[Archived] Hull Preview

[Drunx2002]

You can only beat what's put in front of you. I really don't understand those who won't give credit when it's due. You'll probably retaliate with 'I don't understand those who give credit regardless' but I wanted Sam gone after the Citeh game. He's proven me and others wrong. We AREN'T playing one dimensional football!!! We've PROVEN that since the City game! How biased against the manager ARE some people?

I'm not saying you're wrong. Neither are my posts intended as retaliation.

I'm not giving Allardyce credit for beating 10 man Hull at home, any manager of a Premiership team should be able to do that with their eyes shut. In my opinion he is still fitting the players into his system and he still has no idea of our best 11 or our best formation. If we maintain this run and consistently challenge teams in the top half at home and occasionally away then my opinion of him (and his football) may change.

I'm not letting scraped home wins against poor teams cloud my recent memories of a sound beating at Stoke City and a considerable winless run.

[mellison24]

I'm not saying you're wrong. Neither are my posts intended as retaliation.

I'm not giving Allardyce credit for beating 10 man Hull at home, any manager of a Premiership team should be able to do that with their eyes shut. In my opinion he is still fitting the players into his system and he still has no idea of our best 11 or our best formation. If we maintain this run and consistently challenge teams in the top half at home and occasionally away then my opinion of him (and his football) may change.

I'm not letting scraped home wins against poor teams cloud my recent memories of a sound beating at Stoke City and a considerable winless run.

You don't have to. My point is that we won against who we faced. Surely you can praise him for THIS win? We ALL know what has happened this season, but I just think he deserves some credit for this win. Hull were poor, yes. But we weren't; we beat them = hooray and 3 more points. What about if we beat Bolton? Would you hold the same view? (I don't intend to be aggressive in THIS post and I apologise for wrongly perceiving your posts as retaliation).

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

I'm not giving Allardyce credit for beating 10 man Hull at home, any manager of a Premiership team should be able to do that with their eyes shut.

I wonder how Sunderland felt after losing out to 10 man Portsmouth ?

[zakk]

Grade the team in game against Hull

http://www.voteplayers.com/Matches/Blackburn-Rovers-vs-Hull-City-02102010-4013.aspx

[Miker]

We aren't sending high, accurate balls in and winning them, we are lumping it into the proverbial mixer. A big difference. And if that's so much harder to do, why are we making it more difficult for ourselves playing that way?!?

It's far more difficult to play, short, passing football hence why the teams who have risen to be the best in World football over the years have all played that way (Brazil 1970 & 1982, current Barcelona team, Holland/Ajax in the 70's, Liverpool in the 70's/80's etc etc.)

We are playing pure percentage football, i.e. get the ball into the box as quickly as possible, because the greater the number of times it's lumped in, the greater percentage chance of us getting a lucky knockdown, or there being a defensive slip, or us winning a header etc. There is in no way as much skill involved in this as playing proper, pass and move football.

And all our players could play a passing game, and would no doubt prefer to. Put yourself in their position - you are a highly paid professional footballer, who's trained for years at every aspect of the game. But instead of letting you play to your best ability, and use the skill you've gaine over many years all your boss wants you to do is kick it high and long and early. Wouldn't you be a bit p*ssed off?

It's far more difficult to play short, passing football if your passing is horrible. Passing is the most basic skill a footballer learns though. Passing is the easiest skill to learn, it's pass and move which is difficult. The sort of pass and move that got Olsson's goal against Hull. Passing and moving the ball not only requires good skills, but it requires excellent reactions and agility. Moreover, the team needs to be so familiar with each other that they can read each other's game and know exactly where to be to receive the pass, and know exactly where to pass it. Having watched our team all season, I am not convinced at all that we are good enough at doing this. A great example of this was the amount of times Diouf and Olsson looked out of sync on the wing and whenever Olsson would get into a position to receive the ball, Diouf would ignore him. Our players simply don't possess the attributes to achieve this style of football, as a team like Arsenal does. We have some players that can achieve this, such as Dunn, Kalinic, Olsson and Hoilett, but not everyone. This is why I said that we are bringing some players through to the first team that can play like this and hopefully will be using it to our advantage more next season, but up to this point we aren't able to.

