Boro vs Cardiff 2-0 (Tavernier, McGree)

[Humpty 3,261]

24 minutes ago, RiseAgainst said:

A twist of the knife, perhaps!

For me, the result last night was less relevant than the performance, which was indifferent barring the odd moment of quality (Howson's triple-juggle, or Jones' killer cross that nobody gambled on). I know confidence is a curious beast, but we looked very listless all night, and that's not a word I've often used to describe a football team.

If that's the best we're capable of in a win-or-bust scenario, the play-offs would be another Villa-style non-event. Maybe the players are just absolutely dead on their feet with such a thin squad, but I can't see us rousing ourselves to the kinds of heroics required to overcome the challenge of finishing top six.

...unless Sheffield United impode, or Fulham absolutely pump them in a promotion party.

👀

[Rob 4,505]

1 minute ago, Leesider said:

I don't remember anybody suggesting he would have scored a shedful of goals but he certainly would have been an alternative option. A Plan B. A better option than what we ended up with. 

Well we had to try and get better that was the whole point. Sure Connonly hasn't worked, but at least we tried, staying with what we had definitely wasn't going to work and you would still be here on the forum moaning how we didn't try to get anyone better than him when we knew he wasn't good enough. Sometimes transfers work out sometimes they don't and that's at all levels of the game. I'd rather try than not and I thought he looked like a better option before seeing him not work out, but also the team around him hasn't done any of the strikers any favours as well.

He clearly wasn't the right player and best choice out of the existing players to get off the books so we could get players in and stick to FFP. I'd be more embarrassed at doing nothing and not getting any strikers

[Will 2,958]

13 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

If I remember rightly there was a bit in the second half where Tavernier and McGree swapped sides but otherwise they were playing in exactly the same positions we always set up in under Wilder.  Got to admit, I do have a few concerns about the fella now.  Starting to wonder if Simon Jordan might be a bit right about him.

This happened 2 or 3 times through the game, but I, like you, can't remember Tav being noticeably further forward than he usually plays. Balogun managed to control the ball and bring him into play a few times, which certainly makes it feel like he's more involved further forward, but I think that is more perception than reality and the heatmaps appear to support that.

[Leesider 1,076]

11 minutes ago, Rob said:

Well we had to try and get better that was the whole point. Sure Connonly hasn't worked, but at least we tried, staying with what we had definitely wasn't going to work and you would still be here on the forum moaning how we didn't try to get anyone better than him when we knew he wasn't good enough. Sometimes transfers work out sometimes they don't and that's at all levels of the game. I'd rather try than not and I thought he looked like a better option before seeing him not work out, but also the team around him hasn't done any of the strikers any favours as well.

He clearly wasn't the right player and best choice out of the existing players to get off the books so we could get players in and stick to FFP. I'd be more embarrassed at doing nothing and not getting any strikers

"At least we tried"

Is that the best we can hope for? Dear me

BTW, Who is moaning?

I thought the whole idea of the Forum was to discuss these things & give our opinions.

[Foogle 2,104]

1 hour ago, Changing Times said:

Yeah bizarre reading that.  I thought perhaps I'd not watched the game properly and hadn't seen what was happening so I checked the heat maps and...

Tav

 

McGree

Would seem a strange thing for him to lie about for seemingly no reason, it does look like Tav's touches are further forward whereas Mcgree's are a bit deeper. Which would say to me that Wilder wasn't talking about Tav playing as a Central Attacking Midfielder (a classic 10) but rather just a midfield role with fewer defensive responsibilities further up the pitch. Say we are used to playing with a 6 and two wider 8s and he's saying this was with a 6 with a wide 8 and a 10?

[AnglianRed 6,320]

3 hours ago, Foxtrot Oscar Colin said:

I'd probably ask for us to create better chances. We scored from a 30yard strike that the keeper probably should do better with and a deflected cross. Other than that we probably had the mcgree header and the bamba miss hit at the back stick. Cardiff had 3 very good opportunities to score and hit the bar. It was a poor performance albeit I'm glad for the three points but I don't even think it papered over the cracks considering the opposition. We are playing like a bottom half side not playoff hopefuls.

