Immature display

[Goliath]

Didn’t take the click bait posters long to get their post match posts up. Looks like they have been well fed.

It's a post match discussion. If you've not grasped how a football forum works by now then you should probably give it up.

[BigGaz]

I have been and remain critical of the way we set up sometimes, but there's no way at all anyone can lay anything at the door of Parker yesterday.

We had more than enough chances to take the game, and it was down to individual errors that we didn't. That's something Parker can't control. We stood up well to their efforts to disrupt us and I felt even when they threatened we looked mostly calm and in control.

If we take just one of those chances then we come away talking about another masterclass in defending. Immature display? Thought it was an extremely composed display other than finishing personally.

[dandeclaret]

This is not the thread for reason and balance Gaz….. this is the space to call out the manager, the club, the journalists without balls, and everything else.

[daveisaclaret]

I have been and remain critical of the way we set up sometimes, but there's no way at all anyone can lay anything at the door of Parker yesterday.

I think the thing to lay at Parker's door, potentially, is that we made 5 signings in the window, none are starters and we still have Flemming up front and Foster wide left.

We played well and missed great chances to win, but nobody can be surprised we missed them.

[NL Claret]

This is not the thread for reason and balance Gaz….. this is the space to call out the manager, the club, the journalists without balls, and everything else.

Correct, you only have to look who the original posters are and you know there’s no point in reading the responses. I suppose it satisfies their needs and unfortunately keeps them well fed.

[BigGaz]

I think the thing to lay at Parker's door, potentially, is that we made 5 signings in the window, none are starters and we still have Flemming up front and Foster wide left.

We played well and missed great chances to win, but nobody can be surprised we missed them.

I'm with you there Dave but it's not just him as part of that Transfer Committee so he can share some of that blame.

[dsr]

I have been and remain critical of the way we set up sometimes, but there's no way at all anyone can lay anything at the door of Parker yesterday.

We had more than enough chances to take the game, and it was down to individual errors that we didn't. That's something Parker can't control. We stood up well to their efforts to disrupt us and I felt even when they threatened we looked mostly calm and in control.

If we take just one of those chances then we come away talking about another masterclass in defending. Immature display? Thought it was an extremely composed display other than finishing personally.

That's not the point. I agree we should have been in front after 70 minutes - but we weren't, and it was looking like staying at 0-0 as it nearly always does if we don't change anything. The criticism is that when it was 0-0 and a draw was likely, he didn't try and change it.

[loganking222]

We’d won back to back games with 2 very strong performances, it’s hard to make a case for changing the starting 11, and its certainly not the very hyperbolic ‘Mind numbing negativity’.

It's impossible to make a case.

[Hedontplayforyou]

I have been and remain critical of the way we set up sometimes, but there's no way at all anyone can lay anything at the door of Parker yesterday.

We had more than enough chances to take the game, and it was down to individual errors that we didn't. That's something Parker can't control. We stood up well to their efforts to disrupt us and I felt even when they threatened we looked mostly calm and in control.

If we take just one of those chances then we come away talking about another masterclass in defending. Immature display? Thought it was an extremely composed display other than finishing personally.

This is a pretty accurate assessment really. We should have seen PNE off with the coaches created .

Early doors Anthony should have played Foster in 1v1, which having seen the chances he missed later in the game might not have come to anything anyway , but on a serious note that was a huge chance .

Those two glaring misses from Foster were guilt edged and have in turn seen us drop 2 points.

Flemming seems to make some odd decisions when striking the ball first time in situations were he could play someone n or set himself and I just wish we’d play a few corners into the danger area and see some old fashioned attacking of the ball from our big lads , too often we fanny around with it and it comes to nothing.

I’d take this point if it means we go on a real run from now till the end of the season

[Anonymous Claret]

I like Parker and hope that he remains our manager for a good while.

It was a decent performance yesterday apart from the finishing.

After 60 or 70 minutes we were looking tired and as though we wouldn't score. Edwards looked really good and was a positive substitution. I would have probably took Anthony off instead of Foster. I would have also brought Shelvey on for Laurent and maybe even brought Barnes on also.

