[Archived] Portsmouth Vs Blackburn Rovers

[1864roverite]

I disagree totally with the poster who thinks O'Hara would not come North because he is a so caqlled London boy. He is not going to get in Spurs team anytime soon look whats in front of him and they have signed yet another midfielder.

The other London teams wouldnt really want him with exception of Fulham and I actually think we offer a better option than Roy and his boyz do.

If we were looking at a decent left footed midfielder then he fits the bill, young, fit and can play football and he has the experience to bring on the likes on NZonzi and Linganzi, even for one so young.

I am certain Sam could twist Harry's arm to let him go.

[philipl]

But would the WAG let him?

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Poor lack of "balls" to take more risks, especially after their red.

I wouldve thought we would have more urgency after the pressure was off us!

I'll take the point but have to agree with Bobby G here.Sounded like the game was there for the taking?

[grizfoot]

Why are people so obsessed with 4 4 bloody 2?

None of the best teams in the world play it but people go on about it like it's borderline genius!

Different teams need different formations and our current personnel don't suit the current formation in my opinion. Defensively it works okay but going forward our players are simply not quick enough to get in support of the lone striker.

It works for the best teams because they've got quicker and better players, Chelsea played with Anelka upfront on his own today but you wouldn't know it because he got such quick support from Malouda, J.Cole, Lampard, ect.

Similiarly Liverpool play one upfront but they've got the maginficent talent of Torres who's capable of creating something out of nothing, whereas we've got Roberts for all his running he's not a potent goal threat. Everton play one upfront but they have a superb midfield with creativity and pace capable of bursting from midfield and scoring goals. We just simply don't have that, Pedersen and Diouf and simply too slow to play in this formation as it requires them to cover ground quickly, neither have any pace by Premiership standards and therefore we get the fimiliar sight this season of our lone striker trying to bounce off about three or four defenders in order to try and get a shot on goal.

I've not seen today's game but I hear we were firmly on top and had countless cross after cross coming in but no one on the end of it. The switch to 4-4-2 came very late, I was suprised at this since I'd expect the switch to be made almost as soon as Pompey went down to ten men. 4-4-2 suits our players much better, enables Diouf and Pedersen to play from where they are better suited to, i.e. deeper postions and being able to put in decent crosses. Having two strikers in the the box instead of the one doubles the chance of us scoring a goal, since our midfielders in the 4-5-1 formation very rarely get anywhere near the box.

Especially against depleted Portsmouth who totally nullified our 4-5-1 earlier in the season at home but couldn't handle us second half when we threw on more strikers. Surely a similiar tactic should have been adopted after they went down to ten men?

Staying 4-5-1 stinks of negative play in my opinion, we are basically safe now and we had more to gain by going out for the win rather than to lose getting caught on the counter.

However given our away form this season, I'd say we should be happy with any points on the road. We also hit the post a couple of times I believe, so it could have very easily been all three points instead of just the one.However compared to the dross served up at the Dingledome we are indeed just like Barcelona.

[Balwer]

Just back to London after a trip down to the South Coast. I have to say that our chances opened up after Grella came on. NZonzi may do well in the air but he doesn't pick passes, except to the person standing next to him (a la Andrews). Along with Grella I thought the whole defense was good, and Salgado was good coming forward. The problem from where I was sitting was that the weather wasn't conducive to the overlap we tried down the wings. The players kept losing their footing and were unable to make decent crosses. Pedersen abandoned the long throws too. That pitch, as I said to Rovers Dan, is awful. The goal we sat behind had about a 50cm rise, it's almost like something or someone is buried right under the penalty spot.

Roberts didn't handle the role well today and Dunn was pretty poor. NZonzi was as I described above and Peds didn't do an awful lot. Diouf was patchy, but Hoilett wasn't much better when he came on.

Honestly think we would have won 2 or 3 nil on a dry pitch.

Very frustrating game to attend but the Rovers support was very good, wasn't expecting more than 300 people but would have been 1000 or so.

Oh and O'Hara is excellent, would love to have him at Rovers.

Want to see Grella start against United next to either NZonzi or Pedersen.

Oh and the 4-4-2 v 4-5-1 argument is a moot point. 2 up front is great if you can do well enough in the midfield with 4 people. At the moment we can't do that. Our midfield is poor but as I said earlier, Grella was very good when he came on so there's some hope (if he can stay fit).

[1864roverite]

Apparently he pulled a thigh getting back on the coach !!! (joke I may add)

[Balwer]

Apparently he pulled a thigh getting back on the coach !!! (joke I may add)

I was shocked he got through the 30 minutes unscathed!

