How would you describe PS's style of play

[Jam_Man]

I think if we keep the majority of players next season we should go up, maybe even win the league, it all seemed to go down hill once liam got injured but there is 11 players in a team and not 1.

Our form got better late in the season without Liam in the side. I think the lack of a big man meant we tried to play better football and results did improve.

 

[Beefy]

Or we played easier games.

 

[PEEJ]

It is possible that the instructions given by PS are sometimes poorly executed by the players. From reading interviews on the subject, it is clear PS wants the team to play direct football. I can't imagine for a second that PS instructs players to hoof the ball up the pitch.

The number of goals we scored last season suggests there was a structured plan to our style of play.

 

[Onion_Bag_Dave]

There were plenty of times our "attacking play" was completely ineffective and we barely had a shot on goal all game. If thats not being sussed out I dont know what is.

When you play 1 upfront and use "direct attacking passes" that can be easily dealt with then you do need to create chances in other ways. This was demonstrated against Crewe when with one up front Crewe dealt with everything easily until we changed to 442. Having a plan B on that occassion almost got us the draw.

You say you like to add perspective in your post to McNasty, but your views are so polar to negative views they dont actually give perspective as all.and are just as unbalanced as some of the negative posts.

In some cases I post VERY positive posts to counteract the ridiculous negativity.

If getting 83 points and scoring loads of goals is getting sussed out then wow, I hope we learn from our mistakes and aren't sussed out next season.

You can look at it both ways, you can say we didn't attack effectively enough (to win us more points) or you could say we didn't defend properly at certain times (to save us points). And in my opinion the logic that we were leading against several teams and then threw away points, suggests it wasn't our attacking play that let us down.

Or am I wrong?

 

[Jam_Man]

Or we played easier games.

We certainly had a good run of games at the end which was a big factor, but we also had "easier" games earlier when we didnt peform and certainly never had any sort of consistency.

 

[Jam_Man]

In some cases I post VERY positive posts to counteract the ridiculous negativity.

If getting 83 points and scoring loads of goals is getting sussed out then wow, I hope we learn from our mistakes and aren't sussed out next season.

You can look at it both ways, you can say we didn't attack effectively enough (to win us more points) or you could say we didn't defend properly at certain times (to save us points). And in my opinion the logic that we were leading against several teams and then threw away points, suggests it wasn't our attacking play that let us down.

Or am I wrong?

Its that sort of comment which doesnt do you any favours.

Yes we did score a lot of goals, and we had a great away record. But using that statistic to completely bat away any negativity is why you get criticised for being rose tinted.

Yes we did very well at times, that doesnt mean at other times we werent poor.

There were a number of games, especially at home, we barely had a shot on target, thats clearly an issue with attacking play. At home a team generally wont come to attack and are set up to sit back and soak up pressure, so 451 plays into their hands. They wait for the "direct pass" not to hit its mark, take possession and counter attack. Away its more effective (although not always) as they are more likely to push forward.

The balanced view point is that at times our style was completely ineffective which it was, and at times we let ourselves down defensively. Both cost us points.

 

[Onion_Bag_Dave]

Its that sort of comment which doesnt do you any favours.

Yes we did score a lot of goals, and we had a great away record. But using that statistic to completely bat away any negativity is why you get criticised for being rose tinted.

Yes we did very well at times, that doesnt mean at other times we werent poor.

There were a number of games, especially at home, we barely had a shot on target, thats clearly an issue with attacking play. At home a team generally wont come to attack and are set up to sit back and soak up pressure, so 451 plays into their hands. They wait for the "direct pass" not to hit its mark, take possession and counter attack. Away its more effective (although not always) as they are more likely to push forward.

The balanced view point is that at times our style was completely ineffective which it was, and at times we let ourselves down defensively. Both cost us points.

I will ignore your condecending tone.

In my opinion if we protected our lead in the games which cost us something like 11 points (I think when looking at some results), therefore in my opinion, if we protected our leads and draws we would have won the league.

Ofcourse if we beat other teams by scoring more goals then the same could have happened. But personally, if we were already leading we should have won. Therefore to me, that's down to defending. Not our offensive duties.

However you can also come from the other side of the argument.

Also, if we didn't defend so well and attack so well we wouldn't have finished 4th. It's basically impossible to analyse. Inconsistency killed us!

 

[wiggy]

Boring, Stadium emptying rubbish and not very effective, won't be renewing for a second season due to these reasons!

 

[Jam_Man]

I will ignore your condecending tone.

In my opinion if we protected our lead in the games which cost us something like 11 points (I think when looking at some results), therefore in my opinion, if we protected our leads and draws we would have won the league.

