Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Goals
CafcSteve
Posts: 1,230
A lot of people were slightly worried where they’d come from this season.
The last couple of games are beginning to show why.
Campbell has obviously been on fire with them but we need other midfielders/attackers to step up.
Jones has obviously scored three goals, which means that our recently poor set-pieces are also costing us.
Who are you backing to step up and score them?
0
Comments
-
Godden. In a 4-4-2.
But seeing as he wont play much & we wont play with 2 up front then I'm not expecting much at all.
0 -
Kelman, when he gets a proper run of games, hopefully starting vs Cardiff.3
-
Have you seen how easy it is to play through our midfield in a 4231 most of the time? Would be carnage in a 442golfaddick said:Godden. In a 4-4-2.
But seeing as he wont play much & we wont play with 2 up front then I'm not expecting much at all.3 -
I thought that was odd considering we had Carey on the bench . I’d have dropped Leaburn to the 10 role if Kelman was being introduced but let’s be honest, the subs were made too late anyway.fenaddick said:
Notable that he came on as a 10/second striker than replacing Leaburn todayDDOUBLEE said:Kelman, when he gets a proper run of games, hopefully starting vs Cardiff.
1 -
It would be carnage in a 4-4-2. But our current midfield, easy to play through? Crikey. Imagine if it wasn't creative either. We'd be bottom of the leaguefenaddick said:
Have you seen how easy it is to play through our midfield in a 4231 most of the time? Would be carnage in a 442golfaddick said:Godden. In a 4-4-2.
But seeing as he wont play much & we wont play with 2 up front then I'm not expecting much at all.0 -
Carey was ready to come on at one point and sat down which makes the Kelman sub even more interestingBedsaddick said:
I thought that was considering we had Carey on the bench . I’d have dropped Leaburn in the 10 role but let’s be honest, the subs were too late anyway.fenaddick said:
Notable that he came on as a 10/second striker than replacing Leaburn todayDDOUBLEE said:Kelman, when he gets a proper run of games, hopefully starting vs Cardiff.0 -
Good today but if you’re arguing that the midfield wasn’t easy to play through against Stoke for example you’re watching a different team to meLeuth said:
It would be carnage in a 4-4-2. But our current midfield, easy to play through? Crikey. Imagine if it wasn't creative either. We'd be bottom of the leaguefenaddick said:
Have you seen how easy it is to play through our midfield in a 4231 most of the time? Would be carnage in a 442golfaddick said:Godden. In a 4-4-2.
But seeing as he wont play much & we wont play with 2 up front then I'm not expecting much at all.1 -
Sponsored links:
-
Depends on the shape, TC and the right sided player slightly deeper, Skipp and Coventry in the middle, Leaburn tracking back like he did today and linking play, Kelman off the shoulderfenaddick said:
Have you seen how easy it is to play through our midfield in a 4231 most of the time? Would be carnage in a 442golfaddick said:Godden. In a 4-4-2.
But seeing as he wont play much & we wont play with 2 up front then I'm not expecting much at all.0 -
Our xG per match isn’t great reading - today (0.89) was our second highest total of the season after opening day against Derby (0.97)
0.97, 0.62, 0.74, 0.39, 0.61, 0.48, 0.891 -
That was precisely one half of Conor-Coventry-less football. We've played 7 gamesfenaddick said:
Good today but if you’re arguing that the midfield wasn’t easy to play through against Stoke for example you’re watching a different team to meLeuth said:
It would be carnage in a 4-4-2. But our current midfield, easy to play through? Crikey. Imagine if it wasn't creative either. We'd be bottom of the leaguefenaddick said:
Have you seen how easy it is to play through our midfield in a 4231 most of the time? Would be carnage in a 442golfaddick said:Godden. In a 4-4-2.
But seeing as he wont play much & we wont play with 2 up front then I'm not expecting much at all.1 -
-
Think we've got more of a goal threat this season with the change in system, the front 4 rather than a front three.
I get we've not shown that for a couple of games, mind, although we probably could have won both 1-0 but for refereeing decisions.1 -
I think we will get better going forward. We’ve changed from 3-5-2 to 4-2-3-1, but I bet Jones still spent most of this summer drilling them out of possession in the new shape, because that’s more important for us. First half today was by far the best we’ve looked going forward, after next week we’ve got 3 weeks on the training ground to work on in possession and hopefully build off what we saw today2
-
I know it’s a minor thing but we’ll have to do that work without TC who is our best attacking outlet and maybe Mbick who could really do with learning itNabySarr said:I think we will get better forward. We’ve changed from 3-5-2 to 4-2-3-1, but I bet Jones still spent most of this summer drilling them out of possession in the new shape, because that’s more important for us. First half today was by far the best we’ve looked going forward, after next week we’ve got 3 weeks on the training ground to work on in possession and hopefully build off what we saw today1 -
We’ve had an outstanding start while getting to know a new system with lots of new players who’ve never met and a heavily depleted squad. Our ability to create chances will increase as the squad gels and gets to know each others games.
We’ll have some more difficult games, but overall we’re much better equipped to beat the bottom 12 championship sides than we were last year.3 -
When did we last have 2 0-0 HOME league games consecutively I wonder?
Any ideas ?0 -
Sponsored links:
-
AI says this . Doesn’t mean it right though .Valiantphil said:When did we last have 2 0-0 HOME league games consecutively I wonder?
Any ideas ?
1
