Caught up

...with the game this am. Long tough day in hospital, but I am sorted now. I had to stay in, but found out the score yesterday.
I thought it was a good game. We won our personal battles, we beat them physically, and tactically. Dack showed why he is the best player (by far) in the league, and why he is much better than Powell.
Going in 2-0 meant we where in a weird position. Did we defend, did we go for another? We got caught not wanting to lose the game (which would've been a disaster) meant we sat back a bit too much. They spawned a goal from nothing, having created nothing. But what they do get credit for, is they started to match us physcially, and win their battles second half. I didn't think they showed any class to unlock us, (like we did with them 1st half) and got a really spawny goal to get them back in the game. Their manager had to change things, and he did. It was no surprise when they got the equaliser. I thought it wasn't a free-kick. But both sides suffered poor decisions all game.

I found the fact they celebrated like they won the league very very strange? They still have to win 3 of the 4 games in hand to over-take us. Had we beaten them, we'd have won the league at a canter. A draw doesnt really change anything for auto-promotion. They have to play Sat-Tues for a long period, and win them all. From what I saw yesterday, I dont think they are good enough. They are tough, strong and reacted well to getting a spanking first half. At no point did they cause us loads of problems. And they have a huge task ahead to win almost every game.
Before the game, a point was crucial, in that losing would have put us under massive pressure. Them getting a draw wasn't them winning the league. Like they celebrated.
We simply need to carry our form on. And nothing from yesterday made me doubt we will. It will just be very tight as to who will win the championship, that's all. And they need to win twice a week for a long period of time. I just didnt see anything from them to make me see they will. Had they beat us, I'd have undertsood.

Hmm, sounding a little sour grapes there champs, they well deserved their point. Had it gone on another 10 mins, they were the only ones who were gonna win it. I was was very much relieved to hear the final whistle.

Over 90 mins, as said elsewhere, it was fairly even.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saxo1man41

Hmm, sounding a little sour grapes there champs, they well deserved their point. Had it gone on another 10 mins, they were the only ones who were gonna win it. I was was very much relieved to hear the final whistle.

Over 90 mins, as said elsewhere, it was fairly even.

---

If it sounds that way, I will correct that now! Wigan fully deserved a point. First half we looked like we would easily beat them. Second half they battled really well, and a point was fair. I didn't get why they celebrated on our pitch like they'd won the league? There is a lot of football still to be played. The only thing their goal did was stop us from pulling away to win the league at a canter. You can either look at the result negatively or positively. I have read, witnessed the negavitivity all season. And are you just sussing out Wigan are half decent now? They are a good, strong team, with a decent manager who can change things. At 2-0 down and all going wrong, he did change it, and it worked, they had to after their disasterous start. But fine, focus on them. This is all likely new to you, having not seen much of either side. Not one side in this league has made them look very average, out fought them, out wittted them tactically, had a class above what they did (in Dack, Armstrong etc) so of course they battled to get back in, changed their formation because of us, they where 2-0 down. And haven't been at the top all season by fluke.
To me it looked like 2 sides slugging it out at the top of the league, and neither wanted to lose.
They still have it all to do. If they win every game form now to the end of the season, then they will've deserved it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by champs95

If it sounds that way, I will correct that now! Wigan fully deserved a point. First half we looked like we would easily beat them. Second half they battled really well, and a point was fair. I didn't get why they celebrated on our pitch like they'd won the league? There is a lot of football still to be played. The only thing their goal did was stop us from pulling away to win the league at a canter. You can either look at the result negatively or positively. I have read, witnessed the negavitivity all season. And are you just sussing out Wigan are half decent now? They are a good, strong team, with a decent manager who can change things. At 2-0 down and all going wrong, he did change it, and it worked, they had to after their disasterous start. But fine, focus on them. This is all likely new to you, having not seen much of either side. Not one side in this league has made them look very average, out fought them, out wittted them tactically, had a class above what they did (in Dack, Armstrong etc) so of course they battled to get back in, changed their formation because of us, they where 2-0 down. And haven't been at the top all season by fluke.
To me it looked like 2 sides slugging it out at the top of the league, and neither wanted to lose.
They still have it all to do. If they win every game form now to the end of the season, then they will've deserved it.

---

Phew. Not as bad a telling off as I expected! ;)

I thought it was as was billed. The 2 best sides in the division going toe to toe. A very good game.

By the way, I don't put Wigan's comeback down to anything Mowbray did, or failed to do(unlike elsewhere predictably). Wigan are just a very good team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saxo1man41

I thought it was as was billed. The 2 best sides in the division going toe to toe. A very good game.

By the way, I don't put Wigan's comeback down to anything Mowbray did, or failed to do(unlike elsewhere predictably). Wigan are just a very good team.