The difference between this side and the 1 from a couple of years ago is that we scored a lot of important late goals which in a large part was due to the positive changes made by Kompany. Yesterday we had a very strong bench which I don't think was utilised as well as it could have been.

[Elizabeth]

I think the thing to lay at Parker's door, potentially, is that we made 5 signings in the window, none are starters and we still have Flemming up front and Foster wide left.

We played well and missed great chances to win, but nobody can be surprised we missed them.

Since the window closed, we had won 2 league games and drawn the other one up to yesterday with improved performances. So it should be no surprise that the new signings have not been league starters, albeit some of them did get the chance to play prominent parts in the cup win against Southampton.

The criticism that we are missing too many chances is a fair one. It's important though to give proper consideration to the fact that prior to the window closing we hardly created one chance, so something positive is happening with the style of play.

It really all boils down to the missed chances this month by Flemming and especially Foster, the 2 players you have singled out. Had they put half their chances away we would have more points. That is standing out like a sore thumb. It needs no new introductions and certainly has no relevance to a thread entitled ' Immature display'

The more reflective poster will be recognising that the time hasn't been right to start Edwards in a league game but it has never been nearer after yesterday.

Looking at the Jan window I don't think many would consider any of the 5 signings other than Edwards would be pressing for a starting position. That transfer activity is open to criticism if your focus is on the starting eleven rather than squad strength.

Personally I was disappointed that all we did in the window was bring in a striker who has had his best days. I can only think that was in part due to Flemming being a 1 in 2 goalscorer since returning to full fitness in December. Maybe Foster will still surprise us if he can just get a goal to help him be less hesitant in front of goal.

[BigGaz]

That's not the point. I agree we should have been in front after 70 minutes - but we weren't, and it was looking like staying at 0-0 as it nearly always does if we don't change anything. The criticism is that when it was 0-0 and a draw was likely, he didn't try and change it.

I suppose this is the point where it does become more subjective but after 70 minutes we had a ball fizzed across the 6 yard box and a strong penalty call turned down. Plus one or two other moments where the wrong option was chosen or our execution was lacking, so Still trying to create and creating chances. We almost got done on the counter a couple of times.

You could argue he couldve brought Benny, Barnes Sarmiento or Shelvey on but there are all sorts of reasons against doing that, fitness, sacrificing shape and defensive ability, form etc. I personally thought there was enough talent on the pitch to win us the game still.

I think folk might underestimate the impact on mentality a late loss might have on us, so I thought he got the balance right.

[BigGaz]

Actually yeah, I will concede Anthony couldve done with hooking sooner.

[claretspice]

I don't think it was an immature performance. It was largely a pretty controlled performance, in keeping with what Parker clearly preaches.

But there were two problems with it. Firstly i don't agree we created "loads" of chances and the statistics bear that out. We has two, possibly three, very good chances in the 90 minutes, plus a few half chances. We didn't force a save of note in the 90 minutes. We certainly produced enough chances to score one goal and therefore win 1-0 but this wasn't a day when we might have had a hat full.

Secondly I did think that whilst we undoubtedly showed urgency in the last 10 minutes and started to move the ball forwards earlier, we could have shown that earlier, and our substitutes didn't necessarily help us do that effectively. If we were going to start slinging in long diagonals, we needed at least one or possibly both of Foster (who I thought was wrongly hooked over Anthony despite being more threatening and getting into good positions even if he did miss two chances) and Barnes on the pitch - and we didn't need the insurance presence of Laurent. As it was we retained a rigid 451/433 with Anthony holding pretty wide, two holding midfielders and Flemming fighting for the ball with three centre halves. That I'm afraid didn't make sense to me and it betrayed a reluctance to seize the moment and go for three points. With Humphreys a natural defender at left back and Roberts comfortable stepping into midfield to stop a counter, we had plenty of defensive stability on the pitch. We just needed to trust it to do it's job and give ourselves a chance of winning the game. We didn't create enough in that last 10 minutes.

