He has got to play at left back from now on. he at least opens up and attempts to play forward and takes decent corners. Humphreys looks terrified when receiving the ball, he closes himself off turns backs and goes backwards time and time again.

It's so easy for teams to filter the ball put to him knowing he isn't comfortable under pressure.
I'm surprised we weren't in for Charlie Taylor, he'd have been an instant upgrade.

Pires turns and passes backwards more often than not as well.
Appears to be an instruction.

Neither are ideal IMO. Humphreys better defensively but not a big threat going forward. Pires a bit the opposite and has the odd error in him.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 10:54 pm

He has got to play at left back from now on. he at least opens up and attempts to play forward and takes decent corners. Humphreys looks terrified when receiving the ball, he closes himself off turns backs and goes backwards time and time again.

It's so easy for teams to filter the ball put to him knowing he isn't comfortable under pressure.
I'm surprised we weren't in for Charlie Taylor, he'd have been an instant upgrade.

Humphreys was superb tonight keeping track of James and Bogle, and a big reason we kept our clean sheet. He was certainly instructed to be more defensively minded tonight, which any reasonable person will see was the right decision.

And I don’t remember there being too many criticisms when he sent over two lovely crosses at Sheff Utd and Rovers.

Humphreys is progressing nicely. Not sure he needs a thread digging him out.

Humphrey’s was up against some top opposition, he got no help from Foster. I think some are forgetting Leeds are rightly a top side all over the pitch. Stick with Humphrey’s for me, Pires gets lost at times going forward, as for Taylor, no thanks, been there, done that.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 10:54 pm

He has got to play at left back from now on. he at least opens up and attempts to play forward and takes decent corners. Humphreys looks terrified when receiving the ball, he closes himself off turns backs and goes backwards time and time again.

It's so easy for teams to filter the ball put to him knowing he isn't comfortable under pressure.
I'm surprised we weren't in for Charlie Taylor, he'd have been an instant upgrade.

Doesn’t help when LF isn’t back tracking - Bash was marking 2 men for most of the first half.

No way Pires should have played in that game, tonight.

Humphreys did well and particularly in the first half when he was having to contend with a woeful Foster who was like a little boy lost, at times.

The left-sided position that was needed tonight was Hannibal for Foster. He’d have protected Humphreys better, in terms of mitigating Dan James but also given us more control in the middle of the pitch when he steps inside.

Foster was no help to Humphreys but he's a central striker , and with the best will in the world getting up and down the line to help out a full back is completely alien to him

Goliath wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 10:54 pm

He has got to play at left back from now on. he at least opens up and attempts to play forward and takes decent corners. Humphreys looks terrified when receiving the ball, he closes himself off turns backs and goes backwards time and time again.

It's so easy for teams to filter the ball put to him knowing he isn't comfortable under pressure.
I'm surprised we weren't in for Charlie Taylor, he'd have been an instant upgrade.

Wasn’t it Humphreys who made a couple of crosses in the last few weeks to win us games?

Pires for me was poor in a 5-0 win vs Plymouth. No left back is going to look good with Foster playing LW.

jdrobbo wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 11:14 pm

The left-sided position that was needed tonight was Hannibal for Foster. He’d have protected Humphreys better, in terms of mitigating Dan James but also given us more control in the middle of the pitch when he steps inside.

This is exactly the issue though isn't it, we went into the game terrified of the opposition. It's Dan James, not Lionel Messi, he's a decent player but not worth dictating our set up.

I'd have preferred us to flip it completely, get us pressing them man to man from goal kicks forcing them long or wide and then have the full backs pressing high from there and smothering them. We could have got the crowd involved then a put then under pressure. That was a hugely winnable game tonight but we played with fear, that's not a good trait to have.

There's absolutely no point playing Foster from the left if he's going to be pinned back and asked to play as an orthodox.left midfielder. I agree with you there.

Stonehouse wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 11:18 pm

Wasn’t it Humphreys who made a couple of crosses in the last few weeks to win us games?

He can be a good crosser of a ball without being comfortable receiving the ball in tight spaces. They are 2 completely different skills.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 10:54 pm

He has got to play at left back from now on. he at least opens up and attempts to play forward and takes decent corners. Humphreys looks terrified when receiving the ball, he closes himself off turns backs and goes backwards time and time again.

It's so easy for teams to filter the ball put to him knowing he isn't comfortable under pressure.
I'm surprised we weren't in for Charlie Taylor, he'd have been an instant upgrade.