Long ball tactics may appear to be basic, but they are far from it. They are basic for our defenders who are asked to get the ball out of our half as quickly as possible without much thought, but not for our midfielders and strikers. Aerial balls require players to be stronger than their opponent, anticipate the flight of the ball, position themselves to head it and then successfully actually jump up and head it both accurately and with power. It takes a lot more physical ability, football knowledge and skill to achieve than normal passing. It works for our players because we have a lot of them that are good in the air. They can deal with the long balls and they can bring them down into areas where we can be dangerous.

From what I have seen, we HAVE mixed it around quite often. I don't care if the percentage was something like 80% direct passing, 20% short passing. The fact is, we do play pass and move at times and we have attempted to be more creative with the ball. Playing aerially is our biggest strength though and you can't really dispute it. Sam always talks about how having Samba is great because he strikes fear into the opposition at set pieces. Challenging for aerial balls requires a lot of strength and bravery, something that's much harder to teach than passing. Our players are able to achieve this, Sam wants us to be stronger than the opposition, he wants us to outmuscle them and break up their game. I personally don't see anything wrong with that. Would I prefer pass and move football? Yes I would, but I'm not that horrified by our long balls if I have to watch them.

I should say that I played as a winger, so a great deal of my time was spent on practicing crossing and long balls. There is no greater feeling then sending a long, high ball to a teammate and having it land right in front of them, or score direct from a corner or from a free kick. If you think that the players are sending these long balls and feel depressed about it, then I would suggest you are wrong. There's something artistic in the way a ball sails through the air as it rockets toward a teammate.

I should say that I played as a winger, so a great deal of my time was spent on practicing crossing and long balls. There is no greater feeling then sending a long, high ball to a teammate and having it land right in front of them, or score direct from a corner or from a free kick. If you think that the players are sending these long balls and feel depressed about it, then I would suggest you are wrong. There's something artistic in the way a ball sails through the air as it rockets toward a teammate.

Actually, scratch that. Scoring a goal feels much better

[Drunx2002]

I love this board. Miker I love your post.

Labour should employ you immediately as their spin doctor in advance of the looming election!

Full marks for making long ball tactics sound sexy and artistic! I'm not so sure that Kalinic feels the same way as he scampers around on his own beneath another scud missile from Robinson though. I do agree that it can be effective and that teams can find it difficult to play against. It doesn't make it pretty or attractive to watch though and pass and move football is effective simply because it requires you to outthink your opponents rather than outmuscle them which takes less effort. A mix is what is required and if we're on the road to that then fine.

I'd hazard a guess that Olsson and Diouf weren't on the same wavelength because they have hardly any experience of playing together. If we can get a settled team playing this mix of football then I'll be content. Not much to ask?!

[Plastic Head]

I thought Andrews played alright today. I personally don't think him and N'Zonzi are the ideal midfield pairing but Andrews certainly wasn't awful today like a few people are making out.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

He might have looked OK from Southampton, but from the Riverside he looked like a spastic on acid.

It's far more difficult to play short, passing football if your passing is horrible. Passing is the most basic skill a footballer learns though. Passing is the easiest skill to learn, it's pass and move which is difficult.

I generally agree, but quality players make bad passes good (See Mr A Shearer 1992-96)

[BuckyRover]

I wonder how Sunderland felt after losing out to 10 man Portsmouth ?

Sunderland were only playing with 9 men when they conceded the equaliser.

You have put forward a terrible argument.

[Majiball]

I was relieved we got the win last night it was most definitely needed and very welcome.

The debate on here is really quite interesting and I know exactly where I sit on all the issues.

Direct football requires nowhere near the skill level that pass and move does, in fact in todays age it generally plays into the strengths of most premierships defenders. Can our players play short passes to players strongest foot or into the space in front of them in time with their runs, yes of course they can. I've pointed out before just what you have to go through to make an Elite footballer, let alone a premiership footballer. If the skill levels required for direct football are so high then why do I not see the best teams in the world playing this way, they do have the most skillful players? Simple fact is it isn't and never will be. The best players play the best option at the time whether that be a short ball a or a longer ball, but they do not persistently play the same type of ball.

Even the FA are no saying they'd like to see it disappear and do not recommend it for Youth training as its considered low skill and detrimental to skill acquisition and their development.

