We look the same, devoid of pace and creativity

[Shauntaylor85]

We really need to sign a couple more forward players. We are very predictable. You have to question Tinnion and Manning if not. We are close to being able to win games like that but we need better quality players in final third. Thought it was the priority? Appreciate Yu is out but Mehmeti, Sykes and Bell are average to poor and won’t get any side at this level top six. 

[Back of the Dolman]

2 hours ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

We really need to sign a couple more forward players. We are very predictable. You have to question Tinnion and Manning if not. We are close to being able to win games like that but we need better quality players in final third. Thought it was the priority? Appreciate Yu is out but Mehmeti, Sykes and Bell are average to poor and won’t get any side at this level top six. 

Better side today though weren’t we ?

Your title headline doesn’t really go with what you say in your text I don’t think.

I think we did look quicker today and I don’t think that creativity was the issue, it was the final ball that is still the issue.

If the final ball was better then that would be the quality that would improve creativity.

Edited August 10 by Back of the Dolman

[TinMan's left peg]

Really? Pace and creativity we had, it's quality of the final ball and finishing we lacked today 

Edited August 10 by TinMan's left peg

[RedHienz]

One game in and he's off already. 

[redkev]

4 minutes ago, RedHienz said:

One game in and he's off already. 

He was on one by half time

[Malago]

2 hours ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

We really need to sign a couple more forward players. We are very predictable. You have to question Tinnion and Manning if not. We are close to being able to win games like that but we need better quality players in final third. Thought it was the priority? Appreciate Yu is out but Mehmeti, Sykes and Bell are average to poor and won’t get any side at this level top six. 

Why not post this in the match day thread instead of creating another unnecessary thread.  Just more attention seeking.

[Back of the Dolman]

2 minutes ago, Malago said:

Why not post this in the match day thread instead of creating another unnecessary thread.  Just more attention seeking.

If it was attention seeking it worked as it has 5 replies already including yourself

[LondonBristolian]

2 hours ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

We really need to sign a couple more forward players. We are very predictable. You have to question Tinnion and Manning if not. We are close to being able to win games like that but we need better quality players in final third. Thought it was the priority? Appreciate Yu is out but Mehmeti, Sykes and Bell are average to poor and won’t get any side at this level top six. 

We need two more players for sure. But one of those - who'll bring the pace element - is signed but currently injured and the other other - who'll hopefully bring the creativity element - is the number 10 we want to sign. 

You seem to be saying we should do exactly what the club has stated an intention to do. 

[sh1t_ref_again]

2 hours ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

We really need to sign a couple more forward players. We are very predictable. You have to question Tinnion and Manning if not. We are close to being able to win games like that but we need better quality players in final third. Thought it was the priority? Appreciate Yu is out but Mehmeti, Sykes and Bell are average to poor and won’t get any side at this level top six. 

Are you trying to win the most negative poster award, as you were already streets ahead of everyone else even before this post. At this rate you could do a swindon and have it won by Christmas 

[Back of the Dolman]

1 minute ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Are you trying to win the most negative poster award, as you were already streets ahead of everyone else even before this post. At this rate you could do a swindon and have it won by Christmas 

Trying to get us in top spot, god knows what it must be like in Uzbekistan if they’re more miserable than us

[And Its Smith]

Attack the post not the poster

The post is shit 

[cheese]

Just got back - thought we were pretty good in 2/3 of the pitch.  I'm sure Armstrong will score a few and Fally is off the mark.  On the plus side - we're already in 11th place so jobs a good un

[tin]

4 hours ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

We really need to sign a couple more forward players. We are very predictable. You have to question Tinnion and Manning if not. We are close to being able to win games like that but we need better quality players in final third. Thought it was the priority? Appreciate Yu is out but Mehmeti, Sykes and Bell are average to poor and won’t get any side at this level top six. 

Sykes is a better player than he showed today IMO, but it’s a concern of mine that he’s regressed under Manning.

I agree with you on Bell, and I’m not sure Mehmeti will improve. 

Armstrong was a willing runner but I thought he didn’t carry much goal threat. Still, it’s game one in a long season. 

[Malago]

28 minutes ago, cheese said:

Just got back - thought we were pretty good in 2/3 of the pitch.  I'm sure Armstrong will score a few and Fally is off the mark.  On the plus side - we're already in 11th place so jobs a good un

And we’re above Preston, yet people still moan.

[Galley is our king]

2 hours ago, Back of the Dolman said:

Better side today though weren’t we ?