---

I agree, what we did see are the best 2 sides in the division. 2 very different styles. We both gave it our best. While I appreciate Wigan's style, I thought Powell could easily have been sent off, and that Morsy.
What a lot wont realise is, when we played them earlier in the season, Bennett was sent off for basically nothing. A 50/50 ball which he won the ball, and also made contact with the player. Powell committed assault at one point on Sunday, and didn't even get booked. And the free kick for their equaliser was never a foul in a million years. I thought the ref cost us over there, and at Ewood. I found them rather cocky aswell, which I didn't like. They have won nothing yet. I still feel the cup will eventually catch up with them. They still have to play Rotherham aswell.

I know you have me down as a happy clapper this season. I actually thought Mowbray made some silly mistakes which handed them the upper hand. To drop Payne and play Evans is beyond strange. Evans was poor again, lucky he didn't get sent off early on. Missed a very good chance. And didn't impose himself as their midfield took control. I thought Bennett looked a class above anything in the first half, he could've played centrally. But Mowbray is choosing to not play one of the divisions best players. I think Payne is one of our best players, so this is one thing I cant agree with TM on. I think Evan's costs us points. And I am not seeing why he doesn't fancy Payne in these big games. Travis wasn't on the bench even? He could've come on at HT which would've tightened us up. Instead he goes for Conway on the bench? We don't need Conway or Evans anywhere near this side. Neither are good enough, as they proved all season. I'm finding things like that annoying.

I don't think the final result changes a great deal. If we'd won, I think we'd have won the league title at a canter. Now its going to be very close. All these sides wont carry on winning every week. As I said above, Wigan play Rotherham in a few weeks, it will be interesting to see who we will want to win at that point?

Champs - don't entirely agree about Payne in that particular match. Evans - having played well against Walsall - was off the pace in this game, but it wasn't Payne's skill we needed in the second half - it was a more physical, aggressive central player. I suspect Travis would have been in, anyway, had it not been for the red card raising doubts. Even Smallwood was out-fought after the break.
It is a bit of a concern - this lack of muscle.
I know some supporters are saying that with Bennett, Payne, Armstrong, Dack and Graham all playing at once, we wouldn't need to worry about defence, but I don't think that's going to work against the better teams. You do need the ball-winners and a bit of Robbie Savage in some situations.
Smallwood has been excellent, but he can't always be expected to do that job alone.
I actually quite like Mowbray's idea of sometimes playing with only three at the back, but even then, I think it's pretty hard to find the right balance if all five of those I mentioned are being used as creative/attacking players at the same time.
I wouldn't mind seeing it in action, because it would certainly be exciting football, but Mowbray is a bit more of a pragmatist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AucklandRover

Champs - don't entirely agree about Payne in that particular match. Evans - having played well against Walsall - was off the pace in this game, but it wasn't Payne's skill we needed in the second half - it was a more physical, aggressive central player. I suspect Travis would have been in, anyway, had it not been for the red card raising doubts. Even Smallwood was out-fought after the break.
It is a bit of a concern - this lack of muscle.
I know some supporters are saying that with Bennett, Payne, Armstrong, Dack and Graham all playing at once, we wouldn't need to worry about defence, but I don't think that's going to work against the better teams. You do need the ball-winners and a bit of Robbie Savage in some situations.
Smallwood has been excellent, but he can't always be expected to do that job alone.
I actually quite like Mowbray's idea of sometimes playing with only three at the back, but even then, I think it's pretty hard to find the right balance if all five of those I mentioned are being used as creative/attacking players at the same time.
I wouldn't mind seeing it in action, because it would certainly be exciting football, but Mowbray is a bit more of a pragmatist.

---

I just don't see what Evans actually gives us? He isn't tough, doesn't win enough, doesn't use the ball well, doesn't dominate. Bennett is tough, as is Smallwood. Dack takes a real battering from defenders, never reacts, always gets back up and carries on. He is very tough.
I just think Wigan are a very big, physical side. That's their game. Not much skill involved, or creating numerous chances. We play the exact opposite. we attack, we create chances. I have never seen us lose a physical battle all season long. Its simply not true about our lack of strength. Our first goal vrs Wigan came from a really hard, physical challenge from Lenihan, and the passing move quickly from front to back was excellent. Exactly what we are about. What we aren't, is a bunch of cloggers. So I don't agree in taking out of the side, a very good footballer, to replace him with a clogger, who adds nothing. Had he been effective, I'd have understood it? But as always he wasn't.
You need a footballer, with a footballing brain to stand and protect the defence. That person is not Evans. Payne is more than capable. What sets us aside, are our players like Armstrong, Dack, Chapman, Graham, Payne etc ....when we needed protecting on Sunday, our 'midfield shield' wilted. Bennett could easily have stepped in, or Travis.
I just think TM made a few errors in the side he picked, and definitely in the bench.

