It tells you that when teams commit lots of players forward they are vulnerable to us. On their own grounds they are more likely to do that..except Barnet who kept lots of players behind the ball and tried to nick a 1-0 (understandable in their position). Like most other teams in the league, we find it difficult to break teams down that keep their shape. In the coming weeks, we will see if the new confidence in the team translates to better quality service to our front men, whether we commit more midfielders into attack and whether we take the bulk of our chances as we have been doing away from home.
Perhaps the team feels more relaxed away from home? and doesn't feel the weight of expectancy at home , ie its more fun away from home , do the supporters get less on the teams back away from home as the fans going to those games are diehard supporters?
In one home game we had 10 men and in others D & R, Sheff Weds we created plenty of chances but didn't take them.
I'm not too worried by 1 - 0 wins at home. Nail biting at the time but they still bring 3 points.
Yeovil and others will have seen our last three away results and come to the Valley happy to take a draw. We have to expect that and both fans and players have to be patient enough to deal with it.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]In one home game we had 10 men and in others D & R, Sheff Weds we created plenty of chances but didn't take them.
I'm not too worried by 1 - 0 wins at home. Nail biting at the time but they still bring 3 points.
Yeovil and others will have seen our last three away results and come to the Valley happy to take a draw. We have to expect that and both fans and players have to be patient enough to deal with it.
and Parky needs to have more than a Plan A up his sleeve and needs to adapt to circumstances which he didn't against Brighton with disasterous results.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]In one home game we had 10 men and in others D & R, Sheff Weds we created plenty of chances but didn't take them.
I'm not too worried by 1 - 0 wins at home. Nail biting at the time but they still bring 3 points.
Yeovil and others will have seen our last three away results and come to the Valley happy to take a draw. We have to expect that and both fans and players have to be patient enough to deal with it.
and Parky needs to have more than a Plan A up his sleeve and needs to adapt to circumstances which he didn't against Brighton with disasterous results.
Funny how you are only mentioning Brighton and none of the games since nor any of the team changes made before and during games in the last month.
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]In one home game we had 10 men and in others D & R, Sheff Weds we created plenty of chances but didn't take them.
I'm not too worried by 1 - 0 wins at home. Nail biting at the time but they still bring 3 points.
Yeovil and others will have seen our last three away results and come to the Valley happy to take a draw. We have to expect that and both fans and players have to be patient enough to deal with it.
and Parky needs to have more than a Plan A up his sleeve and needs to adapt to circumstances which he didn't against Brighton with disasterous results.
Funny how you are only mentioning Brighton and none of the games since nor any of the team changes made before and during games in the last month.
not funny at all. I didn't attend Carlisle, Swindon or Peterborough (highly unusual for me as I doubt I've missed that many away games in total the last three seasons but I'd frankly had enough of the negative dull football Parky was serving up) and so can't comment on the performances as I'd wish. In between at Barnet we were average at best and against Sheff Weds we were ok and ground out a victory. I am however looking forward to Rochdale. Maybe I shouldn't go !!
So because you didn't go those performances don't count. I bet if we had lost they would have been valid evidence regardless of your attendance.
I went to Sheff Wed and that was far far from "ground out". We played some very good football in the first half and held out well in the second.
But then whatever Charlton do under Parky will never be good enough for you. You have said already that if (and it is still a huge if in my mind) we go up you will give Parkinson no credit.
You could also say that we have conceded more goals away from home than the bottom team as well as being the lowest conceders at home if you exclude games against teams above us.
For the anoraks, Hartlepool are interesting. At home, they have scored 13 and conceded 18. Away from home, they have scored 4 and conceded 3. Could be a frustrating last game of the season if we need to win to go up.
I cannot comment on team changes during games and the affect those changes have on the performance if I am not there to see the affect those changes might make. I think you will find that on the threads post match on views on a game I never comment on the performance win, lose or draw if I havn't been there to see it. Likewise people follow the match thread and make comments on events they are hearing third hand which I find absurb and so don't do so. We all know that people view incidents differently, one mans foul is anothers fair challenge, and yet people see fit to judge based on someone else's viewpoint. I steer clear of doing this. And please forgive me if I don't like Parky. I am still of the opinion he could have kept us in the Championship if he had chosen to do so but didn't at the expense of trying to keep his job, which he ultimately did, and I still havn't forgiven him for that. I am still of the opinion he isn't a particularly good manager and if he doesn't take us up this season, which as you admit is a huge if, then he would have failed. Some people it seems will be happy with that. I can't win really though can I. If I said now he was brilliant and the best thing since sliced bread I'd be accused of being fickle. If he takes us up then great I'll be as pleased as punch and happy we are back in the League which he should have kept us in initially. Then we'll start to see if he is a good manager.