Your title headline doesn’t really go with what you say in your text I don’t think.

I think we did look quicker today and I don’t think that creativity was the issue, it was the final ball that is still the issue.

If the final ball was better then that would be the quality that would improve creativity.

Yes, but we will face much better and much better organised teams in the coming weeks and months.

Three points for the taking and it didn't happen...

[Rudolf Hucker]

2 hours ago, RedHienz said:

One game in and he's off already. 

 

2 hours ago, redkev said:

He was on one by half time

He’s been moaning all ‘kin summer. 

[downendcity]

6 minutes ago, Galley is our king said:

Yes, but we will face much better and much better organised teams in the coming weeks and months.

Three points for the taking and it didn't happen...

......only because one out most experienced players had a head's gone moment.

[Jose]

Don’t really understand the stick the original post got. Bar Armstrong we have no pace in the team and in the final third we were comical at times. Yes we got in good positions but how many really good chances did we CREATE? Not many. That’s what the post is getting at and it’s pretty spot on in my opinion. 
 

The performance was positive on the whole but I struggle to argue with those two points. 

[joe jordans teeth]

4 hours ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

We really need to sign a couple more forward players. We are very predictable. You have to question Tinnion and Manning if not. We are close to being able to win games like that but we need better quality players in final third. Thought it was the priority? Appreciate Yu is out but Mehmeti, Sykes and Bell are average to poor and won’t get any side at this level top six. 

I like to wind the otib faithful up but subtly,like a bull at a gate you 

[INCRED]

4 hours ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

We really need to sign a couple more forward players. We are very predictable. You have to question Tinnion and Manning if not. We are close to being able to win games like that but we need better quality players in final third. Thought it was the priority? Appreciate Yu is out but Mehmeti, Sykes and Bell are average to poor and won’t get any side at this level top six. 

I thought we were by far the better team today, Armstrong caused them a lot of problems and I thought Fally looked good when he came on so both summer signings showed up well and one scored a very good goal

If Williams hadn’t made the rash challenge and given away the Pen then we would all be saying good solid start and both forwards debut was promising 

What was lacking was a bit of composure and better decisions with the final ball. Fine margins as O’Leary kept us in it early on but we could have had 4 or 5 on another day if we had that bit better quality with the final pass 

Early days but with Yu to come in and possibly Twine, we have the makings of a decent team

give it 10 games and see how we have progressed and then you can get a true reflection on what we can achieve this season 

[joe jordans teeth]

1 minute ago, INCRED said:

I thought we were by far the better team today, Armstrong caused them a lot of problems and I thought Fally looked good when he came on so both summer signings showed up well and one scored a very good goal

If Williams hadn’t made the rash challenge and given away the Pen then we would all be saying good solid start and both forwards debut was promising 

What was lacking was a bit of composure and better decisions with the final ball. Fine margins as O’Leary kept us in it early on but we could have had 4 or 5 on another day if we had that bit better quality with the final pass 

Early days but with Yu to come in and possibly Twine, we have the makings of a decent team

give it 10 games and see how we have progressed and then you can get a true reflection on what we can achieve this season 

Spot on 

[joe jordans teeth]

9 minutes ago, Jose said:

Don’t really understand the stick the original post got. Bar Armstrong we have no pace in the team and in the final third we were comical at times. Yes we got in good positions but how many really good chances did we CREATE? Not many. That’s what the post is getting at and it’s pretty spot on in my opinion. 
 

The performance was positive on the whole but I struggle to argue with those two points. 

So nothing has changed since even when Nigel was in charge is what you are saying,let’s wait and see but we have to give the bloke some slack

[marksy]

[Charlie BCFC]

16 minutes ago, Jose said:

Don’t really understand the stick the original post got. Bar Armstrong we have no pace in the team and in the final third we were comical at times. Yes we got in good positions but how many really good chances did we CREATE? Not many. That’s what the post is getting at and it’s pretty spot on in my opinion. 
 

The performance was positive on the whole but I struggle to argue with those two points. 

Fally is very quick, Sykes and Bell are deceptively quick aswell. That’s not even taking into consideration Yu. Last season I could see it but think we’ve addressed that this season.

We had several opportunities where we didn’t make the correct decision, but I can think of plenty of chances we created. Don’t think anyone can disagree that we edged that one

[joe jordans teeth]

11 minutes ago, marksy said:

 

Edited August 10 by joe jordans teeth

[Back of the Dolman]

33 minutes ago, Galley is our king said:

Yes, but we will face much better and much better organised teams in the coming weeks and months.