You've nailed the problem with your last sentence.

Creating good chances has been a major issue for the last 3-4 months. About the same period of time we haven't been playing like play-off hopefuls most matches.

I'm really amazed by the number of people who still seem convinced we will / should make the play-offs, based on our recent performances. Equally so by folks who still think Boro will miraculously get better just in time to get the results we need for a top 6 finish.

Quite frankly I think we played exactly as our recent form would dictate. As you say it wasn't a brilliant performance, but we still scored twice and won a game we would usually be expected to win (but equally could have lost - remember Hull).

 

As has been said before by others, even if we made the play-offs we'd get clobbered by whoever we faced. In any case Boro are nowhere near ready for the PL (without spending a shedload of money on a total squad overhaul). So for me its no big deal if we finish 7th this season.

 

[Changing Times 12,347]

32 minutes ago, Foogle said:

Would seem a strange thing for him to lie about for seemingly no reason, it does look like Tav's touches are further forward whereas Mcgree's are a bit deeper. Which would say to me that Wilder wasn't talking about Tav playing as a Central Attacking Midfielder (a classic 10) but rather just a midfield role with fewer defensive responsibilities further up the pitch. Say we are used to playing with a 6 and two wider 8s and he's saying this was with a 6 with a wide 8 and a 10?

I just took the heat maps as a representation of how they usually play.  Tavernier gets up and down all game long.  McGree to me is more stationary, whether that's just his game or he's being asked to, or something to do with having Jones over there, and trying to keep out of his way, I don't know.  But if you look at a touch map with them both on then you'll see Tavernier has touches closer to our goal, and closer to the opposition's goal, than McGree tends to have.  His tend to be compressed more between say 30/35 yards from each goal.  Looking at the Huddersfield heat maps there doesn't seem to be much difference to last night other than we had more touches so the heat is brighter.  They seem to be in basically the same locations to me.  Swansea was slightly different in that we had a lot fewer touches and spent more time defending but essentially there was still the same left/right split.  I didn't see Tavernier playing behind the strikers last night while I was watching, and nothing I've seen suggest that he was, other than Wilder saying it.  Perhaps they were supposed to do it but didn't?

[Changing Times 12,347]

The funny thing is, if I was going to play one of them behind the front two then I'd probably favour McGree doing it cos I think Tavernier has a better engine, and gets through more defensive work.  I'd also say that what you're looking for in a player behind the front two is someone who is looking to thread little passes through, which has never felt like Tavernier to me.  You want him driving at teams from deeper, arriving late in the area, playing one two's, hitting shots from within 25 yards that kinda thing.  I'm not sure I'd want him trying to find pockets of space, threading little passes through, and things like that, just doesn't feel like his game at all.

[Foogle 2,104]

25 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

I just took the heat maps as a representation of how they usually play.  Tavernier gets up and down all game long.  McGree to me is more stationary, whether that's just his game or he's being asked to, or something to do with having Jones over there, and trying to keep out of his way, I don't know.  But if you look at a touch map with them both on then you'll see Tavernier has touches closer to our goal, and closer to the opposition's goal, than McGree tends to have.  His tend to be compressed more between say 30/35 yards from each goal.  Looking at the Huddersfield heat maps there doesn't seem to be much difference to last night other than we had more touches so the heat is brighter.  They seem to be in basically the same locations to me.  Swansea was slightly different in that we had a lot fewer touches and spent more time defending but essentially there was still the same left/right split.  I didn't see Tavernier playing behind the strikers last night while I was watching, and nothing I've seen suggest that he was, other than Wilder saying it.  Perhaps they were supposed to do it but didn't?

Reading that article Wilder never specifically mentions Tav playing behind the striker or further forward at all he mentions a diamond: "We played the diamond and I’ve played it before. It really is a go for shape and what it allows is you to dominate the ball, but it does leave you a little open. We had to be mindful that they might have a bit more than we wanted them to have, but when we broke it up we were good. I think after we scored I thought we grew into the game."

