CanuckSkyBlue
Well-Known Member
They’ve also got a 35 year old in their defence
Defence (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter cc84cov
- Start date
chinamans view
Well-Known Member
I made a point to say yes we all agree that defenders lack pace, so we must try something different if we want to stay up. try sweeper style it tightens defence up . play sweeper then 3 at back wing backs as well 2 in midfield and 2 up front
fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
This is Sheaf being caught for their second, in his defence he had few options. We needed to be much more compact once we got ahead.
This is exactly the scenario where you want Kelly close by to just give the ball to and keep play ticking.
This is exactly the scenario where you want Kelly close by to just give the ball to and keep play ticking.
shepardo01
Well-Known Member
In these last 7, we have conceded 16 goals.
That is roughly 1 in every three shots on target goes in.
That is not good at all.
Frostie
Well-Known Member
Quality of opposition is a factor in that of course but we need to stop with the individual errors & improve the defending of set pieces for sure.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Weve consistently conceded whatever the opposition
Nick
Administrator
This is Sheaf being caught for their second, in his defence he had few options. We needed to be much more compact once we got ahead.
This is exactly the scenario where you want Kelly close by to just give the ball to and keep play ticking.
Kelly is an expert in winning an easy foul at times like that too.
mark82
Super Moderator
We didn't concede against Barnsley. The point still stands that we're conceding too many though.
capel & collindridge
Well-Known Member
We've consistently scored whatever the opposition. When we played sides in the bottom half of the table we've scored a goal and they've scored one. When we've played teams in the top half, we've scored a goal and a quarter, they've scored two and half. We're still on course to reach 42 points by the end of the season. We do need to improve a bit to ensure we survive. But i think we have shown that is possible. Getting behind the side and not giving away silly penalties and goals from suicide passes would give us just enough points to survive. We were never going to do much more than that.
The results have been disappointing, largely because we have still been in the game and then feel we have thrown it away. But I think we have played some great football and competed better than I expected. We are on course to end the season with 11 wins 9 draws 26 losses, Goals for 52, goals against 92 (-40). If our luck changes for the better or we tighten up our defence a bit, we could still get 50 points and finish in relative safety. We've only been completely outplayed by Bournemouth. Blackburn scored 4 but we played poorly with 10 men for almost the entire game.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
We will get relegated comfortably on 42 points.
capel & collindridge
Well-Known Member
Only once in the last 10 years has a Championship team on 42 points been "relegated comfortably". On six occasions out of ten, teams with 42 points have actually avoided relegation altogether.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
It hasn’t happened once in the last ten years dude. Most times a team on 42 would be relegated by 5 or more points, only once would it have even been close.
Lord_Nampil
Well-Known Member
Defence needs balance, with Dabo in the team we have won 2 Drew 1 Lost 2 F7 A9 Pts 7. If you look at the goals we have let in how many have come down the right back side when he’s not played??
Will that sort us out? Maybe but defiantly think we need to try and add a CB to play the centre role in the window. Back 4 needs to be settled and once it is we will progress in this league!
Will that sort us out? Maybe but defiantly think we need to try and add a CB to play the centre role in the window. Back 4 needs to be settled and once it is we will progress in this league!
capel & collindridge
Well-Known Member
BSB, you are right in saying it has been more than once in the last ten years teams on 42 have been relegated by a large margin. In 2013, 2017 and 2020. So I can see I was wrong to say it had only happened once. But in four of the last six years, 42 would avoided relegation (just). In 2015, 2016, 2018 and 2019.
I'm not saying 42 points are enough. But they could be. Three times in the last ten years you would have been relegated comfortably (by more than 6points). But it does vary from year to year and on six occasions in the last ten years a team that got at least 42 points would have survived. So statistically 42 offers a 60% chance. Strange but true.
I would take 42 points this season if it meant we stayed up. On the other hand, it we stopped making stupid errors we could almost guarantee safety by getting say 52 points. But even that might not be enough. In 2013. Barnsley survived on 55, but Peterboro went down on 54. So anything can happen!
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I don’t know what league tables you’re looking at but from what I see it’s never happened, at least not in over 20 years. In 2015 it was 46, 2016 it was 49 etc. I think you might be going off how many you’d have needed to finish above 3rd bottom but the league has 24 teams not 25! It’s about catching 4th bottom not beating 3rd bottom.
Frostie
Well-Known Member
Eh?
I've read this a few times & am still confused...
Is he not saying that 42 points would have been enough to avoid relegation? If so that's correct?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It isn’t as he’s assuming we would be slotted in and the 3 teams below would still be there on those points which isn’t really that realistic you need to see what the 4th bottom team had
Frostie
Well-Known Member
Ah gotcha... Think they've obviously just crossed wires then.
In real terms you just need to be better than the bottom 3.
In 2019 Millwall ended on 44 but 42 points would have been enough:
Last season though the same total would have finished bottom:
It varies quite wildly year on year, part of the thrill of the Championship, so I don't think putting an arbitrary points target on the board is realistic.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Not really because 4th bottom always had more
My worry is that we've already made our statement signing in defense this season already, and he's not very good (at least, not in this system). I'm willing to trust the scouts who raved about Ostigard in pre-season, and maybe he can perform better in a different setup, but the way MR hoped to deploy him is not panning out.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
You could equally argue the league has 24 not 23 for your method. It depends which team you remove for us 3rd from bottom or 4th from bottom.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I agree, but this is the first time I have ever heard 42 as a target instead of 50. Borne out by the fact nobody has ever stayed up with 42
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
TBH I’m not sure how much I go with point targets. Every season is different. We are in touch now and I’ll take that all the way to the run in.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Sure, I’m just pretty certain 42 won’t cut it. Cue this being the first season it does!
capel & collindridge
Well-Known Member
In 2015, Rotherham survived in 21st place out of twenty-four team by getting 46 points. They would still have avoided being in the bottom three if they had got 42 points. Millwall, the highest off the three relegated club in 22nd place only got 41 points and were relegated.
In 2016, Rotherham survived once more in 21st place by getting 49 points. Had they only got 41 points, they would still have avoided relegation. Charlton in 22nd place were relegated with just 40 points, while Milton Keynes in 23rd place had only 33, and Bolton in 24th place had only 30.
i think you may be making the mistake of thinking we would have to beat the number of points each season that the team in 21st place got. We don't. We just have to above the bottom three teams. Or are four teams being relegated this year? If so, no-one told me.
Brighton Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Perhaps what I mean is the 4th placed team has yet to get as low as that.
SlowerThanPlatt
Well-Known Member
I think he means in reference to “one of the best players his age in Europe” when we signed him
Legia Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
If he had been that we would never have had a sniff at signing him
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Bit like Kastaneer was well above the level of league one when we signed him
lord_garrincha
Well-Known Member
I'm sure Bigirimana's agent said the same of him at National League when he went to Solihull.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
The DaCosta suggestion could be a very decent option. A lot of teams utilise a traditional full back as part of a back 3.
If pace was the fundamental issue, Pask would be worth considering. But, given his lack of game time so far, it’s a stretch.
In fairness to the defence, our structure in defence hasn’t been too bad (barring Blackburn where we were terrorised). A few commentators complimented our defending on iFollow (for a few games I could only listen to the ‘Home’ commentary). However, our set-piece defending is terrible. It just isn’t good enough. It really doesn’t help that we give away stupid penalties. Both of McFadzean’s penalties were just stupid fouls for an experienced professional and COH’s handball was just silly. Rose’s was probably the only penalty that was unavoidable.
There have been occasions where we’ve been unlucky, if the defence can be sorted out, then we can start turning things around.
