Jump to content
oneBoro Forum

Boro vs Leeds 1-1 (Wing)


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 377
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  •  

    30

  •  

    27

  •  

    24

  •  

    23

Top Posters In This Topic

The Wing injury didn't help but that's when you need a bit of intervention from the manager.

 

Van La Parra could have come on and give us an outlet to counter attack and support the striker. Instead we brought two defensive midfielders on, basically we gave up any intention of attacking even on the break after that.

 

I also mentioned Downing not because I think he's got any pace but he's someone that can put a foot on the ball when everyone else is hoofing it up the pitch.

 

The way some people describe the game it's like we were completely helpless to play any other way than sit back and defend on the edge of our box. It was Leeds not Man City and they looked no better than us until we sat back and let them attack us at will.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Wing injury didn't help but that's when you need a bit of intervention from the manager.

 

Van La Parra could have come on and give us an outlet to counter attack and support the striker. Instead we brought two defensive midfielders on, basically we gave up any intention of attacking even on the break after that.

 

I also mentioned Downing not because I think he's got any pace but he's someone that can put a foot on the ball when everyone else is hoofing it up the pitch.

 

The way some people describe the game it's like we were completely helpless to play any other way than sit back and defend on the edge of our box. It was Leeds not Man City and they looked no better than us until we sat back and let them attack us at will.

 

Im not saying we were wrong to defend the lead but there has to be a balance. You need to give the other team at least something to think about at the other end even when you are defending otherwise the ball keeps coming back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily think our tactics were that wrong. 1-0 lead does not invite for "offensive" changes in the 70th minute against a Leeds side desperate for a goal.

 

Assambalonga makes sense given his pace. Hugill can maybe hold up the ball, but I'd rather have someone who has an off-chance scoring a goal from an individual effort. Clayton is far better defensively than Saville. And dare I say Besic can tackle from time to time as well (or at least stumble into someone).

 

Personally, I would've been *** seeing Downing and VLP on against a Leeds side destined to dominate the last 20 minutes regardless of two players who can presumably hold onto the ball.

 

Sure, you can defend a lead by holding onto the ball, play possession. But that rarely works against a side with better players at that game. We have conceded the fewest goals in the league by some margin, and our goalscoring is atrocious at best. Why would we try to play to our weakness rather than our strength?

 

Because we were playing to their strengths.

 

Proof is in the pudding. They scored.

 

Striking proof that is. 

 

https://footystats.org/clubs/england/leeds-united-fc

 

Leeds score most goals second half. 29 % of their goals in min 81-90 according to that site. They have a way of seeing the games out, put pressure. We are - usually - somewhat decent at defending against that pressure. 

 

I sincerely doubt that putting on two offensive players with little to no defensive ability about them would have turned the game in our favour. We (and Pulis (and Karanka)) are usually good at grinding out leads.

 

EDIT: @Duvel And yes, I know having a player or two being able to take the ball on, get a freekick, and then waste time is a might fine tactic as well. I am saying that I really doubt that we have any players who could fill that roll post 70 minute given the entire team is likely starting to get tired.

 

Putting on Downing will not relieve any pressure. He can't dribble that well anymore, no pace, and he can't defend for ***. I say that even though some people on here suggested putting Downing on left back in place of Friend. Having ball possession takes energy, too. The movement off ball can be more tiring than sitting deep, and moving side to side in whatever midfield constellation was in place. In my uneducated and arm-chair specialist opinion, we have more chance of scoring - in that scenario (post 70th minute) - hoofing the ball to Britt and hope for the best.

 

Lets keep those two separate. Karanka was in a different league to Pulis in terms of being able to grind out a win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Wing injury didn't help but that's when you need a bit of intervention from the manager.

 

Van La Parra could have come on and give us an outlet to counter attack and support the striker. Instead we brought two defensive midfielders on, basically we gave up any intention of attacking even on the break after that.

 

I also mentioned Downing not because I think he's got any pace but he's someone that can put a foot on the ball when everyone else is hoofing it up the pitch.  

 

The way some people describe the game it's like we were completely helpless to play any other way than sit back and defend on the edge of our box. It was Leeds  not Man City and they looked no better than us until we sat back and let them attack us at will.

 

Im not saying we were wrong to defend the lead but there has to be a balance. You need to give the other team at least something to think about at the other end even when you are defending otherwise the ball keeps coming back.

 

as I said I dont think the idea from anyone (including Pulis) was that we would sit that deep with every player. Sometimes *** happens, Bielsa is a better coach than Pulis too I doubt that comes as shock to anyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Wing injury didn't help but that's when you need a bit of intervention from the manager.

 

Van La Parra could have come on and give us an outlet to counter attack and support the striker. Instead we brought two defensive midfielders on, basically we gave up any intention of attacking even on the break after that.

 

I also mentioned Downing not because I think he's got any pace but he's someone that can put a foot on the ball when everyone else is hoofing it up the pitch.  

 

The way some people describe the game it's like we were completely helpless to play any other way than sit back and defend on the edge of our box. It was Leeds  not Man City and they looked no better than us until we sat back and let them attack us at will.

 

Im not saying we were wrong to defend the lead but there has to be a balance. You need to give the other team at least something to think about at the other end even when you are defending otherwise the ball keeps coming back.

