Route 1

[stewart]

Me i just want Sol and his team to sort out whose staying and whose going come january, and those going never allow them to don a SUFC shirt again. Ive given up on this season and just hope come next season you the supporters will see a team you can be proud off.

 

[mfurok]

It doesn’t matter what way of playing you have, you have to play it well to get results.

Playing direct football badly is as damaging as playing out from the back badly.

Sadly that’s totally wrong.

As demonstrated on Saturday, playing it out badly from the back results in goals being conceded.

Playing direct football badly just naffs everyone off.

 

[Mad Cyril]

I would like us to go route zero and try and score from goal kicks.

 

[Leigh_Seasider]

I would like us to go route zero and try and score from goal kicks.

That’s Bishop dropped.

 

[Leigh_Seasider]

Sadly that’s totally wrong.

As demonstrated on Saturday, playing it out badly from the back results in goals being conceded.

Playing direct football badly just naffs everyone off.

As @Tombstone Blues said, you have to play any system well to get results.
Lumping it forward isn’t any better option than passing it around the back if you’re lumping it aimlessly and it’s coming straight back to us, putting us under just as much pressure.

 

[Tombstone Blues]

As @Tombstone Blues said, you have to play any system well to get results.
Lumping it forward isn’t any better option than passing it around the back if you’re lumping it aimlessly and it’s coming straight back to us, putting us under just as much pressure.

That’s my point thank you.

Mr mfurok seems to want to disagree with anything I say regardless. I’ll let him have his moment, I past caring.

 

[Andy_S]

Just watching West Brom beating Bristol City and City are insistent on playing out from the back and it’s cost them two goals. Madness. What on earth is this trend all about?

 

[mfurok]

As @Tombstone Blues said, you have to play any system well to get results.
Lumping it forward isn’t any better option than passing it around the back if you’re lumping it aimlessly and it’s coming straight back to us, putting us under just as much pressure.

Sorry Leigh Seasider but do you really disagree with the statement that If we lose the ball far away from our goal it is much more difficult for the opposition to score than if we lose the ball close to our goal?

 

[Tombstone Blues]

Sorry Leigh Seasider but do you really disagree with the statement that If we lose the ball far away from our goal it is much more difficult for the opposition to score than if we lose the ball close to our goal?

That’s not what I said and you know it.

That’s as accurate a statement as me saying I’d asked, if you agree that surely if we have the ball it’s more difficult for the opposition to score than if we repeatedly give it away by booting it upfield aimlessly.

But have your day in the sun if you wish

 

[mfurok]

That’s not what I said and you know it. But have your day in the sun if you wish

I was deliberately not asking you as you were getting rather sensitive.

This is nothing personal, I have been brought up all my life to detest these tactics and I'm not about to change.

In the meantime, given that you have responded again, if I've misinterpreted what you are saying apologies but please clarify.

Do you agree with constantly trying to pass the ball across the back as Bond and now Campbell are inflicting upon us or not?

PS. As you can see I replied before you edited your post and added another paragraph,

 

[Tombstone Blues]

Just watching West Brom beating Bristol City and City are insistent on playing out from the back and it’s cost them two goals. Madness. What on earth is this trend all about?

Is it not possible that both sides are trying or would like to play similar styles but one is simply better at it than the other?

BC are massively over achieving in that division and if they’ve done it playing the same way then arguably it’s the right way of playing for them?

Sometimes teams are just better than you

 

[Leigh_Seasider]

Sorry Leigh Seasider but do you really disagree with the statement that If we lose the ball far away from our goal it is much more difficult for the opposition to score than if we lose the ball close to our goal?

Sol seems to agree that we don’t have the players to play the long ball game. Do you feel that we do? Hoofing it upfield would get us results...is this guaranteed? Nothing is .. yes, we need to cut out passing straight to the opposition I get that. I’m sure that’s being addressed.

 

[Tombstone Blues]

I was deliberately not asking you as you were getting rather sensitive.

This is nothing personal, I have been brought up all my life to detest these tactics and I'm not about to change.

In the meantime, given that you have responded again, if I've misinterpreted what you are saying apologies but please clarify.

Do you agree with constantly trying to pass the ball across the back as Bond and now Campbell are inflicting upon us or not?

I’m not sensitive to it or you at all. I find it quite amusing that you seem to have a minor obsession in trying to put me in my place.

To answer your question, the game has changed massively and so have the players and styles in it.

In my opinion we are less suited to playing direct football than we are to trying to construct attacks using possession of the football.

Are we doing it well enough? No obviously not.

Would we be better off booting it long? It’s arbitrary but given the personnel, imo, no we wouldn’t.

Are we able to improve playing this way? Absolutely.

Does playing it long and direct have a ceiling of success? Again imo, yes it does.

Can lower league sides succeed playing football on the floor? Yes absolutely. Barnsley, Charlton and Luton are proof of it as are (as much as we’d all hate to say it) Colchester in league 2.

Does it take more effort, more time, more perseverance? Yes. Is it more risky, more fallible? Probably.