Three points for the taking and it didn't happen...

Yes it was disappointing to not take the three points but if we get the final ball and decision making spot on then to me it was a more encouraging performance than we saw last season.

Im not sure there was an issue with Hulls organisation as they did create some good chances.

For me their issue is that they couldn’t play out from the back today and that appears to be the style they want to play.

i don’t know if they just had a bad day or they aren’t good enough to do it, but I think our press was pretty good so that would have put pressure on them.

I’m no happyclapper and I’m far from being convinced by LM, but it’s the first day and hopefully people will sharpen up and I don’t think it’s all doom and gloom 

[Jose]

9 minutes ago, joe jordans teeth said:

So nothing has changed since even when Nigel was in charge is what you are saying,let’s wait and see but we have to give the bloke some slack

Um not particularly but what’s Nigel got to do with anything? I also don’t blame Manning too much these are professionals. We got in good positions and the players didn’t finish the move off. Most of it is on them. The rest is above LM for not giving him the funds to improve our squad. 
 

I don’t overly have a problem with LM. His hands are tied. ( Not as much as Pearsons were…. You brought him up) 

 

4 minutes ago, Charlie BCFC said:

Fally is very quick, Sykes and Bell are deceptively quick aswell. That’s not even taking into consideration Yu. Last season I could see it but think we’ve addressed that this season.

We had several opportunities where we didn’t make the correct decision, but I can think of plenty of chances we created. Don’t think anyone can disagree that we edged that one

We edged it 100%. We should have got more. I don’t think that is saying too much as I thought Hull were awful and it was an opportunity missed. I can’t remember their keeper making many saves though. 

[Charlie BCFC]

3 minutes ago, Jose said:

We edged it 100%. We should have got more. I don’t think that is saying too much as I thought Hull were awful and it was an opportunity missed. I can’t remember their keeper making many saves though. 

Definitely one from Mehmeti first half, do agree though we didn’t take enough shots on which is again a problem in the final 3rd. Would be interested to see how we do with Fally on from the start though 

[Back of the Dolman]

43 minutes ago, Jose said:

Don’t really understand the stick the original post got. Bar Armstrong we have no pace in the team and in the final third we were comical at times. Yes we got in good positions but how many really good chances did we CREATE? Not many. That’s what the post is getting at and it’s pretty spot on in my opinion. 
 

The performance was positive on the whole but I struggle to argue with those two points. 

But I don’t believe that we failed to create chances due to lack of pace, for me it was the final ball and making the right decision.

Sykes could of been slipped in wide more than once, Nakhi should of done better when we were through 2on1.

Mehmeti should of got his head up and passed instead of shooting at one point.

Thats final ball and decision making not pace

[Out of his pie crust]

24 minutes ago, joe jordans teeth said:

 

I like what you added there

[joe jordans teeth]

7 minutes ago, Out of his pie crust said:

I like what you added there

You spotted the stray pubic hair I added,nothing gets past you 

[Jose]

12 minutes ago, Back of the Dolman said:

But I don’t believe that we failed to create chances due to lack of pace, for me it was the final ball and making the right decision.

Sykes could of been slipped in wide more than once, Nakhi should of done better when we were through 2on1.

Mehmeti should of got his head up and passed instead of shooting at one point.

Thats final ball and decision making not pace

That’s creativity though surely? 

[Simon79]

Not sure whether we played well or not, as I’ve not seen or heard much. But I’ve seen a few posts saying that we did create chances, it was the final ball that let us down. Well isn’t that the point? The final ball is the most important/difficult/creative pass? Having the ability & vision to execute it is what it’s all about. Again, haven’t seen any highlights or read any match reports, but is the original post wrong if the final ball was lacking? COYR 

[joe jordans teeth]

1 minute ago, Simon79 said:

Not sure whether we played well or not, as I’ve not seen or heard much. But I’ve seen a few posts saying that we did create chances, it was the final ball that let us down. Well isn’t that the point? The final ball is the most important/difficult/creative pass? Having the ability & vision to execute it is what it’s all about. Again, haven’t seen any highlights or read any match reports, but is the original post wrong if the final ball was lacking? COYR 

We did create enough chances to win that game today no doubt about it,is the final ball lacking maybe but the man you need in the box was stretching their defence so work is needed 

[Back of the Dolman]

8 minutes ago, Jose said:

That’s creativity though surely? 

No I don’t think so, creativity is creating something out of nothing or a lock picking pass.

we needed none of that today as we got into plenty of good positions and failed with the basics, get your head up and make the right decisions at the right time.