I think Lenihan is a major exception. He certainly provides the "bite" we need. What I was referring to was the fact that in several matches this season, we have suddenly lost the midfield to teams relying mainly on strength and aggression. Smallwood, Bennett and Travis have all done well most of the time in the holding roles, but it has still happened for spells in those games. I don't think Payne is the answer in that respect. His qualities are much more in the area of attack and creativity.
I am not a major supporter of Evans; it's just that his weaknesses have been exaggerated. He very much looked the part against Walsall, but he does vanish in some games.
The issue I have is this: many posters elsewhere are knocking TM for playing two holding midfielders, but if we use Bennett, Armstrong Payne, Dack and Graham as attackers, the balance just looks wrong.
However, if Travis comes in alongside Smallwood, one of the five mentioned has to be dropped. Then we have Chapman, Antonsson and Samuel to take into account - not to mention Nuttall, Conway, etc.
I am not as convinced as you that our superior attacking skills are all it takes to win matches. The Wigan game suggested otherwise. Coyle put out teams to win 3-2/4-3, but it often came unstuck.
Mowbray is never going to be gung-ho. I think that team with all the creative players in would undoubtedly please the eye and produce some good victories, but I think back to teams like Northampton, and I don't think it's the only answer.
Some of those same posters also say we should have the more attack-minded Bell replacing Williams, but the same reservations apply.
I would actually like to see the team below in action, simply to answer some of the questions:
Raya
Nyambe Lenihan Mulgrew Bell
Smallwood
Bennett Payne Armstrong
Dack
Graham.
I wonder if Mowbray will take the risk at some point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AucklandRover

I think Lenihan is a major exception. He certainly provides the "bite" we need. What I was referring to was the fact that in several matches this season, we have suddenly lost the midfield to teams relying mainly on strength and aggression. Smallwood, Bennett and Travis have all done well most of the time in the holding roles, but it has still happened for spells in those games. I don't think Payne is the answer in that respect. His qualities are much more in the area of attack and creativity.
I am not a major supporter of Evans; it's just that his weaknesses have been exaggerated. He very much looked the part against Walsall, but he does vanish in some games.
The issue I have is this: many posters elsewhere are knocking TM for playing two holding midfielders, but if we use Bennett, Armstrong Payne, Dack and Graham as attackers, the balance just looks wrong.
However, if Travis comes in alongside Smallwood, one of the five mentioned has to be dropped. Then we have Chapman, Antonsson and Samuel to take into account - not to mention Nuttall, Conway, etc.
I am not as convinced as you that our superior attacking skills are all it takes to win matches. The Wigan game suggested otherwise. Coyle put out teams to win 3-2/4-3, but it often came unstuck.
Mowbray is never going to be gung-ho. I think that team with all the creative players in would undoubtedly please the eye and produce some good victories, but I think back to teams like Northampton, and I don't think it's the only answer.
Some of those same posters also say we should have the more attack-minded Bell replacing Williams, but the same reservations apply.
I would actually like to see the team below in action, simply to answer some of the questions:
Raya
Nyambe Lenihan Mulgrew Bell
Smallwood
Bennett Payne Armstrong
Dack
Graham.
I wonder if Mowbray will take the risk at some point.

---

That's pretty much the side I would go with Auks. Maybe with Williams instead of Bell (who I do really like, but think he's more for next season) simply to add a bit of balance. Armstrong/ Bell would be too attacking, as Armstrong wont provide the same cover that Bennett would on the right.

I do feel TM is very much a horses for courses manager, he will generally pick a different side/formation to play Blackpool, than the one he picked vrs Wigan. As they are are 2 different styles we are facing. In the end, it simply boils down to our 11 vrs their 11.
We learnt after 3/4 games in this league (the hard way and have been playing catch up ever since) that you have to match the Oppo physically, but once you do that, our class will generally shine through. Looking at our how many times we have dropped points, its rare that our style of play doesn't work. I can think of only one game, Plymouth away, in the past 6 months where it just didn't work. 6 months is a hell of a long time in football especially playing Sat-Tues.
While with anything you strive for the best, as fans we all seek perfection, which is a rare thing in football, at any level.
From what I've seen this season, both us and Wigan are clearly the best 2 sides in the division. They do it by playing direct. They are dirty, they are big, they rely on set plays. They don't conceed many. They win by the odd goal.
We play good football. Its attacking, we have several flair players. We have scored the most goals in the entire division (think Wigan scored 7 in just one game!!!) and we play a style of football I would much prefer to pay money to watch. And the most important, we are far younger on average than Wigan. Both pretty much will get the same amount of points, both will achieve the same. It boils down to style. I know which one I would prefer to watch. And what we need to stick to.
If we carry on doing what we have all season, then we will go up, simple as that. Last week changed nothing. Wigan are no closer to us now, than they were 7 days ago. Let them do the worrying, and catching, and play twice a week. We will just calmly go about our business. Like we have for months and months and months on a consistent, high level of football.