Parker today.

[burnley007]

I don't blame Parker. He could have changed things quicker, but we should have beaten Preston today.

The ref didn't help. Preston's tactics didn't help. Too many of our players had an off day.

Don't mind the odd poor performance, in between good games.

This is all as long as we get back on it against Sheff Wed!!

[claretspice]

Could have changed things quicker - it was obvious at half time that we were jaded and needed a bit more quality on midfield - and could have tried harder to win it late on.

Once again, we've failed to score in a game the onus was on us to win, and we haven't brought a striker off the bench. Barnes may be 35 but he's our plan B striker and it makes no sense that we didn't introduce him late on when we looked to go more direct. We kept two holding midfielders on the pitch rather than trying to win it.

Even Parker has acknowledged in post match interviews that Flemming is more naturally a number 10 than a number 9. Once again today, in trying to win a game he had the chance to try him in that natural role. Once again he passed it up out of an abundance of caution.

[KlyBfc]

Could have changed things quicker - it was obvious at half time that we were jaded and needed a bit more quality on midfield - and could have tried harder to win it late on.

Once again, we've failed to score in a game the onus was on us to win, and we haven't brought a striker off the bench. Barnes may be 35 but he's our plan B striker and it makes no sense that we didn't introduce him late on when we looked to go more direct. We kept two holding midfielders on the pitch rather than trying to win it.

Even Parker has acknowledged in post match interviews that Flemming is more naturally a number 10 than a number 9. Once again today, in trying to win a game he had the chance to try him in that natural role. Once again he passed it up out of an abundance of caution.

100% agree with this.
Parker, despite having a ridiculously talented back line, refuses to throw abit of caution to the wind and try and win a game. I am honestly at the stage where id rather us try and go for a win and lose the odd game 1v0 than all these tepid draws.

[BurnleyFC]

Could have changed things quicker - it was obvious at half time that we were jaded and needed a bit more quality on midfield - and could have tried harder to win it late on.

Once again, we've failed to score in a game the onus was on us to win, and we haven't brought a striker off the bench. Barnes may be 35 but he's our plan B striker and it makes no sense that we didn't introduce him late on when we looked to go more direct. We kept two holding midfielders on the pitch rather than trying to win it.

Even Parker has acknowledged in post match interviews that Flemming is more naturally a number 10 than a number 9. Once again today, in trying to win a game he had the chance to try him in that natural role. Once again he passed it up out of an abundance of caution.

Hard to disagree with any of this, especially seeing as Wednesday’s game was a bit of a training session and was over after twenty minutes, so we can’t really use tiredness as an excuse.

[boatshed bill]

I wish we'd signed a CF in the widow.

[Goliath]

Could have changed things quicker - it was obvious at half time that we were jaded and needed a bit more quality on midfield - and could have tried harder to win it late on.

Once again, we've failed to score in a game the onus was on us to win, and we haven't brought a striker off the bench. Barnes may be 35 but he's our plan B striker and it makes no sense that we didn't introduce him late on when we looked to go more direct. We kept two holding midfielders on the pitch rather than trying to win it.

Even Parker has acknowledged in post match interviews that Flemming is more naturally a number 10 than a number 9. Once again today, in trying to win a game he had the chance to try him in that natural role. Once again he passed it up out of an abundance of caution.

Absolutely spot on. It's the mixture of lack of quality and overly cautious management

[TsarBomba]

Absolutely spot on. It's the mixture of lack of quality and overly cautious management

It was mentioned on the matchday thread, but with the pitch being so bad today, and worsening as the game went on, it was crying out for a more direct 4-4-2 approach to try and bypass the scrap in the middle.

20 matches unbeaten and 11 clean sheets is almost becoming a bit of a monkey on our back, in the sense that we seem more intent to keep those runs going instead of going for a win and risking a loss.

[fatboy47]

If we'd won five and lost five of our last 10 draws we'd be looking a whole lot better placed.

[kwwden]

Parker did nothing wrong (IMO)

[dvalley69]

If we'd won five and lost five of our last 10 draws we'd be looking a whole lot better placed.

How do ya work that out?

[Murger]

Parker’s negative tactics will ultimately cost us an automatic promotion spot.

[BurnleyFC]

How do ya work that out?

Pretty simple.

5x3 =15 points
10x1 =10 points

[HurstGrangeClaret]

I’ve defended SP many times this season but think he got it wrong today. He went far too defensive and cannot understand why he didn’t make more and earlier substitutions.
What’s the point of signing JJS if you aren’t going to use him in a game like this. Not sure why Anthony wasn’t subbed and what do you say about Foster.
It was a game we quite clearly should have won. Let’s hope we’re not thinking about the dropped two points at the end of the season.

[randomclaret2]

I wish we'd signed a CF in the widow.

The lack of a goalscorer may well prove costly

[fatboy47]

How do ya work that out?

Do I honestly need to explain?

[Ampth7]

How do ya work that out?

I’m no Maths genius but I’m going to have a go!

Turn 5 draws into defeats = 5 points lost
Turn 5 draws into wins = 10 points gained
Net points gain of 5…..