I don’t know how you have watched tonight and thought Pires is the option, Pires was able to look poor in a 5-0 against Plymouth. With the lack of support Humphreys had with foster I dread to think what would of happened with Pires in the side.

However I do agree on Charlie Taylor

Humphreys will no doubt be a centre half, but he’s doing a job at left back. Definitely the right choice tonight. As mentioned above, Hannibal
would probably have been the better option on the left. I can’t work Foster out - ultimately I don’t think he’s good enough.

Tonight's game was like a world Cup Final's, final group game where a draw takes both teams through.

123EasyasBFC wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 11:30 pm

I don’t know how you have watched tonight and thought Pires is the option, Pires was able to look poor in a 5-0 against Plymouth. With the lack of support Humphreys had with foster I dread to think what would of happened with Pires in the side.

However I do agree on Charlie Taylor

Pires allows us to progress the ball comfortably on both sides. It widens the pitch and makes us more difficult to defend against imo. He might not be perfect but he's been in this country 6 months and is still learning the game, we aren't going to know how good he can be if we don't play him in any big games because we are scared of what erm *checks notes* Dan James will do.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 11:33 pm

Pires allows us to progress the ball comfortably on both sides. It widens the pitch and makes us more difficult to defend against imo. He might not be perfect but he's been in this country 6 months and is still learning the game, we aren't going to know how good he can be if we don't play him in any big games because we are scared of what erm *checks notes* Dan James will do.

It’s all opinion of course but I don’t think Pires progresses us up the pitch anymore than what Humphreys do, Humphreys has better control with both feet, is stronger and a better defender

123EasyasBFC wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 11:30 pm

I don’t know how you have watched tonight and thought Pires is the option, Pires was able to look poor in a 5-0 against Plymouth. With the lack of support Humphreys had with foster I dread to think what would of happened with Pires in the side.

However I do agree on Charlie Taylor

I could throw this back at you and say I don't know what you watched against Plymouth. I thought Pires looked really comfortable in that game, his best performance since Luton on the opening day.
I find it strange how so few are willing to give a new signing from a foreign country time to develop. There's definitely a hint of He's Brazilian so he can't defend' to it.

As it is we are stuck with a centre back at left back, doing his best but it's far from natural for him. If Pires isn't good enough then we should be in the market for a natural left back surely?

Leave it to SP. He rotates them regularly so he obviously knows which is best for the opposition in front if us. Today it was Humphries because he is better defensively and the 4 wide outs that Farke had at his disposal.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 11:38 pm

I could throw this back at you and say I don't know what you watched against Plymouth. I thought Pires looked really comfortable in that game, his best performance since Luton on the opening day.
I find it strange how so few are willing to give a new signing from a foreign country time to develop. There's definitely a hint of He's Brazilian so he can't defend' to it.

As it is we are stuck with a centre back at left back, doing his best but it's far from natural for him. If Pires isn't good enough then we should be in the market for a natural left back surely?

He gave the ball away a lot at Plymouth and when he got into crossing situations they where extremely poor, the fact you are referring to Pires is best two games being against the bottom two sides in the league.

We should be after a left back to challenge humphreys you are right

Tricky Trevor wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 11:41 pm

Leave it to SP. He rotates them regularly so he obviously knows which is best for the opposition in front if us. Today it was Humphries because he is better defensively and the 4 wide outs that Farke had at his disposal.

Exactly. It’s not rocket science, is it. There will be times when Pires will be more suited to the opposition, but it wasn’t tonight.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 11:29 pm

This is exactly the issue though isn't it, we went into the game terrified of the opposition. It's Dan James, not Lionel Messi, he's a decent player but not worth dictating our set up.

I'd have preferred us to flip it completely, get us pressing them man to man from goal kicks forcing them long or wide and then have the full backs pressing high from there and smothering them. We could have got the crowd involved then a put then under pressure. That was a hugely winnable game tonight but we played with fear, that's not a good trait to have.

There's absolutely no point playing Foster from the left if he's going to be pinned back and asked to play as an orthodox.left midfielder. I agree with you there.

It's the Championship, not the the Champions League final!!!!!! Perspective????

In one of his early interviews Joe Worrall said that Humphreys was one of the best players he'd ever seen at his age, thought he was an unbelievable talent - he wasn't even asked about him. Might be best we let him learn the game and be patient with him.