Would I prefer to watch it? Yes I absolutely would.

 

[mfurok]

I’m not sensitive to it or you at all. I find it quite amusing that you seem to have a minor obsession in trying to put me in my place.

To answer your question, the game has changed massively and so have the players and styles in it.

In my opinion we are less suited to playing direct football than we are to trying to construct attacks using possession of the football.

Are we doing it well enough? No obviously not.

Would we be better off booting it long? It’s arbitrary but given the personnel, imo, no we wouldn’t.

Are we able to improve playing this way? Absolutely.

Does playing it long and direct have a ceiling of success? Again imo, yes it does.

Can lower league sides succeed playing football on the floor? Yes absolutely. Barnsley, Charlton and Luton are proof of it as are (as much as we’d all hate to say it) Colchester in league 2.

Does it take more effort, more time, more perseverance? Yes. Is it more risky, more fallible? Probably.

Would I prefer to watch it? Yes I absolutely would.

Don't flatter yourself, play the post not the poster.

In this case I certainly agree with the vast majority of your post.

My point is that playing possession football doesn't have to start ten yards from our goal all the time.

We should limit it to when there is plenty of time to pick the next pass and the pass after that and not stick ridiculously to one mantra.

 

[Tombstone Blues]

Don't flatter yourself, play the post not the poster.

In this case I certainly agree with the vast majority of your post.

My point is that playing possession football doesn't have to start ten yards from our goal all the time.

We should limit it to when there is plenty of time to pick the next pass and the pass after that and not stick ridiculously to one mantra.

Well if you’re going to play that game, in this case I agree with you....apart from the bit about only playing when there is time to pick the next pass....

To play that way well it requires you to play in tight areas with the whole point being to try and get the opposition to engage you and try and take the ball...exposing space leaving them vulnerable.

It’s what Donnie did so well when we went down to 10 men....for a spell we did the right thing by denying space and allowing them to have the ball without getting greedy and chasing it. Unfortunately the crowd couldn’t understand that and aired its frustration with the players for not tackling and not chasing out to the ball. Ultimately Donnie played the long game and stayed patient. We then made it easy by lunging in and getting another sent off.

 

[Lord Football]

We don't have the personnel to play the build from the back game. Watch any team that does it properly and they have the ability to move the ball quickly - be that fast sharp pass and move, or hitting a long pass to a wide man or through the middle. (and by long pass, I don't lump it to the big man)

What we do is fanny dangle about it at the back and as we don't have either the ability to move the ball quickly in midfield nor an obvious pace outlet on the wings, we end moving slowly like pawn on a chessboard until giving the ball way.

The criminal thing is that KB clearly planned for this as a tactic, and yet never got the personnel in who could play it.

 

[Tombstone Blues]

We don't have the personnel to play the build from the back game. Watch any team that does it properly and they have the ability to move the ball quickly - be that fast sharp pass and move, or hitting a long pass to a wide man or through the middle. (and by long pass, I don't lump it to the big man)

What we do is fanny dangle about it at the back and as we don't have either the ability to move the ball quickly in midfield nor an obvious pace outlet on the wings, we end moving slowly like pawn on a chessboard until giving the ball way.

The criminal thing is that KB clearly planned for this as a tactic, and yet never got the personnel in who could play it.

I would argue we have more players suited to this than we do long direct hoof ball!!

I watched a lot of that last season.....we barely won a game in 20, were 3 mins from relegation and it was universally moaned about on here by most fans....

 

[Harry Bullocks]

We don't have the personnel to play the build from the back game. Watch any team that does it properly and they have the ability to move the ball quickly - be that fast sharp pass and move, or hitting a long pass to a wide man or through the middle. (and by long pass, I don't lump it to the big man)

What we do is fanny dangle about it at the back and as we don't have either the ability to move the ball quickly in midfield nor an obvious pace outlet on the wings, we end moving slowly like pawn on a chessboard until giving the ball way.

The criminal thing is that KB clearly planned for this as a tactic, and yet never got the personnel in who could play it.

Happy ...ummm, days in the Minerva, or, the other war zone (pub), approx. 100 yards away , heading towards the pier....sigh

 

[Angell Delight]

Pep Guardiola has a lot to answer for, this wouldn’t even be an issue if he hadn’t arrived in England with this “fancy new style of play.” NO football fan should ever be s***ing themselves every time their team gets a goal-kick.... ?

 

[KiwiRob]

As @Tombstone Blues said, you have to play any system well to get results.
Lumping it forward isn’t any better option than passing it around the back if you’re lumping it aimlessly and it’s coming straight back to us, putting us under just as much pressure.

The key point, however, is to reduce the chances of unenforced errors at the back. How does Sol know our forwards are incapable of controlling or battling for quickly executed but poorly directed clearances? Given Southend's dire defensive track record to date, the greatest risk at present is to continue playing out of defense in a ponderous fashion which invites opposition pressure and hence mistakes. The most revealing statistic of the Oxford game is that Southend had over 60% possession and still lost 4-0.