I made a short one line post the other day highlighting an issue that contributes to the deterioration of skills, you might also want to consider that if the opposition trains like this every day then yes they will be far more proficient at it than we are.

Birmingham are a great example (this season), they have a team that isn't full of great players and yet they don't just play direct. We are capable of playing that way but only if thats what we encourage them to do on the training pitch.

The style however isn't as bad as it was last year, but for people to claim these guys can't and aren't capable of playing a more balanced style is wrong (no offence meant or personal attacks). Most of our players play for their country, they are the best of the best, but yet people on here believe that they are not capable of producing good football. I agree we don't have the quality that we did a couple of years ago, but we haven't dropped that far, that this is the only way.

Our players can do it, but it will take time for them to get back in the habit of it and to become proficient at it.

[philipl]

Thanks to grizfoot and majiball for expressing how I feel as well.

[Majiball]

Thanks to grizfoot and majiball for expressing how I feel as well.

No problems philipl.

PS fancy deleting a PM or two????

[Paul]

It's far more difficult to play short, passing football if your passing is horrible...................

Thanks for that, knew I'd been missing something somewhere these last 45 years or so. Still doesn't address the fact there is a huge difference between a good long ball and the hit and hope style Rovers use. As I said before TV gives a very different impression to the real thing.

[Gav]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

He might have looked OK from Southampton, but from the Riverside he looked like a spastic on acid.

Coffee on keyboard.

[SouthAussieRover]

Thanks for that, knew I'd been missing something somewhere these last 45 years or so. Still doesn't address the fact there is a huge difference between a good long ball and the hit and hope style Rovers use. As I said before TV gives a very different impression to the real thing.

Sorry Paul but I disagree.

Your seat gives you limited impressions of a game.You are seeing it from limited angles as opposed to what pay TV with it's multi cameras and angles can show you.

A person such as you who has a well documented dislike of Sky Sports etc wouldn't underdstand those benefits Tv gives a very good view of what you can't see from your seat. Especially when the game is shown in realtime rather than some edited highlights on MOTD.

[gumboots]

Sorry Paul but I disagree.

Your seat gives you limited impressions of a game.You are seeing it from limited angles as opposed to what pay TV with it's multi cameras and angles can show you.

A person such as you who has a well documented dislike of Sky Sports etc wouldn't underdstand those benefits Tv gives a very good view of what you can't see from your seat. Especially when the game is shown in realtime rather than some edited highlights on MOTD.

Completely different experiences. Actually being there allows you to see for yourself. TV shows you what an editor thinks you should be watching at any given time. Watching on tv may sometimes give you a more accurate view but it doesn't give you the whole pitch at any given time. It also doesn't give you the way it feels to be there and sometimes the way you feel you are seeing the match is as important as what you actually see. We still see too many hopeful long balls where you know the opposition defence is just going to hit it straight back at us. TV or at the ground that doesn't change. We may play some decent stuff in amongst it, but it still feels wearisome to watch us sometimes. I'm glad we're winning because otherwise it would be very difficult to sit through most games and retain a sense of perpective.

[den]

The debate on here is really quite interesting and I know exactly where I sit on all the issues.

The style however isn't as bad as it was last year, but for people to claim these guys can't and aren't capable of playing a more balanced style is wrong (no offence meant or personal attacks).

Our players can do it, but it will take time for them to get back in the habit of it and to become proficient at it.

There is no doubt that our lads could play a "more balanced style" Maj. We just need to cut out the long punts upfield from Robbo and take a few short throw-ins, for starters. I think the discussion is more about this desire to be "entertained". To me, entertainment is about defenders bringing the ball down and playing it short to the lads in front of them. It's about watching a Tugay masterclass. It's about having wingers who can go past a full back and put in a pin point cross. It's about strikers turning and hitting the target from 25 yards out. It's about strikers powering home headers. More than anything it's about exciting the fans with goals.

In our squad, who's going to do any of those things. Many people on here reckon you can teach just about any skill to a player. IMO, you can't.

[mellison24]

There is no doubt that our lads could play a "more balanced style" Maj. We just need to cut out the long punts upfield from Robbo and take a few short throw-ins, for starters. I think the discussion is more about this desire to be "entertained". To me, entertainment is about defenders bringing the ball down and playing it short to the lads in front of them. It's about watching a Tugay masterclass. It's about having wingers who can go past a full back and put in a pin point crossknock it in off the keepers heel . It's about strikers turning and hitting the target from 25 yards out. It's about strikers powering home headers. More than anything it's about exciting the fans with goals.