If draws were worth 2 points then 14 draws would be fantastic…….but they aren’t, so yes, 5 losses and 5 wins instead of 10 draws would be better.

[xxmunkyennuixx]

With the ref, pitch and rugby tackles I am not going to be critical today. It is the games at home that were draws which will prevent automatic promotion.

[Ampth7]

Do I honestly need to explain?

I think I just did it for you, but as I say, I’m no Maths genius

[AfloatinClaret]

I wish we'd signed a CF in the widow.

I'm sure that most of us would, but who and where from exactly?
Good strikers seem to be in even shorter supply than usual this year and let's be honest: If you're a club with a proven/in form striker on your books, then you'll have been winning games and be vying for promotion yourselves; why would you put that promotion at risk unless another club offered you the sort of outrageous fee which is beyond Burnley's budget?

[TheFamilyCat]

I wish we'd signed a CF in the widow.

We did.

[TheFamilyCat]

If we'd won five and lost five of our last 10 draws we'd be looking a whole lot better placed.

But we wouldn't have a clean sheet record.

[Sheedyclaret]

Another day we win that convincingly played ok today

[dvalley69]

Do I honestly need to explain?

Yeah, sorry. Got a bit confused. Maths not my forte!

[Safron]

Had foster took one of his chances today there is no discussion, but the problem is that Parker does not have a plan b and is reluctant to throw caution to the wind, give this squad to another manager and I would love to see the difference in results

[warksclaret]

Its OK starting defensive if you have a bench like ours, but delaying key changes until 15 minutes to go is risky.We have lots of ground to make up now-Scotty has shown too much loyalty to players like Laurent, who seems to lack the control of the ball in tight areas, and Fleming (who stayed on whole game when he was having a mare).Shelvey instead of Brownhill as sub, might have proved more effective Different intent needs to be shown from Friday, and we need to utilise Edwards and Shelvey more, as both are game changers, which is why we brought them in. Its the correct utilisation of players that baffles me with Scotty, the great bulk of what he has done has been first class

[Dark Cloud]

Parker could have made different changes and maybe made them a bit earlier, but we have to be honest, the players we had out there were by far the better and more attack minded, but it's not Parker's fault if they constantly work guilt edged openings and contrive to miss them. It could and should have been 3 or 4 nil and it'll cost us in the long run.

[expoultryboy]

I agree with warksclaret , the gap between us and the top two is growing . It's good to get control of the game especially if you get an early goal as we did on Wednesday . But if it's not working he's got to change the system , not just the personal .

[expoultryboy]

Even changing to 3 - 5 - 2 mid match would give us a more attacking position.

[claretspice]

Parker could have made different changes and maybe made them a bit earlier, but we have to be honest, the players we had out there were by far the better and more attack minded, but it's not Parker's fault if they constantly work guilt edged openings and contrive to miss them. It could and should have been 3 or 4 nil and it'll cost us in the long run.

Nah. The only way it was three or four nil is if we took every good chance we created. We missed two very good chances and a couple of presentable ones, and nothing else. Tellingly we created less after the substitutions than before it.

[JohnMcGreal]

Same old story. This team can't score goals. That's why it's not getting promoted (automatically at least).

[RVclaret]

Nah. The only way it was three or four nil is if we took every good chance we created. We missed two very good chances and a couple of presentable ones, and nothing else. Tellingly we created less after the substitutions than before it.

Interestingly PNE have conceded the 2nd least amount of chances (using xG), after Leeds, in the league since January 1st. So I felt the ones we created were worthy of winning this game, which was always going to be tight.

[TsarBomba]

Nah. The only way it was three or four nil is if we took every good chance we created. We missed two very good chances and a couple of presentable ones, and nothing else. Tellingly we created less after the substitutions than before it.

It’s become a common theme that we lose our way after we make substitutions.

[Dark Cloud]

Nah. The only way it was three or four nil is if we took every good chance we created. We missed two very good chances and a couple of presentable ones, and nothing else. Tellingly we created less after the substitutions than before it.

Tbf, I'm in the pub in Chorley after a few pints, but I can think immediately of 5 guilt edged chances we fluffed. 2 each for Anthony and Foster and then Humphreys and Flemming contriving to leave the ball to each other when my grandma could have headed it in. I honestly think there were others.

[Woodleyclaret]

As I posted last week attack,attack,attack
PNE are the new Luton bullying tactics and aided by diabolical refeeing get points but we needed half time changes with Ash,Jonjo, Edwards and Benny on and go for the win .2 more points lost in a game we should have won easily

[claretspice]

Interestingly PNE have conceded the 2nd least amount of chances (using xG), after Leeds, in the league since January 1st. So I felt the ones we created were worthy of winning this game, which was always going to be tight.

I'm not denying we created chances to win the game. But the point is that we did so without playing especially well, and that once we'd missed them the onus was on us to make substitutions that opened up the game for us. The failing that is so frustrating is that we didn't.

[claretspice]

Tbf, I'm in the pub in Chorley after a few pints, but I can think immediately of 5 guilt edged chances we fluffed. 2 each for Anthony and Foster and then Humphreys and Flemming contriving to leave the ball to each other when my grandma could have headed it in. I honestly think there were others.

