Like I said in my last thread I haven't watched the game but when I saw the lineup the gaffer put out winall and Armstrong puzzled me. Now I would never talk about hecky like I know better but everyone seems to be blaming the team. Any thoughts on hecky's tactics, subs and of course the starting lineup.
I thought we missed a trick by going like for like with Bradshaw and Janko replacing Kent and Winnall. Would have liked to see a defender withdrawn and us go 3-4-3. Also puzzled about the omission of Watkins, but it seemed to work pretty well on Tuesday. With Hecky's record this year though, I'm not about to start criticising!
Nothing wrong with his tactics, we tried to play like we always do, attacking, creative and purposeful. In my opinion we just lacked the pressing and urgency that Watkins gives you with all these modern 4-5-1 formations we play against. He lends a hand to Josh and Conor and must be a dream to play with and gives them little time on the ball to be as effective. Today our strikers didn't do enough defending from the front as it's called. A defender with 0.5 seconds on the ball is always going to play a worse pass or make a worse decision then a defender with 3-4 seconds on the ball. Add to the fact Stam is born and bred from Ajax's school of thinking they were trying to pass it out from the back, whilst very commendable you can squeeze mistakes out of that if you have the personnel on the pitch. We allowed them to build from the back and push us back. Obviously all that is my opinion and a lot might just think oh stop talking stupid but yeah, just my 2 cents.
Not really, the goals came after Watkins was on the pitch (courtesy of his assists some of them). I can't understand why he didn't feature today.
Had injury not forced Hecky's hand with subs, I've no doubt Watkins would have come on at some point in the 2nd half.
He could have come on for Kent (even though his best position is up front) and he could and should have also come on from Sam. Especially being 2 goals down and we had to go a bit longer as he has more height and a lot of power and strength. Nothing against Bradshaw though as his header for Armstrongs volley was brilliant.
My interpretation of the omission of Watkins on Tuesday was that it was a plan to pit the aggression and work rate of Watkins against a tiring defence, rather than from the off. If that was the plan, it worked a treat. Maybe it wasn't and I'm reading more into it than was there, but I guessed that was the objective today too, but in being 2 down we went for another approach.
Please guys don't all pretend to be experts on tactics, line-ups and motivation. We have a manager who we have confidence in for the first time in countless years, countless years of frustration and underperformance. And yet after just one defeat some criticise and bemoan. Have faith, the team can't perform every match, it's just not possible. Give Hecky some space.
Nobody from what I see are pretending to be experts or having a go at our head coach. All people are doing are giving an opinion on the game they saw. It was a surprise that the same team that couldn't break down Wolves got to start again with zero changes. Especially with Marley an unused sub after his massive contribution when he came on the other night.
Bad decision to start White, like I said after the derby game, he's piss poor. Knowing they had McLeary in there side, he should have been nowhere near the starting 11. Amazing how he had what looked a hamstring strain after 5 minutes of getting ripped apart. Not sure what Watkins has done to be dropped either, for me he's been our best player this year behind Hourihane. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes you're right it is amazing that a hamstring strain could look like a hamstring strain . Do you really believe Hecky subbed him after just a few minutes ?