Leeds verdict

[Sussex Wolf]

I can understand a pragmatic approach, I can understand prioritising points on the board if we looked at risk of being in a relegation battle, or like we could get top 6.

The reality is though we’ll probably finish somewhere between 10th and 12th, maybe a place or so either way.

That being the case I’d like to see Lage trying to instil his style of play, I’d accept the results may be hit and miss but we can use this season to adapt and then highlight the areas we need to improve over the next couple of windows. That would be better for us long term than chasing points without a style of play.

Agree with that, but think that’s a discussion for the spring with some additions in January and enough points on the board to be pretty sure we’re safe. Then in the summer, move on players who he feels don’t fit his template and bring in others who will.

 

[Chris H]

Agree with that, but think that’s a discussion for the spring with some additions in January and enough points on the board to be pretty sure we’re safe. Then in the summer, move on players who he feels don’t fit his template and bring in others who will.

Perhaps.

It needs to happen at some point though, if results fall away and performances continue Lage doesn’t have a lot to fall back on. At least if he was showing us the style of play from the first 3 games people would give him more leeway with results.

You can get away with bad results for a while if performances are good, and you can get away with bad performances for a while if results are good. My concern is if both fall away then what else is there?

I like Lage, he gave us a glimpse in the first 3 games of what he could do with our style of play so that gives him some credit, but at some point we need to show that again even if it’s just for periods of games.

 

[Ercall Wolves]

Semedo caused the problem? What about Neves who runs out to challenge a player whose back is to goal and lets him turn and run into the box after receiving the ball?

Neves is far more culpable than Semedo yet all the amateurs on here can't see any further than the immediate move before the goal.

Yes Semedo caused the problem as he gave away the penalty with 2 minutes to go the same as he did at home to Villa last season
Neves was done by a great bit of skill as are hundreds of players up and down the country every weekend, even the best of players
Regarding your comment about amateurs being on here that is just plain disrespectful which is very amateurish of you

 

[Krispy Kreme]

Yes Semedo caused the problem as he gave away the penalty with 2 minutes to go the same as he did at home to Villa last season
Neves was done by a great bit of skill as are hundreds of players up and down the country every weekend, even the best of players
Regarding your comment about amateurs being on here that is just plain disrespectful which is very amateurish of you

Disrespectful?

It's fact. We're all entitled to opinion but far too many people post their polar opinions as if they're fact.

There is 0 balance from the majority of the members of this forum.

 

[Krispy Kreme]

Yes Semedo caused the problem as he gave away the penalty with 2 minutes to go the same as he did at home to Villa last season
Neves was done by a great bit of skill as are hundreds of players up and down the country every weekend, even the best of players
Regarding your comment about amateurs being on here that is just plain disrespectful which is very amateurish of you

And no Semedo did very little tbh, it was a soft penalty but other than just letting the lad run past him which he would have rightly been criticised for what else could he do but try and track him.

 

[Aimless Balls]

And no Semedo did very little tbh, it was a soft penalty but other than just letting the lad run past him which he would have rightly been criticised for what else could he do but try and track him.

Earlier, Kilman tossed an attacker to the side inside the box and there was no foul called, and rightfully so. To call that pen in added time was a bit absurd.

 

[Fenrir_]

Yes Semedo caused the problem as he gave away the penalty with 2 minutes to go the same as he did at home to Villa last season
Neves was done by a great bit of skill as are hundreds of players up and down the country every weekend, even the best of players
Regarding your comment about amateurs being on here that is just plain disrespectful which is very amateurish of you

There's no danger then Neves gets turned, Semedo is wider (as he should be) so not in the best position to make a challenge, the man in the best position is Saiss but then their player goes past Saiss like he isn't there, leaving Semedo on the wrong side of a forward who's about to have a shot at goal. At no point did he have an opportunity to get goal side of him

Semedo didn't cause the problem, Neves and Saiss are far more to blame for how that penalty came about

 

[sswolf]

Thanks oh great sage of the mix. We want to see a bit more attacking intent, a little more guile and a few more (not many more) attempts on goal, simply to play the game of football and be a bit braver. That's all.

I like to have a ten inch **** but I don’t what you have and what you want are two different things

 

[Ercall Wolves]

Disrespectful?