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]I am still of the opinion he could have kept us in the Championship if he had chosen to do so but didn't at the expense of trying to keep his job, which he ultimately did, and I still havn't forgiven him for that.
Nope, I've tried, and just cant see the logic in this.
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]I am still of the opinion he could have kept us in the Championship if he had chosen to do so but didn't at the expense of trying to keep his job, which he ultimately did, and I still havn't forgiven him for that.
Nope, I've tried, and just cant see the logic in this.
me neither. He let us go down and that meant he was trying to keep his job?
Hopefully the atmosphere at The Valley will be positive following the recent good away form which might give the players the confidence to perform better at home too.
The side that demolished Peterborough was made for playing counter attacking football - players like Racon, Waggy and Martin thrive on having space to carry the ball into at pace. Peterborough are a side that throw players forward but leave gaps at the back and boy did we exploit that.
At the Valley, teams are going to be less cavalier and I think that is where the movement of the front two and the passing of Jackson and Racon (particularly Jackson) are going to be vital in creating space and exploiting it. It's going to be interesting to see and I would echo those who have already urged everyone to stay patient and with the team right up to the final whistle. I have to say the players look extraordinarily fit at the moment and that will hopefully stand us in good stead in tight games, we've certainly shown ourselves capable of bagging late goals this season.
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]I am still of the opinion he could have kept us in the Championship if he had chosen to do so but didn't at the expense of trying to keep his job, which he ultimately did, and I still havn't forgiven him for that.
Nope, I've tried, and just cant see the logic in this.
me neither. He let us go down and that meant he was trying to keep his job?
I know it sounds daft but bare with me. In my opinion he was more concerned with not losing games to the detriment of trying to win them. Two games stick out with me, I doubt either of you were there and so can't comment. Swansea away. Fifteen minutes to go and it was one-all. It was an end to end game and either side could have won it. However, we went from playing two up front and in with a chance of grabbing a winner to taking off a striker and bringing on a midfielder to protect the point we had. Similarly a couple of weeks later at Reading we drew 2-2 but did likewise and preserved the point we had. We were bottom of the table and needed wins. Those extra four points, if gained, could have given confidence a boost and who knows what could have happened. As it is we went down. Parky was able then to say 'hey, I arrested the decline and we only lost two of our last ten games' or whatever it was I can't remember. Better than saying 'hey, we went down' and lost say six of our last ten which we could have done. It looks like he steadied a sinking ship and by doing so made himself look better and he kept his job. We could have gambled in those two games, and others, and lost and his record would have looked worse and he could have lost his job. Self preservation. We were already down, doomed, but were we? If we had attacked those games, gambled and won who know what would have happened ? We may have stayed up. May have. We will never know. In my opinion we could have, maybe should have. That we didn't is down to Parky. Forgive me if I'm not shouting his name from the rooftops just yet.
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]I cannot comment on team changes during games and the affect those changes have on the performance if I am not there to see the affect those changes might make.
On that point, that's fair enough, but in some cases it's obvious so is fair to comment. Parky bringing on Martin instead of Sodje or Abbott was clearly a good decision to everyone there or not. Not putting Reid straight back in the team once fit another example.
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]I am still of the opinion he could have kept us in the Championship if he had chosen to do so but didn't at the expense of trying to keep his job, which he ultimately did, and I still havn't forgiven him for that.
Nope, I've tried, and just cant see the logic in this.
me neither. He let us go down and that meant he was trying to keep his job?
I know it sounds daft but bare with me. In my opinion he was more concerned with not losing games to the detriment of trying to win them. Two games stick out with me, I doubt either of you were there and so can't comment. Swansea away. Fifteen minutes to go and it was one-all. It was an end to end game and either side could have won it. However, we went from playing two up front and in with a chance of grabbing a winner to taking off a striker and bringing on a midfielder to protect the point we had. Similarly a couple of weeks later at Reading we drew 2-2 but did likewise and preserved the point we had. We were bottom of the table and needed wins. Those extra four points, if gained, could have given confidence a boost and who knows what could have happened. As it is we went down. Parky was able then to say 'hey, I arrested the decline and we only lost two of our last ten games' or whatever it was I can't remember. Better than saying 'hey, we went down' and lost say six of our last ten which we could have done. It looks like he steadied a sinking ship and by doing so made himself look better and he kept his job. We could have gambled in those two games, and others, and lost and his record would have looked worse and he could have lost his job. Self preservation. We were already down, doomed, but were we? If we had attacked those games, gambled and won who know what would have happened ? We may have stayed up. May have. We will never know. In my opinion we could have, maybe should have. That we didn't is down to Parky. Forgive me if I'm not shouting his name from the rooftops just yet.
