criticised.

Basically he's supposed to win every game or everything he's done is obviously wrong.

...but then you look at the fact that no side in the division has won more games than us and yet he's still criticised regularly and it just sort of suggests that a decent portion of our fanbase are either tactical geniuses or entitled idiots.

 

[Maidenhead]

Personally I don't think that it was a case of poor tactics or substitutions, i think that we just ran out of fit players.

My view is that, probably out of necessity, we play far too many players that should br recuperating and building up fitness, but we have no one else to bring in.

Hamer and Cannon are both carrying knocks, and if they're not fit to start then they shouldn't be on the bench.

Similarly with BBD and Campbell, Wilder's forever saying that we can only get 60 minutes out of them in which case I ask the question, is playing them when they're not fully fit doing more harm than good in the long term?

Playing partially fit players inevitably leads to aggravating existing conditions or further injuries due to excessive stress on the body.

Trouble is the world of football is a very short term place with the next three points, ie. Take it one game at a time, dominating thinking.

If we could get most of our players properly fit we would be a top team but unfortunately the world of football doesn't work like that.

I do think that our fitness and conditioning team need to take a long hard look at themselves and their methods to try and get their house in order for next season, whatever division we're in.

I think everyone that pulled on the shirt last night gave it their all and I was proud of them.

Unfortunately too many shouldn't really have been pulling the shirt on in the first place, but I'm sure that the faster the games run out, the more risks Wilder will take with the players health, and who can blame him given the price that every manager has to pay for perceived failure.

 

[1987]

I don't think we bottled anything.
We did the best we could and came up short.

Our fans seem to work off a baseline assumption that there's a winning formula every time we play at this level and therefore, if we don't win someone did something wrong.
Could it not just be that we came up against a better team at their peak?

We went toe--to-toe and came up short.
Rather than sit back and go to a 3, Wilder decided the best form of defence was attack and sent on Hamer and Cannon..
...it didn't work out

But Leeds were coming back into the game regardless. They're absolutely relentless and they defend and attack in numbers. Once they'd equalised we started to get overran.
We're not the first and won't be the last team they do that to.

If we can keep that level of intensity up for the rest of the season then I'll be feeling quite optimistic about our chances.
We're not going to be in a title race with them, it's all about finishing above Burnley for 2nd.

Great post Morgs

 

[CarlMcBlade]

Davies is a winger is he?

Yeah, forgot about that one, but when Gus came on for JRS and Cannon came on for Campbell, BBD moved over to the right. I don’t think many of us argued with that little shuffle of the pack…Regarding Davies, I guess we were clean out of wingers. Which begs the question….Where’s Brooks?

 

[N20 Blade]

Chris Wilder is many things, to me, but not a ''bottle merchant''. Farke is arguably a better coach and tactician, however, he also has much better players. The agenda against Wilder is frustratingly predictable.

 

[CarlMcBlade]

Ok O'Connell, Couts, Basham etc etc, some players don't hit the ground running, especially in a team that isn't playing to their strengths, but writing him off already is ridiculous, but it seems the modern way

Its never gonna be easy for a fox in the box type of striker when we play with inverted wingers. Billy was the similar type of player but he had the luxury of out and out wing backs playing in regular crosses into the box. I haven’t lost faith in the Cannon, but if we want him to succeed we need to give him better service.

 

[CarlMcBlade]

I don't think we bottled anything.
We did the best we could and came up short.

Our fans seem to work off a baseline assumption that there's a winning formula every time we play at this level and therefore, if we don't win someone did something wrong.
Could it not just be that we came up against a better team at their peak?

We went toe--to-toe and came up short.
Rather than sit back and go to a 3, Wilder decided the best form of defence was attack and sent on Hamer and Cannon..
...it didn't work out

But Leeds were coming back into the game regardless. They're absolutely relentless and they defend and attack in numbers. Once they'd equalised we started to get overran.
We're not the first and won't be the last team they do that to.

If we can keep that level of intensity up for the rest of the season then I'll be feeling quite optimistic about our chances.
We're not going to be in a title race with them, it's all about finishing above Burnley for 2nd.

Yeah, we had em on the ropes, but we just couldn’t find that knockout punch. At 1-0 Leeds could always see a way back.