A Tactically Astute Performance Let Down By Poor Finishing

[Rousseau 9,486]

On a sidenote, how did McKay and Holt perform?

 

Holt did OK; McKay wasn't involved enough because we couldn't find him when he played centrally -- not surprising as Hibs had 4 playing centrally -- but was a little better when he went back to playing LW.

[colinstein 294]

I find it difficult to see the game at strategic level

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Holt did OK; McKay wasn't involved enough because we couldn't find him when he played centrally -- not surprising as Hibs had 4 playing centrally -- but was a little better when he went back to playing LW.

 

I think McKay would be an excellent no.10 where he started his career (but there is no room for that in the MW formation) but he is not a CMF player. He is a fast clever player but suffers on the LW because he has no left foot and always has to cut inside. It's difficult for him to get to the bye line and cut the ball back with his left.

 

I have been impressed with Holt. At 4 goals and 5 assists in 16 games, I reckon he's value for money.

[Tannochsidebear 2,320]

It looked more like a 3-4-3 to me from my seat, with both Wallace & Tav totally unsure of how far up (or back) they were supposed to be. Neither are midfielders and both lack the quality and experience to play in those roles. The front 3 for me were far too narrow, with McKay and Waghorn far too often not providing any width for Wallace & Tav to link up with.

 

To me it looked like the tactic was dreamed up in the dressing room 10 minutes before kick off and looked unplanned and pretty much a shambles. This gave Hibs the first half to play with as we had too many players not knowing where they were supposed to be. It is no coincidence that Tav put in his worst shift since his arrival when he was moved into an unfamiliar role, with no assistance or link up man in front of him until we changed it in the second half.

 

The manager has to take the blame for this error, although had we got either of the two stonewall penalties (from where I was sitting, not seen them back on tv), we would clearly have won the game. Fine margins and all that.

 

If Wilson kicks another ball in defence when Ball & Kiernan are available I will be amazed. I thought that was the one huge mistake in bringing him back into the side, when for weeks prior to his injury he was the worst performer, and clearly has confidence (and perhaps ability?) issues. Nothing went right for him in the first half and I was commenting that it reminded me of Ricksens OF debut and I would have repeated the decision of that day and hooked him after 20 minutes and got us back to our "normal" formation. We may well have had more time to win the game had we done so.

 

I will be very interested to see how this team reacts over the next few weeks, although we only have one game then a two week break (another ridiculous decision) until the games start to be twice weekly again. We cannot allow the lead to be cut before hosting Hibs on 28th December.

[Bruno55 0]

I think McKay would be an excellent no.10 where he started his career (but there is no room for that in the MW formation) but he is not a CMF player. He is a fast clever player but suffers on the LW because he has no left foot and always has to cut inside. It's difficult for him to get to the bye line and cut the ball back with his left.

 

I have been impressed with Holt. At 4 goals and 5 assists in 16 games, I reckon he's value for money.

 

Like Greg Wilde John fleck, and many others played on the right wing all left sided...

[SteveC 150]

It looked more like a 3-4-3 to me from my seat, with both Wallace & Tav totally unsure of how far up (or back) they were supposed to be. Neither are midfielders and both lack the quality and experience to play in those roles. The front 3 for me were far too narrow, with McKay and Waghorn far too often not providing any width for Wallace & Tav to link up with.

 

To me it looked like the tactic was dreamed up in the dressing room 10 minutes before kick off and looked unplanned and pretty much a shambles. This gave Hibs the first half to play with as we had too many players not knowing where they were supposed to be. It is no coincidence that Tav put in his worst shift since his arrival when he was moved into an unfamiliar role, with no assistance or link up man in front of him until we changed it in the second half.

 

The manager has to take the blame for this error, although had we got either of the two stonewall penalties (from where I was sitting, not seen them back on tv), we would clearly have won the game. Fine margins and all that.

 

If Wilson kicks another ball in defence when Ball & Kiernan are available I will be amazed. I thought that was the one huge mistake in bringing him back into the side, when for weeks prior to his injury he was the worst performer, and clearly has confidence (and perhaps ability?) issues. Nothing went right for him in the first half and I was commenting that it reminded me of Ricksens OF debut and I would have repeated the decision of that day and hooked him after 20 minutes and got us back to our "normal" formation. We may well have had more time to win the game had we done so.