It's fact. We're all entitled to opinion but far too many people post their polar opinions as if they're fact.

There is 0 balance from the majority of the members of this forum.

I agree with your second sentence “we’re all entitled to opinion”

 

[Ercall Wolves]

And no Semedo did very little tbh, it was a soft penalty but other than just letting the lad run past him which he would have rightly been criticised for what else could he do but try and track him.

If he tracked him that’s fine but he pushed him
In real time I thought/wishful thinking it was not a penalty and I was almost in love with it but it was
Every pundit agreed it was a penalty

 

[Krispy Kreme]

If he tracked him that’s fine but he pushed him
In real time I thought/wishful thinking it was not a penalty and I was almost in love with it but it was
Every pundit agreed it was a penalty

It was a penalty I agree. But it was an incredibly soft penalty and Semedo was left with very little he could do in my opinion. If Neves got tighter to him and stopped him from turning never would have happened, Podence could of tried to tackle too instead of spectating and Kilman gets turned inside out.

However obviously Semedo is at fault because well when isn't he.

 

[AndyY]

We lost the midfield battle start to finish mate. We need fresh legs in there. Time to give Cundle ago even from then bench??

100% under nuno we probably would of lost. Credit to Leeds and their fans they made it a hard game they can take many positives from it.

Whereas we have lots to improve!! This is a transition season for us. It’s still Nuno’s team it’s took us a few games to get going.

I’m glad we are picking up points. The performances are worrying. Maybe the players need a few days off then start the high intensity again.

I have said for a very long time (inc last season) that our problems are due to us losing the midfield battle - two in midfield (plus the WBs) isnt enough.
That means we have to play 3-5-2 or go to 4 at the back. Personally I like a back 3 so we have go 2 up top. Raul and Hwang, presumably?
Who makes the midfield 3? I would try Saiss back in there as the midfield enforcer to help out Neves and Moutinho, with Boly back at LCB. If we want width then the wing backs have to do better, so RAN and Semedo (with the latter working harder going forward) or time to try Traore at WB again (crikey!).
This all means no place for Trincao, Podence, or Traore in reality. Impact subs?
Discuss.

 

[Mile End Wanderer]

I have said for a very long time (inc last season) that our problems are due to us losing the midfield battle - two in midfield (plus the WBs) isnt enough.
That means we have to play 3-5-2 or go to 4 at the back. Personally I like a back 3 so we have go 2 up top. Raul and Hwang, presumably?
Who makes the midfield 3? I would try Saiss back in there as the midfield enforcer to help out Neves and Moutinho, with Boly back at LCB. If we want width then the wing backs have to do better, so RAN and Semedo (with the latter working harder going forward) or time to try Traore at WB again (crikey!).
This all means no place for Trincao, Podence, or Traore in reality. Impact subs?
Discuss.

I’d try go 343 it takes us to be backs against the wall to get going. If we can attack teams and look steady that’s what we want

 

[lobodelsur]

I have said for a very long time (inc last season) that our problems are due to us losing the midfield battle - two in midfield (plus the WBs) isnt enough.
That means we have to play 3-5-2 or go to 4 at the back. Personally I like a back 3 so we have go 2 up top. Raul and Hwang, presumably?
Who makes the midfield 3? I would try Saiss back in there as the midfield enforcer to help out Neves and Moutinho, with Boly back at LCB. If we want width then the wing backs have to do better, so RAN and Semedo (with the latter working harder going forward) or time to try Traore at WB again (crikey!).
This all means no place for Trincao, Podence, or Traore in reality. Impact subs?
Discuss.

Don't think its as simple as that. Bruno has already said he favours a 'horses for courses' approach - so we saw a front 2 of Hwang and Traore at Vile, but joined by Jimenez yesterday.
Apparently he favours a back 4, but hasn't ventured in that direction yet. Even when he does I think we'll see the midfield and strikers changed according to who we're playing - e.g Podence as a '10' at home against weaker opposition but no '10' against stronger teams, Marcal as a LB against strong opposition (RAN against weaker ones) etc. etc. But I do think he'll be looking to find and establish a back 4 that he will pick regularly.