TsarBomba wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 10:58 pm

Humphreys was superb tonight keeping track of James and Bogle, and a big reason we kept our clean sheet. He was certainly instructed to be more defensively minded tonight, which any reasonable person will see was the right decision.

And I don’t remember there being too many criticisms when he sent over two lovely crosses at Sheff Utd and Rovers.

Humphreys is progressing nicely. Not sure he needs a thread digging him out.

Plus..... he seems to be our only player who can deliver a good cross.

Anthony had a great opportunity early on and scuffed it along the ground as per.

Pires would have got roasted last night
One of the few things the manager got tactically right

Im glad the majority can’t see how Pires would of been the answer last night

Vegas Claret wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 1:17 am

In one of his early interviews Joe Worrall said that Humphreys was one of the best players he'd ever seen at his age, thought he was an unbelievable talent - he wasn't even asked about him. Might be best we let him learn the game and be patient with him.

Nobody's saying he isn't. I'm saying he's a centre back not a full back.
Worrall also said how good a player Jay Rod was but that doesn't stop people on here saying hos useless he is.

123EasyasBFC wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 6:58 am

Im glad the majority can’t see how Pires would of been the answer last night

Negative mindsets. Making that change immediately starts us off with a defensive feeling. What happened to not changing a winning team after we'd just won 5 -0.
I thought it was symbolic of the general approach to the game.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 7:05 am

Negative mindsets. Making that change immediately starts us off with a defensive feeling. What happened to not changing a winning team after we'd just won 5 -0.
I thought it was symbolic of the general approach to the game.

Humphreys isn’t a negative or defensive change, he’s just the better player, better on the ball, better without the ball, better defender and better crosser of the ball.

As stated better Pires still managed to standout as the weak link against Plymouth

Humphreys is a far better player than Pires and it was absolutely correct to start him last night. He had a strong performance against the best right sided attack in the division. Funny enough he created one of two fairly decent chances for Flemming to score too.

Pires over Humphreys
He's one of the worst left backs I've ever seen wear the shirt

Not his best game last night , but I’d have BH over Pires any day of the week , he’s a better alround player . Worth noting that Foster offers almost nothing tracking back or linking with BH.

bumba wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 7:25 am

Pires over Humphreys
He's one of the worst left backs I've ever seen wear the shirt

Is this your first season watching?

Goliath wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 10:54 pm

He has got to play at left back from now on. he at least opens up and attempts to play forward and takes decent corners. Humphreys looks terrified when receiving the ball, he closes himself off turns backs and goes backwards time and time again.

It's so easy for teams to filter the ball put to him knowing he isn't comfortable under pressure.
I'm surprised we weren't in for Charlie Taylor, he'd have been an instant upgrade.

Sometimes you read a post that shows some people either have no knowledge of football whatsoever, or pick a subject so outrageous just to get noticed

Row x wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 8:02 am

Sometimes you read a post that shows some people either have no knowledge of football whatsoever, or pick a subject so outrageous just to get noticed

Suggesting we play a left back in his position over an out of position centre back, how outrageous.

Pires is probably better suited to coming in for games when the opposition aren’t the best and are likely to sit with a low block.

I’m not sure I would have fancied him up against Dan James last night.

agreenwood wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 8:24 am

Pires is probably better suited to coming in for games when the opposition aren’t the best and are likely to sit with a low block.

I’m not sure I would have fancied him up against Dan James last night.

It doesn't need to be just Pires v James though. If we press higher up the pitch and look to win the ball higher then control possession, we could have limited how much of the ball Dan James saw.
Just a generally more aggressive approach across the pitch.

I just heard we've drawn four of our last 5 games at home 0-0. If we had gone out in a more aggressive and attacking manner in those games, I'm sure we would have got the 2 wins to have made it worthwhile points wise.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 8:30 am

It doesn't need to be just Pires v James though. If we press higher up the pitch and look to win the ball higher then control possession, we could have limited how much of the ball Dan James saw.
Just a generally more aggressive approach across the pitch.

I just heard we've drawn four of our last 5 games at home 0-0. If we had gone out in a more aggressive and attacking manner in those games, I'm sure we would have got the 2 wins to have made it worthwhile points wise.

But that’s not how Parker sets us up.

The concept is safety first. We’re built to try and control possession, but also never to commit too many forward and risk being caught on the counter. Against better sides we give up possession more and hope to catch them out in the odd moment.

