POST-MATCH THREAD: Preston North End v Charlton Athletic: Saturday 4th October 2025: KO 15:00

RonnieMoore said:

Rob said:

All this talk about “our aim is to stay up this season”. Of course that’s true but I’m glad that isn’t Nathan Jones philosophy. He wants us to do better than that and I’m glad about that. 

That’s what he saying and that’s his job to build a positive feeling around the club .. but deep down he would take 4th from bottom now if offered .. 

RonnieMoore said:

Rob said:

All this talk about “our aim is to stay up this season”. Of course that’s true but I’m glad that isn’t Nathan Jones philosophy. He wants us to do better than that and I’m glad about that. 

That’s what he saying and that’s his job to build a positive feeling around the club .. but deep down he would take 4th from bottom now if offered .. 

Garrymanilow said:

sam3110 said:

Garrymanilow said:

jimmymelrose said:

Garrymanilow said:

golfaddick said:

SELR_addicks said:

Todds_right_hook said:

gringo said:

It's not that long ago that we worried that some club would come in and nick Leaburn off us. I think at the moment we would struggle to give him away. He doesn't seem to have pushed on (perhaps his injury has affected him longer term) but It seems there is something missing at the moment.

The thing that is missing affecting Leaburns game is service!!!

He does look markedly slower than before his injury. Maybe I just have a poor memory but used to think he had a decent 5-10 yard sprint. 

He's never been that good. Just like his old man. Split opinions although there were/are more for than against. At least his old man could attack the ball in the air (oh yes I forgot, he did get his head to a ball to flick onto Knibbs that set up our winner at Bramall Lane 🙄)

I'd start with Oloafe & Kelman for the next few games. Try that pairing & see how we fare.

According to Fotmob Leaburn has won 37 aerial duels this season, which puts him ahead of 92.7% of players in his position. But yeah, if you ignore that and the goal he created then he never wins anything, you're right.

Out of curiosity,  what is the definition of winning an aerial duel here? Is it simply getting the header in before the opposition player regardless of where it goes, or is it winning the aerial duel AND the ball falling nicely and intentionally for a teammate?

Also, this 92.7% below: how many duels on the ground have they won? How do they compare?

Statistics can be twisted to suit an argument.

By the way, Leaburn senior never ’attacked’ the ball in the air until the 91-92 season. 

Fotmob get their data from Opta, who define an aerial duel as 'where two players challenge in the air against each other. The player that wins the ball is deemed to have won the duel. When more than two players are involved the player closest to the duel winner is given an Aerial Duel lost'. So no, nothing about it also falling beautifully at a teammate's feet but then that's a different stat. 

Miles has won 49 duels apparently, better than 83.6% of others in his position but even with the definition it's not clear what exactly a duel is; they say any 50:50 contest but he's also only won 3 tackles so it's evidently a very broad category and not really that useful except to show he's quite strong. He has won possession in the final third 9 times though, which is above 94.5% of others.

Statistics can be twisted to suit an argument sure but these have just been presented as they are on the stats page, and they're presented in response to that claim that Leaburn can't attack the ball in the air, which is provably untrue and a silly thing to say; just goes to show that football fans see what they want to see a lot of the time, not what's actually happening. 

6'7" lad in "wins Ariel duels" shocker.

Next thing you'll know people will be telling us Kaminski has saved more shots than anyone else in our starting XI....

You would think it was obvious but there's been a lot of comments on here that he doesn't win enough headers based on his height. That's factually not true but people still say it until they're met with the reality. And then it's the wrong kind of headers he's winning or he's not doing it while kissing the badge.

Garrymanilow said:

sam3110 said:

Garrymanilow said:

jimmymelrose said:

Garrymanilow said:

golfaddick said:

SELR_addicks said:

Todds_right_hook said:

gringo said:

It's not that long ago that we worried that some club would come in and nick Leaburn off us. I think at the moment we would struggle to give him away. He doesn't seem to have pushed on (perhaps his injury has affected him longer term) but It seems there is something missing at the moment.

The thing that is missing affecting Leaburns game is service!!!

He does look markedly slower than before his injury. Maybe I just have a poor memory but used to think he had a decent 5-10 yard sprint. 

He's never been that good. Just like his old man. Split opinions although there were/are more for than against. At least his old man could attack the ball in the air (oh yes I forgot, he did get his head to a ball to flick onto Knibbs that set up our winner at Bramall Lane 🙄)

I'd start with Oloafe & Kelman for the next few games. Try that pairing & see how we fare.