Ofcourse if we beat other teams by scoring more goals then the same could have happened. But personally, if we were already leading we should have won. Therefore to me, that's down to defending. Not our offensive duties.

However you can also come from the other side of the argument.

Also, if we didn't defend so well and attack so well we wouldn't have finished 4th. It's basically impossible to analyse. Inconsistency killed us!

And if we were losing we should have lost I assume so theres lots of points we shouldnt have got where we came from behind? And even games where we gave away leads we could have won if we had retained possession better, ie not by playing longer passes. So not necessarily as straight forward as defending being at fault. After all if the opposition dont have the ball they cant score.

Football is full of swings and roundabouts, and as you say its impossible to analyse and give a definitive answer why we didnt go up was because of defending/attacking/style/formation. There are far too many factors involved.

 

[Firestorm]

. They wait for the "direct pass" not to hit its mark, take possession and counter attack. Away its more effective (although not always) as they are more likely to push forward.

But a Direct pass to one man up front going astray would not prompt an effective counter attack because we would have most of the team behind the ball.

To be honest , I recall a number of the teams who won at RH scored by intercepting short passes being attempted by our defence or the midfield

That said , I did come away from RH several times this season saying the the opposition had done their job, generally parked the bus and countered.

Direct football is harder to play at home, particularly if the opposition sits deep and allows you to keep the ball up to the halfway line, there is less spce to hit the target man, less room to compensate for an overhit ball and generally more bodies about. Its those times where either PS lacked the guile to change things or the players did not grasp the instrucions.
But PS learned from it, with later ganes, Mohsni playing wide gave an outlet which once used tended to pull the opposition defence wider, thus creating more space and opening up visiting teams , unfortunately Crewe were not undone quite enough (IMHO due to Benyon not being as effective as Harris )

 

[Jam_Man]

But a Direct pass to one man up front going astray would not prompt an effective counter attack because we would have most of the team behind the ball.

To be honest , I recall a number of the teams who won at RH scored by intercepting short passes being attempted by our defence or the midfield

That said , I did come away from RH several times this season saying the the opposition had done their job, generally parked the bus and countered.

Direct football is harder to play at home, particularly if the opposition sits deep and allows you to keep the ball up to the halfway line, there is less spce to hit the target man, less room to compensate for an overhit ball and generally more bodies about. Its those times where either PS lacked the guile to change things or the players did not grasp the instrucions.
But PS learned from it, with later ganes, Mohsni playing wide gave an outlet which once used tended to pull the opposition defence wider, thus creating more space and opening up visiting teams , unfortunately Crewe were not undone quite enough (IMHO due to Benyon not being as effective as Harris )

Whether its effective to "catch us on the break" as such it allows them to get posession and as you have the two wide players in the 5 man midfield/ or 3 man stikers generally higher up the pitch it gives them more space on the flanks than if we had 2 wide midfielders which is why Gilbert used to struggle so much.

Either way, as you say they are sitting there waiting for it and its giving the ball straight back to them and allowing them to come forward.

Playing Mohsni out wide did make a difference but of course we had 2 up front in the last home games which also helped.

 

[Hawkwell Blue]

Boring, Stadium emptying rubbish and not very effective, won't be renewing for a second season due to these reasons!

So you want exciting, stylish football that fills stadia and you weren't happy that we misssed out by just one point. Welcome to the real world. You don't really get League Two do you?

Oh well I'm sure Man City or Arsenal need new fans.

 

[davewebbsbrain]

Boring, Stadium emptying rubbish and not very effective, won't be renewing for a second season due to these reasons!

Shame there isn't a season ticket for SZ and you didn't renew that either. If you aren't going to games, don't post your thoughts on here. Stay away from games, stay away from SZ.....Simples

 

[ozzy-shrimper]

At the start of the season, hoofball. At the latter end of the season after signing Eastwood and realising Harris is effective when the ball is on the floor, both styles.

 

[southchurch]

Its called an entertainment industry. But to be honest in most games I watched this season I felt just empty and bored. We had a couple of good moments which came in the main away from home. I only went to 1 away game which was Dagenham. That was good fun but we were out played for most of that game although we came out on top. I don't expect Barcelona , no one does. But I do find it a bit annoying that people say you can't expect people to play football at this level. These are full time professional players who train every day. I have played pub football with lads who can pass and hold onto the ball for decent periods of time. These are Pro footballers for god sake. Sturrock can spin it however he wants but I hate to watch us being out played for long periods of the game , while humping it long over and over and basically hoping for a bit of luck. I watched many a game that we came out on top this season but I still did not enjoy it much. Yes it was better when we won but is that really all you want, no matter what.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Wonderful.After all he got us the North Bank back.(irony alert).