[John]

Oh and the 4-4-2 v 4-5-1 argument is a moot point. 2 up front is great if you can do well enough in the midfield with 4 people. At the moment we can't do that. Our midfield is poor but as I said earlier, Grella was very good when he came on so there's some hope (if he can stay fit).

Agree and also on Grella.

Some people go well OTT on the 2 strikers issue. We had plenty of the ball but struggle to use it effectively. Also had some OK chances today even though not as many clear cut ones as in previous matches.

Poor result today, as Pompey had plenty of players missing, were down to ten men and have a semi-final next week.

[Ossydave]

Different teams need different formations and our current personnel don't suit the current formation in my opinion. Defensively it works okay but going forward our players are simply not quick enough to get in support of the lone striker.

It works for the best teams because they've got quicker and better players, Chelsea played with Anelka upfront on his own today but you wouldn't know it because he got such quick support from Malouda, J.Cole, Lampard, ect.

Similiarly Liverpool play one upfront but they've got the maginficent talent of Torres who's capable of creating something out of nothing, whereas we've got Roberts for all his running he's not a potent goal threat. Everton play one upfront but they have a superb midfield with creativity and pace capable of bursting from midfield and scoring goals. We just simply don't have that, Pedersen and Diouf and simply too slow to play in this formation as it requires them to cover ground quickly, neither have any pace by Premiership standards and therefore we get the fimiliar sight this season of our lone striker trying to bounce off about three or four defenders in order to try and get a shot on goal.

I've not seen today's game but I hear we were firmly on top and had countless cross after cross coming in but no one on the end of it. The switch to 4-4-2 came very late, I was suprised at this since I'd expect the switch to be made almost as soon as Pompey went down to ten men. 4-4-2 suits our players much better, enables Diouf and Pedersen to play from where they are better suited to, i.e. deeper postions and being able to put in decent crosses. Having two strikers in the the box instead of the one doubles the chance of us scoring a goal, since our midfielders in the 4-5-1 formation very rarely get anywhere near the box.

Especially against depleted Portsmouth who totally nullified our 4-5-1 earlier in the season at home but couldn't handle us second half when we threw on more strikers. Surely a similiar tactic should have been adopted after they went down to ten men?

Staying 4-5-1 stinks of negative play in my opinion, we are basically safe now and we had more to gain by going out for the win rather than to lose getting caught on the counter.

However given our away form this season, I'd say we should be happy with any points on the road. We also hit the post a couple of times I believe, so it could have very easily been all three points instead of just the one.However compared to the dross served up at the Dingledome we are indeed just like Barcelona.

to play 442 well needs 2 pacey wingers who deliver good balls in, i.e rippers and wilcox. We don't have that and I fail to see how shoving 2 up top would have helped today.

[American]

Classic Kamara:

Just back - thought we had some great chances the first half, but once they were down to 10 men, we resorted to lumping it into the box instead of having our players run the ball in. Defense was great, as usual, but Dunn was useless and we just lacked a finishing touch.

As for the city itself - as dreadful as the match.

[magicalmortensleftpeg]

That Chris Kamara moment made my day when i saw it this afternoon. Legend. Both the match and result were forgettable so lets move on.

[AggyBlue]

I was shocked he got through the 30 minutes unscathed!

Is there an official statement from the club?

[47er]

Are you sure?

They've lost 2-0 to Spurs. 5-0 to Chelsea. 1-4 to Liverpool. 1-2 to Birmingham. 1-2 to Stoke. 5-0 to United. Fulham 1-0 and Man City 2-0.

Beat Hull 3-2 and Burnley 2-1.

Some of those are tough games, but they've hardly been on a good streak!

We'll win.

I warned you didn't I? Never underestimate Rovers' capacity to disappoint! What stood out today was the lack of pace. Why is Kalinic on the outer at the moment?

[47er]

ur not getting it are you. What I'm saingbis, had we gone 4-4-2 & lost then people would of blamed Sam for it.

Once they were down to ten men surely it was time to bring on a second striker? Sam left it too late.

I can see why he claims missed chances as the main reason we didn't get all 3 points but we were never impressive (despite 55% possession) and a large proportion of the chances fell to defenders from set pieces.We just do not create enough from open play because we lack the skills and pace in key areas.

Still we got a point away and kept a clean sheet. Disappointed but hardly devastated.