According to Fotmob Leaburn has won 37 aerial duels this season, which puts him ahead of 92.7% of players in his position. But yeah, if you ignore that and the goal he created then he never wins anything, you're right.

Out of curiosity,  what is the definition of winning an aerial duel here? Is it simply getting the header in before the opposition player regardless of where it goes, or is it winning the aerial duel AND the ball falling nicely and intentionally for a teammate?

Also, this 92.7% below: how many duels on the ground have they won? How do they compare?

Statistics can be twisted to suit an argument.

By the way, Leaburn senior never ’attacked’ the ball in the air until the 91-92 season. 

Fotmob get their data from Opta, who define an aerial duel as 'where two players challenge in the air against each other. The player that wins the ball is deemed to have won the duel. When more than two players are involved the player closest to the duel winner is given an Aerial Duel lost'. So no, nothing about it also falling beautifully at a teammate's feet but then that's a different stat. 

Miles has won 49 duels apparently, better than 83.6% of others in his position but even with the definition it's not clear what exactly a duel is; they say any 50:50 contest but he's also only won 3 tackles so it's evidently a very broad category and not really that useful except to show he's quite strong. He has won possession in the final third 9 times though, which is above 94.5% of others.

Statistics can be twisted to suit an argument sure but these have just been presented as they are on the stats page, and they're presented in response to that claim that Leaburn can't attack the ball in the air, which is provably untrue and a silly thing to say; just goes to show that football fans see what they want to see a lot of the time, not what's actually happening. 

6'7" lad in "wins Ariel duels" shocker.

Next thing you'll know people will be telling us Kaminski has saved more shots than anyone else in our starting XI....

You would think it was obvious but there's been a lot of comments on here that he doesn't win enough headers based on his height. That's factually not true but people still say it until they're met with the reality. And then it's the wrong kind of headers he's winning or he's not doing it while kissing the badge.

J BLOCK said:

Braziliance said:

bromleyjohn said:

Was there. Disappointed but not too sad at a top 6 side. The problem ,like the start ,of last season is the final finish and chances created. No shots on target is the main stat.

Top 6 side for now, with all respect to Preston fans, I can't see them finishing anywhere near the top 6 by the end of the season.

It looks like they will comfortably finish above lower mid-table, which is where most people expected them to be, but I don't see them having enough for that top6. 

They won't get many more comfortable afternoons at home than that, and their fans will tell you that themselves

Disagree, I’ve done every game this season and haven’t seen a better team. Can’t see any team running away with it this season, wouldn’t be surprised if they sneak top 6. 

Crispywood said:

Braziliance said:

SheedyCAFC said:

Being the third ‘best’ team to get promoted we have done well to be competitive in every game so far but I do think we have proved we are good enough defensively to be able to play a flat back 4 and have a more attacking minded player in place of Burke for example, do we really need 3 centre backs against Sheff Wed up next? None of our strikers are scoring but nobody’s getting us up the pitch enough to supply them with any chances, TC & Kelman are constantly playing with their backs to goal & chasing shadows, I don’t think they’re exactly the problem & I don’t think it’s as simple as playing Leaburn / Olaofe either

This is what me and my mate were saying on the way back.

5 defenders and 2 defensive minded midfielders is excessive and not always necessary.

I would like to see a 433/4231 against Wednesday. TC/Kelman/Apter up top with Carey behind them. Give Apter and TC more freedom out wide and let them do what they do best. 

2nd lowest for succesful dribbles when we have two talented wingers just seems a waste.

Whilst I get why a 4231 would make us better going forward. To me to suddenly tear up the system, formation and style the only thing that has given us any sort of success in the last 6 years whilst we’re also currently exceeding expectations just isn’t worth it. 

We’ve only got 2 CB’s who would work in a flat 4 being Burke and Jones. In addition, Whether it’s a 352 or 4231 the formation isn’t going to suddenly teach TC how to have end product or teach Leaburn how to outmuscle a cb or Kelman how to have Godden level positioning. The only player who would really benefit from a change is Apter. 

Something does need to change to make us better going forward but I’d rather experiment with personnel like going Carey/TC Apter just in behind a striker, or Knibbs/Carey in the 8 instead of Docherty when we want to be more attacking, even maybe TC as a LWB and have 2 natural strikers. We have options to try different combos then tearing apart everything that brought us success in the first place 

Chunes said:

The Red Robin said:

I got killed for saying it after the Millwall game, but Leaburn just doesn’t look interested. We’ll see what happens in January. 