Some years ago a camping party in the mountains were engaged in a ferocious metaphysical dispute. The corpus of the dispute was a squirrel — a live squirrel supposed to be clinging to one side of a tree-trunk; while over against the tree’s opposite side a human being was imagined to stand. This human witness tries to get sight of the squirrel by moving rapidly round the tree, but no matter how fast he goes, the squirrel moves as fast in the opposite direction, and always keeps the tree between himself and the man, so that never a glimpse of him is caught. The resultant metaphysical problem now is this: Does the man go round the squirrel or not?
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]I cannot comment on team changes during games and the affect those changes have on the performance if I am not there to see the affect those changes might make.
On that point, that's fair enough, but in some cases it's obvious so is fair to comment. Parky bringing on Martin instead of Sodje or Abbott was clearly a good decision to everyone there or not. Not putting Reid straight back in the team once fit another example.
of course it was a good decision, he went on to score two goals. Maybe Abbott would have done the same. Bringing no-one on would have been the wrong decision.
[cite]Posted By: LargeAddick[/cite]I cannot comment on team changes during games and the affect those changes have on the performance if I am not there to see the affect those changes might make.
On that point, that's fair enough, but in some cases it's obvious so is fair to comment. Parky bringing on Martin instead of Sodje or Abbott was clearly a good decision to everyone there or not. Not putting Reid straight back in the team once fit another example.
of course it was a good decision, he went on to score two goals. Maybe Abbott would have done the same. Bringing no-one on would have been the wrong decision.
We were 1-0 up and Anyinsah was injured. Could have put any of Sodje, Abbott, Martin, McCormack or Reid on and adjusted the formation. Agree other options might have worked out, but it doesn't stop it from being a good decision.
Large - shut up and get lost - this could have been a sensible thread - but somehow it has degenerated with you having a big Parky bash. What has 2 years got to do with it! And you admitted you didnt see saturdays game so how on earth can you suggest abbot would have effective. Andd please dont answe this cause its the wrong thread
Teams consider us a "big" club and come for the draw or breakaway 1-0, so set up shop accordingly.
I saw the Sheff Wed. game and have to say that the tactics surprised me. 1-0 up 40 mins gone, creating chances & Wednesday had a corner. They had 8 players up, we had the whole team back in the last third. Not even a lone striker to keep the 2 wednesday defenders on the half way company. Seemed a little negative to me and looked like we were going for the 1-0 win. Second half performance supported that theory against what I considered to be woeful opposite.
That said, if we consider the Brighton game as ground zero/turning point, we have only played the one home league game (Sheff. Wednesday) since. I guess the acid test will be the next couple of league games........
[cite]Posted By: Bermuda_red[/cite]Interesting statistic and a number of factors:
Teams consider us a "big" club and come for the draw or breakaway 1-0, so set up shop accordingly.
I saw the Sheff Wed. game and have to say that the tactics surprised me. 1-0 up 40 mins gone, creating chances & Wednesday had a corner. They had 8 players up, we had the whole team back in the last third. Not even a lone striker to keep the 2 wednesday defenders on the half way company. Seemed a little negative to me and looked like we were going for the 1-0 win. Second half performance supported that theory against what I considered to be woeful opposite.
That said, if we consider the Brighton game as ground zero/turning point, we have only played the one home league game (Sheff. Wednesday) since. I guess the acid test will be the next couple of league games........
Comments
But only partly due to that.
I'm not too worried by 1 - 0 wins at home. Nail biting at the time but they still bring 3 points.
Yeovil and others will have seen our last three away results and come to the Valley happy to take a draw. We have to expect that and both fans and players have to be patient enough to deal with it.
and Parky needs to have more than a Plan A up his sleeve and needs to adapt to circumstances which he didn't against Brighton with disasterous results.
Funny how you are only mentioning Brighton and none of the games since nor any of the team changes made before and during games in the last month.
not funny at all. I didn't attend Carlisle, Swindon or Peterborough (highly unusual for me as I doubt I've missed that many away games in total the last three seasons but I'd frankly had enough of the negative dull football Parky was serving up) and so can't comment on the performances as I'd wish. In between at Barnet we were average at best and against Sheff Weds we were ok and ground out a victory. I am however looking forward to Rochdale. Maybe I shouldn't go !!
I went to Sheff Wed and that was far far from "ground out". We played some very good football in the first half and held out well in the second.