[Parsonblue]

I thought we gave a decent performance today in increasingly difficult circumstances. The heavy rain in the second half made the pitch very difficult. A combination of good goalkeeping, the woodwork and some poor finishing prevented us from winning a game which we totally dominated. The system we are playing is creating chances but we are not clinical in front of goal. It was ironic that after the Rovers fans had shouted for Kalinic, his main contribution after coming on, was getting in the way of a goalbound effort - it was that sort of day.

While the result was a disappointment, I was happy enough with the performance and, once again, the team look to be fully in tune with what the manager is asking them to do. Again the younger players, Jones, Nzonzi, Olsson and Hoilett showed great promise. I thought Pedersen and Diouf got through a tremendous amount of work while Salgado, Samba and Givet were excellent in defence. With better finishing and a little more luck in front of goal today would have been a comfortable victory.

[roversmum]

It was freezing cold and very wet. The photographers at our end were ankle deep in water. The players were very tired towards the end of the match but kept up the pressure until the end - those conditions were horrendous.

Disappointed we didn't win, but we could have played all night and not scored, it was one of those days when the ball was never going in the net. At least we got a point.

[Hughesy]

Disappointed we didn't win, but we could have played all night and not scored, it was one of those days when the ball was never going in the net. At least we got a point.

Thats what I said early - today Lady Luck wasnt with us!

[Tom]

Just seen MOTD what the hell was Robbo doing for that one that Givet had off the line?

[herbergeehh]

Has anyone discussed what a gem Phil Jones is, yet? Such composure, and actually a fairly good passer of the ball too. Eighteen? Brilliant.

[grizfoot]

to play 442 well needs 2 pacey wingers who deliver good balls in, i.e rippers and wilcox. We don't have that and I fail to see how shoving 2 up top would have helped today.

For the simple matter that they'll be two bodies in the box rather than just the one. Like I said earlier it doubles the chance of us scoring. I'd disagree with needing pacey winers in a 4-4-2 formation, it obviously helps if you do but not a neccessity. Just look at when Bentley played for us, he never had great pace but was able to put in crosses from deep positions, Diouf and Pedersen are capable of doing a similiar thing on a good day.

I'd argue the 4-5-1 formation puts more emphasis on having pacey wingers because your wide players in this formation need to support the lone attacker high up the pitch whilst also getting back to defend. At least with a 4-4-2 the wingers don't need to get as high up the pitch and as we so often do you can put crosses in from deep this would give us the two targets to aim for rather than just the one.

In my opinion the players we've got don't really fit the system at present. We've got no lone target man striker as such, Kalinic looked okay for a time but plays better with a strike partner, Roberts and Di Santo work hard but it's not ideal having your lone striker carrying a low goal threat. Ideally on the wings you'd have pacey wingers but also players who are decent in the air, for the way we play 4-5-1 anyway. Then the final piece in the jigsaw would be a classic box-to-box midfielder capable of scoring goals from midfield. I'm sure these are the areas Big Sam's wokring on but I imagine it will take an awful lot of scouting to find anyone within our budget that matches these criteria. But thoose are the type of players you need to make 4-5-1 work as an offensive weapon. Defensively it should in theory at least be a solid formation, and that shows in the number of clean sheets we've got this season.

Currentley game after game we see an isolated lone striker and our main source of goals is set pieces or a piece of individual magic from somewhere (usually Dunn if playing). It's hard to question this tactic since it guided us into the safety of mid-table this season but I'm sorry I can't help but wonder if we'd played a traditional 4-4-2 all season where we'd be now. I for one would certainly like us to play this formation more often espeically when against a bottom of the table side down to ten men and depleted with injuries.

I notice a lot of people bring up the poor weather conditions, but that shouldn't be a valid reason not to change to a more offensive tactic surely?

[Hughesy]

Has anyone discussed what a gem Phil Jones is, yet? Such composure, and actually a fairly good passer of the ball too. Eighteen? Brilliant.

Very unlucky not to get his 1st goal today too!

4 games played with him & Samba together - just 2 conceded!

[RoyRover]

Different teams need different formations and our current personnel don't suit the current formation in my opinion. Defensively it works okay but going forward our players are simply not quick enough to get in support of the lone striker.

It works for the best teams because they've got quicker and better players, Chelsea played with Anelka upfront on his own today but you wouldn't know it because he got such quick support from Malouda, J.Cole, Lampard, ect.