He just signed a new contract.

I personally think Miles is bothered. You don't get in the top 5% in the Championship for pressing when you're not. Even more impressive considering he hasn't played that many minutes.

Scoham said:

I’ll just copy over what I said in the TC thread. I was happy enough with the first half.

We need pace and width on at least one wing, as good as Bree is he won’t be doubled up on by the opposition and that creates space. Not unlike Jones to revert back to solid consistent players, but at this level we need more creativity and flair in the final third on top of throwing on height, pace and power.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

The problem for me wasn’t bringing TC off, it was not bringing Apter and/or Hernandez on.

NJ must understand what those 3 offer having so much faith in TC and signing the other two recently.

We need to evolve in the final third and just putting more height, pace and strength on hasn’t been as successful as it was last season.

Combine it with a wide player or two who loves taking players on - even if the end product isn’t there, it can also create more space for others, and make a team sit back more to avoid being countered.

Having Small and TC on either wing was arguably the most important factor in our improvement last season. As good as Bree is, he doesn’t offer a those strengths, and if you don’t start with that on both wings, at least end the game that way when you’re losing.

golfaddick said:

The Red Robin said:

I got killed for saying it after the Millwall game, but Leaburn just doesn’t look interested. We’ll see what happens in January. 

It's quite simple.....he's missing his mummy. 

Redrobo said:

I think some have forgotten that the aim this season is staying up.
Kelman and Campbell help us keep games very tight. Finishers are to help us keep what we’ve got or to nick a goal.
Jones came into the Club to keep us from going down to league 2, which he did by sorting the defence. 

He then addressed the forward play and got us promoted.
Too early for me to try and be clever.
2 points a game is promotion form. We have taken four from three very difficult games, two of which were away. That is staying up form.
We are also good at home.
That is staying up form.

Braziliance said:

The Red Robin said:

@Braziliance nice to meet you yesterday - my pre-match hope for a point didn’t look so bad afterall. 

Cheers mate, nice to put a face to a name as well and meet you.

Vlog is up now for anyone interested,

https://youtu.be/xvkX6-WzNvU?si=we-lmzhorTuEf9Xu

My last video with subtitles as it's genuinely far too much effort and adds about an hour to a video render 

Southbank said:

Unfortunately whenever we do replace Campbell we look more vulnerable because our other forwards do not press in the way he does. This is a real conundrum for NJ. We are better defensively with TC on the pitch, but our goals are not coming from strikers. Does it matter if we are getting results anyway? Can anybody hand on heart say that if we had started Olaofe or Leaburn this season so far instead of TC we would have been better off? Can't see it myself 

Crispywood said:

Braziliance said:

SheedyCAFC said:

Being the third ‘best’ team to get promoted we have done well to be competitive in every game so far but I do think we have proved we are good enough defensively to be able to play a flat back 4 and have a more attacking minded player in place of Burke for example, do we really need 3 centre backs against Sheff Wed up next? None of our strikers are scoring but nobody’s getting us up the pitch enough to supply them with any chances, TC & Kelman are constantly playing with their backs to goal & chasing shadows, I don’t think they’re exactly the problem & I don’t think it’s as simple as playing Leaburn / Olaofe either

This is what me and my mate were saying on the way back.

5 defenders and 2 defensive minded midfielders is excessive and not always necessary.

I would like to see a 433/4231 against Wednesday. TC/Kelman/Apter up top with Carey behind them. Give Apter and TC more freedom out wide and let them do what they do best. 

2nd lowest for succesful dribbles when we have two talented wingers just seems a waste.

Whilst I get why a 4231 would make us better going forward. To me to suddenly tear up the system, formation and style the only thing that has given us any sort of success in the last 6 years whilst we’re also currently exceeding expectations just isn’t worth it. 

We’ve only got 2 CB’s who would work in a flat 4 being Burke and Jones. In addition, Whether it’s a 352 or 4231 the formation isn’t going to suddenly teach TC how to have end product or teach Leaburn how to outmuscle a cb or Kelman how to have Godden level positioning. The only player who would really benefit from a change is Apter. 

Something does need to change to make us better going forward but I’d rather experiment with personnel like going Carey/TC Apter just in behind a striker, or Knibbs/Carey in the 8 instead of Docherty when we want to be more attacking, even maybe TC as a LWB and have 2 natural strikers. We have options to try different combos then tearing apart everything that brought us success in the first place