But then whatever Charlton do under Parky will never be good enough for you. You have said already that if (and it is still a huge if in my mind) we go up you will give Parkinson no credit.
For the anoraks, Hartlepool are interesting. At home, they have scored 13 and conceded 18. Away from home, they have scored 4 and conceded 3. Could be a frustrating last game of the season if we need to win to go up.
I cannot comment on team changes during games and the affect those changes have on the performance if I am not there to see the affect those changes might make. I think you will find that on the threads post match on views on a game I never comment on the performance win, lose or draw if I havn't been there to see it. Likewise people follow the match thread and make comments on events they are hearing third hand which I find absurb and so don't do so. We all know that people view incidents differently, one mans foul is anothers fair challenge, and yet people see fit to judge based on someone else's viewpoint. I steer clear of doing this. And please forgive me if I don't like Parky. I am still of the opinion he could have kept us in the Championship if he had chosen to do so but didn't at the expense of trying to keep his job, which he ultimately did, and I still havn't forgiven him for that. I am still of the opinion he isn't a particularly good manager and if he doesn't take us up this season, which as you admit is a huge if, then he would have failed. Some people it seems will be happy with that. I can't win really though can I. If I said now he was brilliant and the best thing since sliced bread I'd be accused of being fickle. If he takes us up then great I'll be as pleased as punch and happy we are back in the League which he should have kept us in initially. Then we'll start to see if he is a good manager.
Nope, I've tried, and just cant see the logic in this.
me neither. He let us go down and that meant he was trying to keep his job?
However a win is a win be it 5-1 or 1-0.
At the Valley, teams are going to be less cavalier and I think that is where the movement of the front two and the passing of Jackson and Racon (particularly Jackson) are going to be vital in creating space and exploiting it. It's going to be interesting to see and I would echo those who have already urged everyone to stay patient and with the team right up to the final whistle. I have to say the players look extraordinarily fit at the moment and that will hopefully stand us in good stead in tight games, we've certainly shown ourselves capable of bagging late goals this season.
As long as we get 6 pts.
I know it sounds daft but bare with me. In my opinion he was more concerned with not losing games to the detriment of trying to win them. Two games stick out with me, I doubt either of you were there and so can't comment. Swansea away. Fifteen minutes to go and it was one-all. It was an end to end game and either side could have won it. However, we went from playing two up front and in with a chance of grabbing a winner to taking off a striker and bringing on a midfielder to protect the point we had. Similarly a couple of weeks later at Reading we drew 2-2 but did likewise and preserved the point we had. We were bottom of the table and needed wins. Those extra four points, if gained, could have given confidence a boost and who knows what could have happened. As it is we went down. Parky was able then to say 'hey, I arrested the decline and we only lost two of our last ten games' or whatever it was I can't remember. Better than saying 'hey, we went down' and lost say six of our last ten which we could have done. It looks like he steadied a sinking ship and by doing so made himself look better and he kept his job. We could have gambled in those two games, and others, and lost and his record would have looked worse and he could have lost his job. Self preservation. We were already down, doomed, but were we? If we had attacked those games, gambled and won who know what would have happened ? We may have stayed up. May have. We will never know. In my opinion we could have, maybe should have. That we didn't is down to Parky. Forgive me if I'm not shouting his name from the rooftops just yet.
Some years ago a camping party in the mountains were engaged in a ferocious metaphysical dispute. The corpus of the dispute was a squirrel — a live squirrel supposed to be clinging to one side of a tree-trunk; while over against the tree’s opposite side a human being was imagined to stand. This human witness tries to get sight of the squirrel by moving rapidly round the tree, but no matter how fast he goes, the squirrel moves as fast in the opposite direction, and always keeps the tree between himself and the man, so that never a glimpse of him is caught. The resultant metaphysical problem now is this: Does the man go round the squirrel or not?
of course it was a good decision, he went on to score two goals. Maybe Abbott would have done the same. Bringing no-one on would have been the wrong decision.
Andd please dont answe this cause its the wrong thread
Teams consider us a "big" club and come for the draw or breakaway 1-0, so set up shop accordingly.
I saw the Sheff Wed. game and have to say that the tactics surprised me. 1-0 up 40 mins gone, creating chances & Wednesday had a corner. They had 8 players up, we had the whole team back in the last third. Not even a lone striker to keep the 2 wednesday defenders on the half way company. Seemed a little negative to me and looked like we were going for the 1-0 win. Second half performance supported that theory against what I considered to be woeful opposite.
That said, if we consider the Brighton game as ground zero/turning point, we have only played the one home league game (Sheff. Wednesday) since. I guess the acid test will be the next couple of league games........
did we concede from that corner?