Neither of Anthony's chances were gilt edged. I'm not a massive fan if XG, but ours today was exactly 1. Anthony's personal XG was 0.08. If we're relying on those chances, we aren't creating enough.

[Row x]

Pretty simple.

5x3 =15 points
10x1 =10 points

Surely it depends who we lose against?
Wouldn't want Leeds, sunderland, boro etc being the ones to beat us

[RVclaret]

Neither of Anthony's chances were gilt edged.

If Anthony had done the obvious thing and passed to Foster, who was in acres, it was a gilt edged chance, and should still be viewed as such (in my view).

[matttheclaret]

If Anthony had done the obvious thing and passed to Foster, who was in acres, it was a gilt edged chance, and should still be viewed as such (in my view).

Passing to Foster would have made sure we didn't score. He did right to shoot

[willsclarets]

I said at HT I wanted to see Edwards, Shelvey and Barnes on the pitch and quickly. I still believe that was thr right thing. Direct was working better, made for Barnes and made for Shelvey who can pick longer passes. Also perfect for Edwards who will cause problems every time he gets the ball. He just needed longer to do his thing. It is the one thing I get irritated by Parker for. Otherwise love the bloke

[Devils_Advocate]

Surely it depends who we lose against?
Wouldn't want Leeds, sunderland, boro etc being the ones to beat us

Why not. In the 5 win / 5 lose scenario we gain 5 pts so even 3 of the 5 losses are against those 3 teams we are +5 and they are all +2 so we'd still be 3ps better off against them all

[RVclaret]

Passing to Foster would have made sure we didn't score. He did right to shoot

It wasn’t the right to shoot and he should have passed to Foster. It would have been a bigger chance than his other two, with more time and a better angle.

[claretspice]

If Anthony had done the obvious thing and passed to Foster, who was in acres, it was a gilt edged chance, and should still be viewed as such (in my view).

If my aunt had so forth she'd be my uncle, etc.

Anthony had one of those afternoons today. It was a surprise he saw out the 90. That was thr most egregious example.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Nah. The only way it was three or four nil is if we took every good chance we created. We missed two very good chances and a couple of presentable ones, and nothing else. Tellingly we created less after the substitutions than before it.

Agree 100% with your earlier big post and much of this one but not the one about more creativity before the subs.

We had 3 shots in 20 minutes after the subs, 8 shots in 70 before. We also had the Edwards drag back and penalty claim which were both as dangerous as any shot we had.

The issue for me is that until Edwards plays we are over reliant on Anthony and if both play (ideally with Foster up front and Flemming behind) it gives the opponent a lot to think about. But we leave such a switch way, way too late. This is becoming a regular thing. That’s even before we get to talking about Benson, Barnes, Shelvey or Sarmiento.

That came was there to win and 60 minutes was the time to switch it up.

[Steve-Harpers-perm]

As the games countdown and especially if we are chasing the top two at some point Parker is going to have to drop the cautious approach and go for it.

[dvalley69]

Sick of hearing about playing Flemming behind Foster: it hasn't happened all season; I doubt we've worked on it in training and there's never been an inkling it's a thought so as football manager decisions go it's an absolute non-starter, and rightly so. Why would a coach do something in a game that's never been tried before?

[claretspice]

Agree 100% with your earlier big post and much of this one but not the one about more creativity before the subs.

We had 3 shots in 20 minutes after the subs, 8 shots in 70 before. We also had the Edwards drag back and penalty claim which were both as dangerous as any shot we had.

The issue for me is that until Edwards plays we are over reliant on Anthony and if both play (ideally with Foster up front and Flemming behind) it gives the opponent a lot to think about. But we leave such a switch way, way too late. This is becoming a regular thing. That’s even before we get to talking about Benson, Barnes, Shelvey or Sarmiento.

That came was there to win and 60 minutes was the time to switch it up.

I think we're agreeing. We had one presentable chance for Anthony immediately after the changes and then Humphreys and Flemming got in each other's way. Any other shots we had after the subs were speculative. We didn't lack for endeavour after the changes but we became more and more incoherent as what we were looking to became increasingly at odds with the strengths of those on the pitch.

[Stacks]

I don't blame Parker. He could have changed things quicker, but we should have beaten Preston today.

The ref didn't help. Preston's tactics didn't help. Too many of our players had an off day.

Don't mind the odd poor performance, in between good games.

This is all as long as we get back on it against Sheff Wed!!

“Too many of our players had an off day”

Well then make subs way earlier - our bench is almost as strong as our starting lineup.

[Dark Cloud]

Neither of Anthony's chances were gilt edged. I'm not a massive fan if XG, but ours today was exactly 1. Anthony's personal XG was 0.08. If we're relying on those chances, we aren't creating enough.

I disagree. They bloody were. I've seen the second one (in the second half) back in the pub and although it's not as clear from the back row of the stand which is where I was, it shows the absolute acres of goal he has to aim at!

[AmbleClaret]

It was a game we quite clearly should have won. Let’s hope we’re not thinking about the dropped two points at the end of the season.

There'll be plenty of 0.0 dropped point games we'll be able to point to at the end of the season.