In our squad, who's going to do any of those things. Many people on here reckon you can teach just about any skill to a player. IMO, you can't.

For me, the entertainment stems from scoring ANY sort of goal and winning games. Everything you mention would be an excellent bonus. And it is KIND of happening in fits and bursts since the Citeh game. Olsson's goal being a fine example of the bits in bold.

[ada2020]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

He might have looked OK from Southampton, but from the Riverside he looked like a spastic on acid.

Coffee on keyboard.

Ditto

[Ozz]

Den-How about the 30 minutes against Villa away in the semi? I though the football was excellent. There are other examples this season, a spell at The Reebok, Chelsea in the league cup and so on.

I think once we are fairly safe, and I hope that is sooner not later, then I would tell the lads to play that style again.

I'm not saying we are the new Blue Brazil, but some encouraging spells this season. Just Sam seems to want the %age game most of the time.

[S15]

Den-How about the 30 minutes against Villa away in the semi? I though the football was excellent. There are other examples this season, a spell at The Reebok, Chelsea in the league cup and so on.

I think once we are fairly safe, and I hope that is sooner not later, then I would tell the lads to play that style again.

I'm not saying we are the new Blue Brazil, but some encouraging spells this season. Just Sam seems to want the %age game most of the time.

No, we're the Blue and White Brazil.

[den]

Den-How about the 30 minutes against Villa away in the semi? I though the football was excellent. There are other examples this season, a spell at The Reebok, Chelsea in the league cup and so on.

Good points Ozz. Just the odd spell though. The 6 we let in at Villa, or the 5 we conceded at Chelsea weren't too entertaining though. Villa were caught in the headlights a bit going into the game Carling Cup game ahead, while the Chelsea game was in the Carling Cup as well, where their side was understrength and their performance wasn't as committed as it would otherwise have been? Whadya think?

Still, let's hope we can see more of that [good spells, not conceding 6] .

[Drunx2002]

Den-How about the 30 minutes against Villa away in the semi? I though the football was excellent. There are other examples this season, a spell at The Reebok, Chelsea in the league cup and so on.

Both of those games were managed by Neil McDonald were they not?

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

Sunderland were only playing with 9 men when they conceded the equaliser.

You have put forward a terrible argument.

True - but surely this expensively assembled Sunderland team should have been able to put enough goals past bottom of the table Portsmouth while they had a man advantage ?

[Ozz]

Good points Ozz. Just the odd spell though. The 6 we let in at Villa, or the 5 we conceded at Chelsea weren't too entertaining though. Villa were caught in the headlights a bit going into the game Carling Cup game ahead, while the Chelsea game was in the Carling Cup as well, where their side was understrength and their performance wasn't as committed as it would otherwise have been? Whadya think?

Still, let's hope we can see more of that [good spells, not conceding 6] .

You forgot the 6 at Arsenal too Den! I just think they look a bit more comfortable playing football, OK it's only been a sporadic bursts, and maybe in favourable circumstances, but they can only play whats in front of them.

I'm sure Sam regards it as too much of a gamble to let them play an open game every week, and rightly so I reckon, hence the performances highlighted by you were indeed cup games with little to lose. The WBA situation last year is his proof. But an increasing number of ST holders tell me they are put off big style by the lump it football, and Sam needs to be aware of this as eventually if his results tail off, and we don't seem to be making progress it's his job on the line.

I think it's the progress aspect we really want to see, show us that it won't always be like this.

[Gav]

Den-How about the 30 minutes against Villa away in the semi? I though the football was excellent. There are other examples this season, a spell at The Reebok, Chelsea in the league cup and so on.

Why only the odd spell?

Because the manager won't allow the team to express themselves.

I’d be happier if we played more attacking football away from home, rather than waving the white flag before we’ve even kicked off.

Do I want relegation and more fancy football, no I don't, but as someone mentioned, look at Brum, hardly a penny spent and decent winning football. Look at us under Hughes, fight and determination even though we often got outclassed, but you walked away feeling you'd had a go.