We didn’t have trouble creating today, we had trouble with our thought processes.

You need creativity when you’ve got a team sitting behind the ball happy to soak pressure so we haven’t seen that this season yet.

If that happens and we can’t break them down repeatedly then yes I’ll accept creativity might be required but for me the title of this thread was wrong when you look at todays game

[Jose]

Just now, Back of the Dolman said:

No I don’t think so, creativity is creating something out of nothing or a lock picking pass.

we needed none of that today as we got into plenty of good positions and failed with the basics, get your head up and make the right decisions at the right time.

We didn’t have trouble creating today, we had trouble with our thought processes.

You need creativity when you’ve got a team sitting behind the ball happy to soak pressure so we haven’t seen that this season yet.

If that happens and we can’t break them down repeatedly then yes I’ll accept creativity might be required but for me the title of this thread was wrong when you look at todays game

I completely disagree. We had an issue CREATING chances today. We got in positions to create chances and were sloppy and lacked conviction. 
 

Anyway agree to disagree. More positives than negatives today that’s for sure. 

[38MC]

1 hour ago, Galley is our king said:

Yes, but we will face much better and much better organised teams in the coming weeks and months.

Three points for the taking and it didn't happen...

You’re right, but it’s the season opener. We ought to also become better and more organised in the coming weeks and months. It’s a marathon, not a sprint. 

I’d say today the positives outweighed the negatives for me and maybe I was too pessimistic coming into this season. I can see with a bit more composure, confidence, and probably a bit more ‘bedding’ in time in competitive games, we could improve on last years position. 

We still have at least one new signing to play - Yu - in the final third, we are going to get a number 10 by hook or crook in reality (albeit I’m not all in on that needing to be Twine like the club seem to be) and Manning will prove his credentials or not by whether we see more cohesion in attacking phases. 

It didnt quite click today, but we can still feel hard done by to not win away from home with a clean sheet. That’s quite promising in and of itself. 

[Back of the Dolman]

2 minutes ago, Jose said:

I completely disagree. We had an issue CREATING chances today. We got in positions to create chances and were sloppy and lacked conviction. 
 

Anyway agree to disagree. More positives than negatives today that’s for sure. 

Yes, we just obviously have different ideas about the relationship of creativity against final ball and decision making.

But I think we agree that it wasn’t bad today compared to some of the stuff we saw last season 

[Rob k]

8 minutes ago, Jose said:

I completely disagree. We had an issue CREATING chances today. We got in positions to create chances and were sloppy and lacked conviction. 
 

Anyway agree to disagree. More positives than negatives today that’s for sure. 

I know what your saying and think your right - we got in some Very good positions today which should have lead to us creating good chances which didnt materialise. We were the better side, especially in the 2nd half and for me, 2pts dropped. 

[Silvio Dante]

I think people need to step back and think of the difference between territory and creativity. And again, I’ll bring up that 45-60 minute period when we were well on top. But it was territory not creativity. We didn’t create much of a chance, despite Hull trying to give the ball away for a pastime.

Now, there’s nothing wrong with territory. A lot of territory often leads to a goal as it’s incessant pressure. It didn’t today, and Tbf, didn’t look like doing so.

Bottom line - we pressed well (with the caveat aided by a team who wanted to play from the back without ability to do so), and we got a lot of territory. But we didn’t have creativity - and that isn’t a new problem.

Edited August 10 by Silvio Dante

[RoystonFoote'snephew]

We don't lack pace, most of the side is fine in that area, but it's how we utilise that pace. It's the creativity we lacked today to put those with pace clear to get shots on goal. 

[Robbored]

To day was the first competitive game of the season after the summer break and was typical with two teams who were both ring rusty.  Not much flow or creativity plus plenty of errors and missed passes, pretty much what was to be expected.

That said - City were holding Hull at bay until the reckless challenge from Williams ultimately cost us two points. Frustrating end to the match.

[BS3rich]

Not long got back..

Thought we played it around with a lot more zip than last season, some nice link up play and getting into good areas..no one wanted to shoot though, was as if we were trying to walk it into the net…enter Fally with that spectacular finish! More of that please.

Really hope Manning can somehow get Sinclair & Fally on the pitch together!! 
 

Up The City!!

[95red]

Not feeling  the love ,thought  we looked very much the same, tippy tatty no end product,no reason  to expect  anything  other than  mid table. 

