Our tactics cost us in the end

I wasn't quite right there then!! Thanks for the figures.

 

You make a fair point. I think the form of a number of players dipped towards the very end of the season.

 

I agree totally with what you say. I don't think we pressed anything like as effectively towards the end of the season, though that was obviously due in part to the fact that the opposition didn't faff around at the back.

 

Struggling - personally - to get behind the notion that tactics which saw us gain more points and wins than 21 other clubs once Val took over, 'cost us' anything.

The second leg was very similar to the first in my opinion. A non-event for most of the first half. Then in the exact same minute as the first leg, we concede a goal of outstanding quality that was made possible by the incorrect decisions of officials. At Oakwell, the lad Ayew was offside and coming marginally back on when he received the ball. That is offside as it's the same phase of play. Now, don't get me wrong, it was an immaculate finish. But with VAR, it's ruled out. At the Liberty, there is no foul by Helik. It's not as bad as the first leg goal, because once the free-kick is given we have the opportunity to deal with a cross and a shot from outside the box. And I'm not sure VAR intervenes in the awarding of free-kicks. Someone might know more. I'm unsure.

But yeah. Absolutely nothing between the sides, lots of ping pong, in both first halves. Because they refuse to play out from their own half in fear of the high press, and we can't press them high so it becomes a tough watch.

In the second half of both games, Swansea begin to retreat, they move deeper, because the Reds are starting to win second-balls. When the referee isn't seeing fouls that aren't there. This allowed the Reds all of their own half to play in. So naturally, you can get it down a bit more. In the first leg, Mowatt saw a wicked effort deflect just wide, Brittain is denied from six yards and Morris hits the bar. In the second leg, we were still struggling to break them down by and large. Except twice, when on the counter we saw Jordan have a goalbound effort blocked just in front of goal and then the same player run 2/3's of the pitch to lay the goal on for Woodrow (an exquisite finish). There were also three headed chances from corners. The one where Morris directs it near post rather than far, saved well by Woodman, one that Dike gets his head to which hits the 'keeper's glove on the way over, which isn't seen by the officials, and another one from Morris where he again has a good run at the far post but as he's about to meet the ball, Fulton runs across him obstructing him (he's not trying to play the ball) and Guéhi leans into him, leaving Carlton in an unnatural position where he can only spoon the header up and over.

In the first leg, Lowe should have done better with an effort in the second half, and in the second, Smith bottled it one-on-one with Collins. So Swansea weren't without other chances.

But overall, Barnsley clearly had the better opportunities. Which you could argue, shows we did enough to win. That we didn't, was down to one thing - profligacy in front of goal. Because regardless of their two fantastic strikes, aided by the officials or not, we had the chances to win both legs.

So overall for me, our tactics didn't cost us.

 

I disagree with you and Val on one point. He said we need too many chances to score a goal and you've said profligacy in front of goal. Brittain should have scored in the first game. But Brittain doesn't do goals. Other than that I can't think of an easy chance we missed. I'd argue that the time we spent in the opposition's final third should have resulted in more and better chances. It's not that we missed a lot of good chances it's that we didn't create enough. However, I'd also argue that Swansea's excellent defence and keeper played a huge part in that.

 

Like I already said I wasn't slagging him off he's scored 8 goals from open play in the league I think he will be disappointed with that bearing in mind Morris has 7 and he's only been here since jan. I also think his lack of pace holds him back from been a top championship striker. Not that he is a poor player or anything like that as he's been good for us. Its a football forum I can put a opinion across and people can argue diffrent you've said numerous times you didn't rate Bruce dyer who is also further up on the stat you have brought up... opinions ey

 

Tiredness?

 

Ultimately we'll never know. I understand what you're driving at, but I don't necessarily agree. Any side who has gone on a run of 9 wins in 10 matches is likely to have a dip relative to that. Even Liverpool last season or Man City the season before didn't keep up those type of numbers.

 

I agree with this, we've missed chances for a few years now. I won't criticise our forwards, because at the financial level we're shopping at, you don't get everything; work rate, attitude, pace, physicality, finishing etc. Our player excel in certain aspects but not all, hence they're at Barnsley and not Man City or Liverpool or Bayern Munich etc.

 

Currently compiling/creating the Season Recap video. The amount of missed chances is quite extraordinary. It started from game one, Luton at home and Freezy somehow putting a simple header wide with all the goal to aim at. But we did massively improve in that area once Val took over and had a window to correct it. Had we had the services of Morris and Dike all season, and had Val been here from day one, we'd have pushed Norwich and Watford for an automatic spot.

But if my aunty had balls etc...

 

I take everyones view into account. But disagreeing with it is absolutely fine too.

And we'll just have to disagree here too, which we should both be ok with. I just feel he is a top championship striker already. Pukki isn't blessed with pace, or Kieffer and they got over 20 goals. And looking at tables, Woodrow is the 11th highest scorer in the league, that seems pretty impressive when we've not played to suit him at all. He'd have 2 more if he'd have been on the pitch instead of dike at Luton and Mowatt v Reading.

But anyway, theres no point going round in circles. We have our own valid opinions, and we aren't going to think differently, nor should we try and coerce the other to do so.

 

Good point with moore and pukki i think pukki is faster than he looks and is strong as a ox. Moore has other attributes like his massive aerial threat.

 

I agree with almost all that you say. My original post was in no way meant to belittle our great achievement of finishing 5th in the table. After the first leg against Swansea, however, I had been hoping for a change of approach from the kick-off in the second leg.The fact that Swansea had beaten us on three consecutive occasions suggested to me that they would be perfectly comfortable, if we played in the same manner once again. You remark that the second leg proceeded in very much the same way as the first. That's exactly what I had feared. Surely it would have been worthwhile to alter our approach and take them by surprise by taking them on in a more conventional brand of football at the outset. When we got the ball down, we caused Swansea some problems. Why didn't we do that from the first minute?