We’re just not going to be aggressive against the better sides whether it’s Pires or Humphrey. So if we’re going to set up soak up some pressure, Humphrey is better at that.

agreenwood wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 8:36 am

But that’s not how Parker sets us up.

The concept is safety first. We’re built to try and control possession, but also never to commit too many forward and risk being caught on the counter. Against better sides we give up possession more and hope to catch them out in the odd moment.

We’re just not going to be aggressive against the better sides whether it’s Pires or Humphrey. So if we’re going to set up soak up some pressure, Humphrey is better at that.

That's fair. I think he overestimated Leeds though, they really aren't all that good. They've win 5 from 14 away from home.

I think Humphreys has been exceptional and got better and better as the season has gone on. He might not have as much going forwards as Pires but his all-round game is stronger in my opinion and his crossing has been better than most of our wingers frankly. Loads of potential to progress into a Premier League footballer and I do not see that in Pires, personally.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 8:22 am

Suggesting we play a left back in his position over an out of position centre back, how outrageous.

A left back who's not as good as the centre half playing left back, yep

AlargeClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 7:38 am

Not his best game last night , but I’d have BH over Pires any day of the week , he’s a better alround player . Worth noting that Foster offers almost nothing tracking back or linking with BH.

Yet when Sky showed Fosters touch map there were as many touches in the LB area than there were as a LW. Their link up play does need working on.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 8:00 am

Is this your first season watching?

No I've watched for decades and he is really really poor.

bumba wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 10:24 am

No I've watched for decades and he is really really poor.

We played Vitinho and Delcroix at left back last season, he's far better in that role than those two.
You must also have seen Brian Easton and Mo Camara as well then. He's streets ahead of both.

I'd also have him ahead of Jordan and Kalvenes from the Coyle days.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 10:34 am

We played Vitinho and Delcroix at left back last season, he's far better in that role than those two.
You must also have seen Brian Easton and Mo Camara as well then. He's streets ahead of both.

I'd also have him ahead of Jordan and Kalvenes from the Coyle days.

As much as I think Pires is poor, Brian Easton is another level of bad, 4-0 down away at Leicester watching Easton trying to take corners was a new low

Goliath wrote: ↑

Mon Jan 27, 2025 10:54 pm

He has got to play at left back from now on. he at least opens up and attempts to play forward and takes decent corners. Humphreys looks terrified when receiving the ball, he closes himself off turns backs and goes backwards time and time again.

It's so easy for teams to filter the ball put to him knowing he isn't comfortable under pressure.
I'm surprised we weren't in for Charlie Taylor, he'd have been an instant upgrade.

I can only assume, after reading this post, that you have never played or indeed watched any sort of football before?

Goliath wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 10:34 am

We played Vitinho and Delcroix at left back last season, he's far better in that role than those two.
You must also have seen Brian Easton and Mo Camara as well then. He's streets ahead of both.

I'd also have him ahead of Jordan and Kalvenes from the Coyle days.

Delcroix was a centre half playing left back, I'd have Vitinho over Pires any day of the week have you really just said that?
Easton was bad but I'd pick Jordan, Kalvanes and Camara over Pires right now

bumba wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 11:22 am

Delcroix was a centre half playing left back, I'd have Vitinho over Pires any day of the week have you really just said that?
Easton was bad but I'd pick Jordan, Kalvanes and Camara over Pires right now

Vitinho at left back was an absolute shambles.
Pires has made 20 appearances in the best Championship defence in history whilst still settling in from a new country. He's not been outstanding by any means but I'm not sure what he's done to deserve this level of criticism.

It's bizarre that someone had a go earlier In the thread for 'digging out' Humphreys when the whole thread has been people criticising Pires for very little reason. I just think he deserves a chance after playing well in a 5 0 win against Plymouth and presumably now starting to feel more settled.

One rule for one, one rule for another.

Goliath wrote: ↑

Tue Jan 28, 2025 12:48 pm

Vitinho at left back was an absolute shambles.
Pires has made 20 appearances in the best Championship defence in history whilst still settling in from a new country. He's not been outstanding by any means but I'm not sure what he's done to deserve this level of criticism.

It's bizarre that someone had a go earlier In the thread for 'digging out' Humphreys when the whole thread has been people criticising Pires for very little reason. I just think he deserves a chance after playing well in a 5 0 win against Plymouth and presumably now starting to feel more settled.

One rule for one, one rule for another.

Did he play well against Plymouth? In an easy game I don't think he was particularly good
The only reason people are criticising Pires, is because you started a thread criticising another player.