[38MC]

22 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think people need to step back and think of the difference between territory and creativity. And again, I’ll bring up that 45-60 minute period when we were well on top. But it was territory not creativity. We didn’t create much of a chance, despite Hull trying to give the ball away for a pastime.

Now, there’s nothing wrong with territory. A lot of territory often leads to a goal as it’s incessant pressure. It didn’t today, and Tbf, didn’t look like doing so.

Bottom line - we pressed well (with the caveat aided by a team who wanted to play from the back without ability to do so), and we got a lot of territory. But we didn’t have creativity - and that isn’t a new problem.

Respectively disagree because for me it is.

The focal point of our attacks were new players both playing their first competitive game post pre-season. They aren’t January signings where you’d expect conditioning to not be a problem.  

and I think we all walk away seeing potential in both of our new strikers. It might take a month or two more of training and competitive games for things to click. I saw enough potential today though for a first competitive game. Plenty of frustrations, sure, but they need to be tempered. 

Edited August 10 by 38MC

[The Swan and Cemetery]

From what I saw (via Sky Sports app, which worked well), I’d say net marginal improvement, but have to find someone with composure in the final third, if we’re not going to be embroiled in our usual: 11 going for promotion, 11 trying to avoid relegation, plus Bristol City and Preston antics. 

[marksy]

16 minutes ago, The Swan and Cemetery said:

From what I saw (via Sky Sports app, which worked well), I’d say net marginal improvement, but have to find someone with composure in the final third, if we’re not going to be embroiled in our usual: 11 going for promotion, 11 trying to avoid relegation, plus Bristol City and Preston antics. 

What after one game? Leave it alone mate, have a drink and enjoy your weekend 

[Riaz]

7 hours ago, Shauntaylor85 said:

We really need to sign a couple more forward players. We are very predictable. You have to question Tinnion and Manning if not. We are close to being able to win games like that but we need better quality players in final third. Thought it was the priority? Appreciate Yu is out but Mehmeti, Sykes and Bell are average to poor and won’t get any side at this level top six. 

Lack of pace?

We closed down extremely quickly today and had plenty of chances.

Don’t know what game you watched 

[Out of his pie crust]

Decent creative 10 (twine or a.n.other) and we’d be top 8, without, prob standard mid table

[joe jordans teeth]

talking nonsense as per(myself)

Edited August 10 by joe jordans teeth

[The Swan and Cemetery]

39 minutes ago, marksy said:

What after one game? Leave it alone mate, have a drink and enjoy your weekend 

Not sure offering an opinion on what I’ve seen today is some dramatic over reaction?!? If we don’t improve… we won’t improve. But if you could advise on the number of games before an opinion is allowed, I’d be ever so grateful. 

[Galley is our king]

2 hours ago, downendcity said:

......only because one out most experienced players had a head's gone moment.

Mmmm, yes... and no.

Of course it was a rash and unnecessary challenge but, we should have been out of sight by then.

Coaching on the grass..... does that include crossing the bloody ball? Shooting? Are they told you can only shoot inside the 6 yard box?

They were there for the taking and we didn't

Blame Williams if you want but it's slightly naive IMHO.

[38MC]

1 minute ago, The Swan and Cemetery said:

Not sure offering an opinion on what I’ve seen today is some dramatic over reaction?!? If we don’t improve… we won’t improve. But if you could advise on the number of games before an opinion is allowed, I’d be ever so grateful. 

I think one game where our two focal strikers almost unanimously impressed playing with completely new ‘feeders’ in their first competitive games for months is a tad early. 

It all depends on how whether you’re willing to see green shoots or expect immediate impact (and despite getting a pretty immediate impact from Fally who scored but also showed some pretty good close control, or Armstrong who showed a lot too). 

[The Swan and Cemetery]

9 minutes ago, 38MC said:

I think one game where our two focal strikers almost unanimously impressed playing with completely new ‘feeders’ in their first competitive games for months is a tad early. 

It all depends on how whether you’re willing to see green shoots or expect immediate impact (and despite getting a pretty immediate impact from Fally who scored but also showed some pretty good close control, or Armstrong who showed a lot too). 

In fairness I said net marginal improvement, not sure that’s particularly negative. 

[Silvio Dante]

1 hour ago, 38MC said:

Respectively disagree because for me it is.

The focal point of our attacks were new players both playing their first competitive game post pre-season. They aren’t January signings where you’d expect conditioning to not be a problem.  

and I think we all walk away seeing potential in both of our new strikers. It might take a month or two more of training and competitive games for things to click. I saw enough potential today though for a first competitive game. Plenty of frustrations, sure, but they need to be tempered. 