 

I will be very interested to see how this team reacts over the next few weeks, although we only have one game then a two week break (another ridiculous decision) until the games start to be twice weekly again. We cannot allow the lead to be cut before hosting Hibs on 28th December.

 

A terrible way to treat fans and now looking even more ridiculous than it did before.

[der Berliner 3,283]

Don't exactly think that we played with 3 at the back, rather that Ball actually took over the defensive midfield role in a way that Halliday never did. Can't blame the manager for that either*, as the errors that cost the game came from individuals you would expect to handle these situations. From the looks of it, Wilson was sure not at it and got removed. Then again, Hibs weren't exactly tearing us to shreds. Another basic error for their second. Part and parcel of the game. We do it, others do it. We primarily let ourselves down with not taking our opportunities (again), a cardinal sin in this game. Right now, this needs more adjustment than changing tactics that much.

 

* I would expect that they already trained that way, but you would not exactly try it out away at Hibs. Of course, against better opposition in the cups, we simple need to be defensively more sound and somewhere you've got to start it.

 

NB: A bit disappointed that Shiels gets less game time than Clark and Oduwa.

Edited November 2, 2015 by der Berliner

[Rousseau 9,486]

I think McKay would be an excellent no.10 where he started his career (but there is no room for that in the MW formation) but he is not a CMF player. He is a fast clever player but suffers on the LW because he has no left foot and always has to cut inside. It's difficult for him to get to the bye line and cut the ball back with his left.

 

I have been impressed with Holt. At 4 goals and 5 assists in 16 games, I reckon he's value for money.

 

I'd agree with that. At number 10 he'd have more options, but he'd still need the forwards to make runs wherever he plays; he'll find the pass if the forwards make runs. Mata does a decent job playing RW at Man Utd, cutting inside. I don't think one needs to be a natural 'winger', in the somewhat old-fashioned sense, to be successful; in fact, most successful wingers these days play on the opposite side because they cut inside.

[Rousseau 9,486]

It looked more like a 3-4-3 to me from my seat, with both Wallace & Tav totally unsure of how far up (or back) they were supposed to be. Neither are midfielders and both lack the quality and experience to play in those roles. The front 3 for me were far too narrow, with McKay and Waghorn far too often not providing any width for Wallace & Tav to link up with.

 

To me it looked like the tactic was dreamed up in the dressing room 10 minutes before kick off and looked unplanned and pretty much a shambles. This gave Hibs the first half to play with as we had too many players not knowing where they were supposed to be. It is no coincidence that Tav put in his worst shift since his arrival when he was moved into an unfamiliar role, with no assistance or link up man in front of him until we changed it in the second half.

 

The manager has to take the blame for this error, although had we got either of the two stonewall penalties (from where I was sitting, not seen them back on tv), we would clearly have won the game. Fine margins and all that.

 

If Wilson kicks another ball in defence when Ball & Kiernan are available I will be amazed. I thought that was the one huge mistake in bringing him back into the side, when for weeks prior to his injury he was the worst performer, and clearly has confidence (and perhaps ability?) issues. Nothing went right for him in the first half and I was commenting that it reminded me of Ricksens OF debut and I would have repeated the decision of that day and hooked him after 20 minutes and got us back to our "normal" formation. We may well have had more time to win the game had we done so.

 

I will be very interested to see how this team reacts over the next few weeks, although we only have one game then a two week break (another ridiculous decision) until the games start to be twice weekly again. We cannot allow the lead to be cut before hosting Hibs on 28th December.

 

I agree with most of that. I mentioned that McKay was often too far in advance of his midfield teammates, so it did look like a 3-4-3, and for all intents and purposes it was. A more orthodox 3-4-3 might have worked better, with link-up men for the wing-backs, like you said. Overall, it was something it seemed we needed more practice with. I'm pleased Warburton tried it though: it shows he can change; also makes it more interesting for us!

[Rousseau 9,486]

Like Greg Wilde John fleck, and many others played on the right wing all left sided...

 

It's not an unusual thing. Most of the best wingers in the world just now are playing on the wrong side. Ronaldo -- when he actually played wide! -- played on the opposite flank so he could cut inside.