To me that would suggest that he played Balogun as the number 10 as you'd need 4 players to create a diamond, with two CMs further forward rather than our usual flat midfield 3, I think the reporter has just got his wires crossed suggesting that the player at the tip of the diamond was Tav.

You can see from Balogun's heat map that he's playing deeper than usual. Whereas Watmore had more touches further up the pitch.

[Foogle 2,104]

10 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

The funny thing is, if I was going to play one of them behind the front two then I'd probably favour McGree doing it cos I think Tavernier has a better engine, and gets through more defensive work.  I'd also say that what you're looking for in a player behind the front two is someone who is looking to thread little passes through, which has never felt like Tavernier to me.  You want him driving at teams from deeper, arriving late in the area, playing one two's, hitting shots from within 25 yards that kinda thing.  I'm not sure I'd want him trying to find pockets of space, threading little passes through, and things like that, just doesn't feel like his game at all.

This could be where he's going with the formation, with Crooks back in the next game he might push one of him, McGree or Tav into a role behind a single striker as he seems to be sick of all of our number 9s...

[Brunners 7,982]

19 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

The funny thing is, if I was going to play one of them behind the front two then I'd probably favour McGree doing it cos I think Tavernier has a better engine, and gets through more defensive work.  I'd also say that what you're looking for in a player behind the front two is someone who is looking to thread little passes through, which has never felt like Tavernier to me.  You want him driving at teams from deeper, arriving late in the area, playing one two's, hitting shots from within 25 yards that kinda thing.  I'm not sure I'd want him trying to find pockets of space, threading little passes through, and things like that, just doesn't feel like his game at all.

Also conveniently seems to be what McGree is good at, also. Some of the passes he's played recently have been sublime.

[Changing Times 12,347]

20 minutes ago, Foogle said:

Reading that article Wilder never specifically mentions Tav playing behind the striker or further forward at all he mentions a diamond: "We played the diamond and I’ve played it before. It really is a go for shape and what it allows is you to dominate the ball, but it does leave you a little open. We had to be mindful that they might have a bit more than we wanted them to have, but when we broke it up we were good. I think after we scored I thought we grew into the game."

To me that would suggest that he played Balogun as the number 10 as you'd need 4 players to create a diamond, with two CMs further forward rather than our usual flat midfield 3, I think the reporter has just got his wires crossed suggesting that the player at the tip of the diamond was Tav.

You can see from Balogun's heat map that he's playing deeper than usual. Whereas Watmore had more touches further up the pitch.

I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that the journo would have had a conversation with Wilder where he's explained it in more detail than we see in those quotes, and it was Wilder who suggested Tavernier was behind the two strikers.  I don't see how we'd be more open with a striker playing deeper but we'd be more open with a midfielder playing further forward, which also ties in with what he says there.

[DanFromDownSouth 1,706]

To be fair if you look at the average player positions, which I think is calculated using where the player touches the ball the most in relation to on pitch position, then Tav is right alongside the strikers. 

[DanFromDownSouth 1,706]

Just for context this is Tav's average position from the last home game vs Huddersfield. It's not a huge difference, and the position could be skewed for all manor of reasons, but at face value it is different.

[Foogle 2,104]

17 minutes ago, Changing Times said:

I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that the journo would have had a conversation with Wilder where he's explained it in more detail than we see in those quotes, and it was Wilder who suggested Tavernier was behind the two strikers.  I don't see how we'd be more open with a striker playing deeper but we'd be more open with a midfielder playing further forward, which also ties in with what he says there.

Well I'd say you're more open going from a flat midfield 3 to one sitting with two more advanced? I'm with you in that I didn't see any changes in the way that we usually play. I just can't get my head around why he'd use the term 'diamond' if he was just referring to 3 players which is why my thinking is that the 4th player is a striker that was playing deeper. I can't think of a reason why Wilder would just outright lie about something like a formation change.