Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Post-match Thread: Wigan Athletic v Charlton Athletic | Tues 2 March 2021

167891012»

Comments

  • RedRobin said:
    My main take from last night is what a difference having an ex pro commentating. No offence to Terry and Greg, both do a job but there’s a clear difference and made watching even more bearable. 
    I'm not entirely sure whether simply being a former professional footballer makes someone a better commentator.

    On the one hand, Steve Brown was clearly able to draw on his experience as a player to make sensible, insightful observations.

    On the other hand, Steve McManaman.
  • Davo55 said:
    Quite unusual but fascinating when Brownie is in the commentary box, as it feels like you're sitting next a coach in the stand and he's explaining to you exactly what's going on out there.

    So much more detail that a co-commentator normally provides, and I'm talking about the ones on TV and Radio not Greg and Terry.
    Agreed. I think we could do a lot worse than appointing Brownie as defensive coach.
    I said the same thing to my son last night.
    Me too ! 
    You said the same thing to @southamptonaddick 's son too Fanny ?
    Indeed, MOG. 

    Surely you're aware that I have all Lifers on speed dial ! 

    It's called " Having Fanny's finger on the pulse" ....
    As against "Having your finger on ..."
  • thenewbie said:
    Bowyer thread closed permanently then?
    To be fair it was going round in circles anyway. 

  • thenewbie said:
    Bowyer thread closed permanently then?
    To be fair it was going round in circles anyway. 

    That is oddly hypnotic. I think I lost ten minutes just watching it over and over.
  • Arresting the run of crappy results was important
    The return of JFC was important
    The contribution of JFC was critical - it also helped to show up just how little impact the likes of Shinnie actually make and the difference in the degree of effort expended superficially competent players(?) like Smith and Jaiyesimi
    The praise heaped on Pearce is rose tinted in the extreme, he's marginally less scary than Oshilaja, he came close to a dismal own goal and he was up against naff all striking capability from Wigan - ladees aand gennelmen I gives you Joe Dodoo!!  Joe Dodoo FFS remember him? Pearce won't get an easier ride in the rest of his career.
    Wigan are unarguably the weakest side in the division and Charlton were reasonable value for a one goal win.  Ain't exactly a ringing endorsement is it?
  • Aneke and JFC picked up knocks and Maatsen was struggling at the end. Will they be fit for Oxford?
  • edited March 2021
    Cafc43v3r said:
    Leuth said:
    I don't hate Purrington and think he'd potentially work on the left of a back three (or the CENTRE of a back three, which I'm amazed we haven't tried since the fourth game of the season, when it worked well for 20 minutes). That said we'd then probably be playing a left-footer on the right of a back three if Pearce stays in. Famewo would probably have to do that. He probably could. This would free up Maatsen as a wing-back and allow Matthews to do likewise, AND allow a CM three, which suited Watson. The more I think about it the more I like it. It did look good against Burton (until it didn't).
    I was listening to Neil Warnock earlier in the season (lockdown makes you do funny things) and he has reluctantly gone to 352, or had done, because it was the only way he could get 3 central midfielders AND two center forwards on the pitch.  He also pointed out there are no box-2-box midfielders any more, which is why everyone tries to play with 3.


    Exactly. 

    Modern coaching has bred a whole generation of very limited and often quite "lazy" midfielders. They have an extra midfielder with them, so they don't have to do anywhere near the running and even less so when at least one of them isn't expected to join in any attacks. 

    I think back to when Ahmed Kashi first played under Guy Luzon. He played in a traditional 442 and looked superb. He came back under Robinson and was restricted to playing really deep as a water-carrier and didn't look anywhere near as good. Then in the 2nd half of one game, when we were chasing it and Robinson let him push on and suddenly he looked a lot more like the player we'd first signed....all action at both ends of the field. 


  • All our away wins have been to nil.  Surely this must be some kind of record, no?
    This isn't a dig at you but I think that you might have stumbled upon the answer. 

    Keep a clean sheet and we can pick up points. We need to run this past Bowyer as my guess is that he hasn't twigged this yet. 

  • Sponsored links:


  • Simonsen said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    Leuth said:
    I don't hate Purrington and think he'd potentially work on the left of a back three (or the CENTRE of a back three, which I'm amazed we haven't tried since the fourth game of the season, when it worked well for 20 minutes). That said we'd then probably be playing a left-footer on the right of a back three if Pearce stays in. Famewo would probably have to do that. He probably could. This would free up Maatsen as a wing-back and allow Matthews to do likewise, AND allow a CM three, which suited Watson. The more I think about it the more I like it. It did look good against Burton (until it didn't).
    I was listening to Neil Warnock earlier in the season (lockdown makes you do funny things) and he has reluctantly gone to 352, or had done, because it was the only way he could get 3 central midfielders AND two center forwards on the pitch.  He also pointed out there are no box-2-box midfielders any more, which is why everyone tries to play with 3.


    Exactly. 

    Modern coaching has bred a whole generation of very limited and often quite "lazy" midfielders. They have an extra midfielder with them, so they don't have to do anywhere near the running and even less so when at least one of them isn't expected to join in any attacks. 

    I think back to when Ahmed Kashi first played under Guy Luzon. He played in a traditional 442 and looked superb. He came back under Robinson and was restricted to playing really deep as a water-carrier and didn't look anywhere near as good. Then in the 2nd half of one game, when we were chasing it and Robinson let him push on and suddenly he looked a lot more like the player we'd first signed....all action at both ends of the field. 


    I am sure academies have 6 cookie cutters. 

    Center halves that are pretty on the ball but can't defend, attacking full backs, 1 dimensional holding midfielders (who seem to be totally interchangeable with the center halves) , "number 10s" and wide forwards.  Anything else is either a freak or as rare as rocking horse shit. 
  • Cafc43v3r said:
    Simonsen said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    Leuth said:
    I don't hate Purrington and think he'd potentially work on the left of a back three (or the CENTRE of a back three, which I'm amazed we haven't tried since the fourth game of the season, when it worked well for 20 minutes). That said we'd then probably be playing a left-footer on the right of a back three if Pearce stays in. Famewo would probably have to do that. He probably could. This would free up Maatsen as a wing-back and allow Matthews to do likewise, AND allow a CM three, which suited Watson. The more I think about it the more I like it. It did look good against Burton (until it didn't).
    I was listening to Neil Warnock earlier in the season (lockdown makes you do funny things) and he has reluctantly gone to 352, or had done, because it was the only way he could get 3 central midfielders AND two center forwards on the pitch.  He also pointed out there are no box-2-box midfielders any more, which is why everyone tries to play with 3.


    Exactly. 

    Modern coaching has bred a whole generation of very limited and often quite "lazy" midfielders. They have an extra midfielder with them, so they don't have to do anywhere near the running and even less so when at least one of them isn't expected to join in any attacks. 

    I think back to when Ahmed Kashi first played under Guy Luzon. He played in a traditional 442 and looked superb. He came back under Robinson and was restricted to playing really deep as a water-carrier and didn't look anywhere near as good. Then in the 2nd half of one game, when we were chasing it and Robinson let him push on and suddenly he looked a lot more like the player we'd first signed....all action at both ends of the field. 


    I am sure academies have 6 cookie cutters. 

    Center halves that are pretty on the ball but can't defend, attacking full backs, 1 dimensional holding midfielders (who seem to be totally interchangeable with the center halves) , "number 10s" and wide forwards.  Anything else is either a freak or as rare as rocking horse shit. 
    You forgot goalkeepers who can play it out from the back, except when they've forgotten about stopping shots and have to pick it out from the back,,,


    ,,,of the net.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!