Decent point tbf. 
 

I think the issue is the, for want of a better term, “support network” isn’t new. And you rely on that to create chances for the front one or two.

I often go back to the quotes from the Dons and Oxford fans re Liam - they struggled to create chances that weren’t “perfect” chances (not a criticism). The higher up you go, the chances of creating a perfect chance are reduced due to defensive nouse.

So - I agree, I see potential on both Sincs and Fally (as I said, they’re both punts) - but I’m not sure we can or should rely on Fally, as today, to create something out of nothing and we need to be better at creating the opportunity. And for avoidance of doubt, that’s not the perfect opportunity. 

Good post tho

[mozo]

2 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

I think people need to step back and think of the difference between territory and creativity. And again, I’ll bring up that 45-60 minute period when we were well on top. But it was territory not creativity. We didn’t create much of a chance, despite Hull trying to give the ball away for a pastime.

Now, there’s nothing wrong with territory. A lot of territory often leads to a goal as it’s incessant pressure. It didn’t today, and Tbf, didn’t look like doing so.

Bottom line - we pressed well (with the caveat aided by a team who wanted to play from the back without ability to do so), and we got a lot of territory. But we didn’t have creativity - and that isn’t a new problem.

I think we created lots of opportunities. 

What is an an opportunity? It's a situation whereby a goal or assist could be crafted because you've found space or created an overload etc.

Your characterisation of territory is not accurate enough in my opinion. That suggest we had the ball lots but didn't create goalscoring opportunities. 

We had loads of dangerous play, we just kept ballsing it up, that's the problem.

So for me, tactics aren't the issue.

Just take advantage of dangerous positions next time. Nahki. Sykesy. Anis. Etc.

[Silvio Dante]

51 minutes ago, mozo said:

I think we created lots of opportunities. 

What is an an opportunity? It's a situation whereby a goal or assist could be crafted because you've found space or created an overload etc.

Your characterisation of territory is not accurate enough in my opinion. That suggest we had the ball lots but didn't create goalscoring opportunities. 

We had loads of dangerous play, we just kept ballsing it up, that's the problem.

So for me, tactics aren't the issue.

Just take advantage of dangerous positions next time. Nahki. Sykesy. Anis. Etc.

To be fair mate, the point you make there about “ballsing it up” is the only pertinent one and actually agrees with what I said. Territory without creating opportunity (ie ballsing it up) is not chance creation. And chance creation is ultimately based on the quality of the chance.

We had 1.25 xG (normal disclaimer that it’s not an arbiter of individual chances but a good arbiter of balance of play). Ipso facto - we had territory but didn’t create chances.

So, I’m happy to say Im accurate. I saw it with my eyes and the stats back me. The question is what do you have that evidences the alternate stance?

I’d be 100% willing to bet Liam is looking at the same stats and balance of play as I am….

[mozo]

9 hours ago, Silvio Dante said:

To be fair mate, the point you make there about “ballsing it up” is the only pertinent one and actually agrees with what I said. Territory without creating opportunity (ie ballsing it up) is not chance creation. And chance creation is ultimately based on the quality of the chance.

We had 1.25 xG (normal disclaimer that it’s not an arbiter of individual chances but a good arbiter of balance of play). Ipso facto - we had territory but didn’t create chances.

So, I’m happy to say Im accurate. I saw it with my eyes and the stats back me. The question is what do you have that evidences the alternate stance?

I’d be 100% willing to bet Liam is looking at the same stats and balance of play as I am….

I'd imagine when they do the debrief they'll be showing countless examples of being in great attacking positions and making the wrong decision. Hopefully the players can fine tune.

I'd be a lot more worried if we weren't getting in good positions, and if our strikers didn't look a handful.

[Mr Popodopolous]

I can be negative at times but the OP with respect.

Striving for continual improvement is good, commendable and as a xkub we don't do this enough, but I was a bit glass half full yesterday. I saw a display which was broadly decent and contained the following positives..all IMO.

*Defensively sound or reasonable minimum for the most part- the big big blunder at the end aside.

*Fine in midfield, tehchsilyl etc.

*Good energy and press.

Both new strikers looked good in different ways.

Obviously a negative would be that yeah we were wasteful with our final ball, also Bird or Knight aren't 10s.

Decent foundation to build on albeit I'd still feel a lot more comfortable with a prime years striker, Yu within a month hopefully and if we sign Twine or equivalent perhaps it'll knit together well.