Similiarly Liverpool play one upfront but they've got the maginficent talent of Torres who's capable of creating something out of nothing, whereas we've got Roberts for all his running he's not a potent goal threat. Everton play one upfront but they have a superb midfield with creativity and pace capable of bursting from midfield and scoring goals. We just simply don't have that, Pedersen and Diouf and simply too slow to play in this formation as it requires them to cover ground quickly, neither have any pace by Premiership standards and therefore we get the fimiliar sight this season of our lone striker trying to bounce off about three or four defenders in order to try and get a shot on goal.

I've not seen today's game but I hear we were firmly on top and had countless cross after cross coming in but no one on the end of it. The switch to 4-4-2 came very late, I was suprised at this since I'd expect the switch to be made almost as soon as Pompey went down to ten men. 4-4-2 suits our players much better, enables Diouf and Pedersen to play from where they are better suited to, i.e. deeper postions and being able to put in decent crosses. Having two strikers in the the box instead of the one doubles the chance of us scoring a goal, since our midfielders in the 4-5-1 formation very rarely get anywhere near the box.

Especially against depleted Portsmouth who totally nullified our 4-5-1 earlier in the season at home but couldn't handle us second half when we threw on more strikers. Surely a similiar tactic should have been adopted after they went down to ten men?

Staying 4-5-1 stinks of negative play in my opinion, we are basically safe now and we had more to gain by going out for the win rather than to lose getting caught on the counter.

However given our away form this season, I'd say we should be happy with any points on the road. We also hit the post a couple of times I believe, so it could have very easily been all three points instead of just the one.However compared to the dross served up at the Dingledome we are indeed just like Barcelona.

I was thinking exactly the same thing about our formation. I'm not bitching about the result, because we have had some good ones recently. But I would say that those results have masked over what is becoming a succession of dire performances. Sam has said that very few teams play with a 4-4-2 formation these days and that even the top teams play with one up front. This isn't the case. Man United, Arsenal and Chelsea more or less play with 3 fowards. They are better at playing this formation, because they don't rely on just hoofing the ball up the pitch and hope that Jason Roberts maybe controls it. Their passing and movement is measured so that other players are able to join in with the play once the ball goes into the final third. We naturally don't have the same quality of players, who aren't as good as retaining the ball in the final third and getting players into that area of the pitch quickly enough. As such most of our attacks break down and why we are so reliant on getting corners, free kicks and thrown ins, because that is the only way we are able to produce any chances.

This is why I think that a 4-4-2 formation would suit us better, as it gives our strikers a partner, who is near enough to link up with, hold the ball up, bring other players into play and sustain more pressure. At the moment we boot the ball up the pitch, let Jason Roberts put the defence under some pressure and hope that maybe a corner or thrown in comes from it. It's not so much the style of play that annoys me, more the fact that it is such low percentage football. We create so little from it, that we barely look like scoring in most games. You could argue that we don't have the players to play any other way and it would be hard to disagree. But I do think that to sustain this style of football for an entire season, then we can't expect to win too many games. And even if we do sign a striker in the summer, will he be subjected to the same type of football, that will make it very difficult for him to score either?

[philipl]

Conditions were terrible but Sam missed a trick by failing to turn the screw immediately following the sending off.

Starting with Roberts rather than Kalinic proved to be a mistake. Roberts lack of control was exacerbated by the conditions.

[Parsonblue]

Conditions were terrible but Sam missed a trick by failing to turn the screw immediately following the sending off.

Starting with Roberts rather than Kalinic proved to be a mistake. Roberts lack of control was exacerbated by the conditions.

How was not starting Kalinic a mistake? He did nothing when he came on apart from stopping a goalbound effort. His last two outings have been disappointing and I suspect Sam, wisely, withdrew him from the firing line so his confidence wouldn't suffer and to give Roberts a chance to prove his worth. With hindsight you say it was a mistake. However, with hindsight we'd always pick the right team and never lose a match

After the sending off, Sam brought Hoilett on and went with pace down both wings which enabled us to get behind the Pompey defence - for whom Mokoena was outstanding. I commented during the second half that it was going to be one of those days and so it turned out. However, it certainly wasn't from the lack of effort from all concerned that we didn't get a win and it was another encouraging away performance.

[John]

Those advocating 2 strikers are over-rating our strikeforce.

Roberts can be a handful on occasions, but his finishing is awful.

Kalinic looks very promising but still has got lots to improve on.

Di Santo similar to Kalinic.

The words 'bad luck' has been used quite a bit on this thread, but you could also say bad finishing = lack of quality.

Also, not sure there is a natural partnership from our strikers - plus Dunn is not strong/mobile enough to play in central midfield so it is logical to play him higher up the pitch, in addition, he is one of our better finishers as his goals tally this season illustrates.