 

as I said I dont think the idea from anyone (including Pulis) was that we would sit that deep with every player. Sometimes *** happens, Bielsa is a better coach than Pulis too I doubt that comes as shock to anyone?

 

Not long after we scored I remember Pulis urging our defence to push up the pitch a bit. That was the only time I saw him do it. Then with the substitutions I felt like Pulis was happy to sit back and try and hang on for 1-0.

 

I don't think it was a tactical masterclass from Bielsa because we we didnt give him or Leeds anything to think about from an attacking perspective. We just allowed them to push their full backs even further up the pitch and flood bodies into our box.

 

Fair enough if people think we were helpless to doing anything different in the second have, I totally disagree though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Wing injury didn't help but that's when you need a bit of intervention from the manager.

 

Van La Parra could have come on and give us an outlet to counter attack and support the striker. Instead we brought two defensive midfielders on, basically we gave up any intention of attacking even on the break after that.

 

I also mentioned Downing not because I think he's got any pace but he's someone that can put a foot on the ball when everyone else is hoofing it up the pitch.  

 

The way some people describe the game it's like we were completely helpless to play any other way than sit back and defend on the edge of our box. It was Leeds  not Man City and they looked no better than us until we sat back and let them attack us at will.

 

Im not saying we were wrong to defend the lead but there has to be a balance. You need to give the other team at least something to think about at the other end even when you are defending otherwise the ball keeps coming back.

 

as I said I dont think the idea from anyone (including Pulis) was that we would sit that deep with every player. Sometimes *** happens, Bielsa is a better coach than Pulis too I doubt that comes as shock to anyone?

 

When you only bring on defensive players you’re bound to sit deeper. If he wanted us to push higher up the pitch he shouldn’t have brought two defensive midfielders on for two who are more attack minded. It was a decision made out of habit by Pulis rather than actually reading the game.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily think our tactics were that wrong. 1-0 lead does not invite for "offensive" changes in the 70th minute against a Leeds side desperate for a goal.

 

Assambalonga makes sense given his pace. Hugill can maybe hold up the ball, but I'd rather have someone who has an off-chance scoring a goal from an individual effort. Clayton is far better defensively than Saville. And dare I say Besic can tackle from time to time as well (or at least stumble into someone).

 

Personally, I would've been *** seeing Downing and VLP on against a Leeds side destined to dominate the last 20 minutes regardless of two players who can presumably hold onto the ball.

 

Sure, you can defend a lead by holding onto the ball, play possession. But that rarely works against a side with better players at that game. We have conceded the fewest goals in the league by some margin, and our goalscoring is atrocious at best. Why would we try to play to our weakness rather than our strength?

 

Because we were playing to their strengths.

 

Proof is in the pudding. They scored.

 

Striking proof that is. 

 

https://footystats.org/clubs/england/leeds-united-fc

 

Leeds score most goals second half. 29 % of their goals in min 81-90 according to that site. They have a way of seeing the games out, put pressure. We are - usually - somewhat decent at defending against that pressure. 

 

I sincerely doubt that putting on two offensive players with little to no defensive ability about them would have turned the game in our favour. We (and Pulis (and Karanka)) are usually good at grinding out leads.

 

EDIT: @Duvel And yes, I know having a player or two being able to take the ball on, get a freekick, and then waste time is a might fine tactic as well. I am saying that I really doubt that we have any players who could fill that roll post 70 minute given the entire team is likely starting to get tired.

 

Putting on Downing will not relieve any pressure. He can't dribble that well anymore, no pace, and he can't defend for ***. I say that even though some people on here suggested putting Downing on left back in place of Friend. Having ball possession takes energy, too. The movement off ball can be more tiring than sitting deep, and moving side to side in whatever midfield constellation was in place. In my uneducated and arm-chair specialist opinion, we have more chance of scoring - in that scenario (post 70th minute) - hoofing the ball to Britt and hope for the best.

 

Well it is a striking proof. They scored. Unfortunately we can't prove that going the other way would have worked because we chose to let Leeds do what they want.

 

I'm not spoiling for an argument but in my opinion if it's not broke don't fix it. The system with wing was working well. So when he needs to come off put on someone who can do the same job. Probably VLP (preferably tav but you know he seems to have been dropped altogether, presumably because it's good for his development). But no. We put on someone who can't do his job. Someone who is defensive.

 

Pulis reverted to type and it cost us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

as far as the subs go, Britt made sense, and besic at the time seemed an obvious choice as wing was forced off.

 

Clayton was the glaringly obvious wrong sub we didn't need a DM we needed an outlet to get us up the pitch. someone that could run and chase things down with Britt.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah he's poor, would have preferred us to keep batth or even better go back to 4 at the back with fry and ayala.

 

As for vlp... what was the point? Seems like another jack harrison, made all the worse by the fact pulis and his supporters have been whinging all season about not having wingers. Speaking rubbish as usual our gaffer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very simple.. he's part of the best defence in the league.

 

When your defence is 10 men strong whereas most other teams have 5 or 6 men defences then you'd expect us to concede less goals.

 

Exactly... the trade-off is obvious when you see we're one of the lowest scorers in the entire league.

 

I would like to see a back four of Shotton-Ayala-Fry-Friend. No need whatsoever to play 5 at the back against anyone but the very best sides.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...