[dsr]

I suppose this is the point where it does become more subjective but after 70 minutes we had a ball fizzed across the 6 yard box and a strong penalty call turned down. Plus one or two other moments where the wrong option was chosen or our execution was lacking, so Still trying to create and creating chances. We almost got done on the counter a couple of times.

You could argue he couldve brought Benny, Barnes Sarmiento or Shelvey on but there are all sorts of reasons against doing that, fitness, sacrificing shape and defensive ability, form etc. I personally thought there was enough talent on the pitch to win us the game still.

I think folk might underestimate the impact on mentality a late loss might have on us, so I thought he got the balance right.

But we've gone into the last 15 miutes at 0-0 12 times this season, and only when a Swansea defender generously handled the ball have we won the game. At what point does Parker realise that "no change" means "no win"? Or is he happy with the draws?

[CoolClaret]

But we've gone into the last 15 miutes at 0-0 12 times this season, and only when a Swansea defender generously handled the ball have we won the game. At what point does Parker realise that "no change" means "no win"? Or is he happy with the draws?

Until recently, with players returning from injury and with the addition of Edwards, who did we have fit on the bench to come on and impact a game?

[dsr]

Until recently, with players returning from injury and with the addition of Edwards, who did we have fit on the bench to come on and impact a game?

A second centre forward. Barnes recently, Rodriguez before that, even Houtondji who made a difference away to Hull. When we switched to 2 up front at Hull (even for only 7 minutes!) we scored. Why not try that tactic when it's 0-0?

[CoolClaret]

A second centre forward. Barnes recently, Rodriguez before that, even Houtondji who made a difference away to Hull. When we switched to 2 up front at Hull (even for only 7 minutes!) we scored. Why not try that tactic when it's 0-0?

So 35 yr old Ashley Barnes was signed in January, 35 yr old Jay Rodriguez (who is yet to score for Wrexham, ok it's only been 3 games) or Andreas Houtondji, who was a speculative signing to develop and has scored 1 goal in 6 apps in Belgium.

I understand and appreciate wanting to go two up top, I certainly thought yesterday was a game made for Bash and going more direct, but it's important that fans try and remain objective about the situation.

Some are trying to paint this picture like we've had ridiculous talent (for this level) available all year and it's because of 'negative' SP why we can't score.

This despite in his previous campaigns at this level had strikers that netted over 25 goals.

What's really happening, is that our players are pretty much scoring inline with their career averages but he has given us the best defence in European football.

That ain't a SP problem, that's a squad and a recruitment problem for not identifying and getting a striker that could put the ball in the back of the net, hold up the ball, occupy defenders and open up space for others to move into.

[claretspice]

I suppose this is the point where it does become more subjective but after 70 minutes we had a ball fizzed across the 6 yard box and a strong penalty call turned down. Plus one or two other moments where the wrong option was chosen or our execution was lacking, so Still trying to create and creating chances. We almost got done on the counter a couple of times.

You could argue he couldve brought Benny, Barnes Sarmiento or Shelvey on but there are all sorts of reasons against doing that, fitness, sacrificing shape and defensive ability, form etc. I personally thought there was enough talent on the pitch to win us the game still.

I think folk might underestimate the impact on mentality a late loss might have on us, so I thought he got the balance right.

The point about fizzing balls across the 6 yard box is interesting, isn't it. The balls went in because we held pretty good width, but no-one got on the end of them because (i) we don't really have a natural goalscorer/centre forward whose instinct is to be in those positions, and (ii) we just don't get enough men in the box to play the percentages. We rely on absolute precision to create chances.

We ended the game yesterday with a back four who are all natural defenders - neither Humphreys nor Roberts is a Vitinho or Maatsen style full back who you might say is better going forward than defending, and tellingly they produced only 3 crosses between them yesterday - plus two holding midfielders who do not naturally get into the box (Cullen can but he's made his reputation prompting and knitting the game together from deep). It is an oversimplification, but if you are attacking with 4 and defending with 6, it's not a surprise that you'll end up with crosses going into the box that no-one is able to get on the end of - particularly when the opposition are playing a 5-4-1 formation.