[Football] "Graham Potter’s side remain a gloriously flawed machine": The Observer 12 July

[A1X]

I still see games like that last Citeh one as a training exercise - Potter can use it to see and show to the players where we lack a bit if we have any ambition to play expansive football and do well. He could easily have played 5 at the back and Murray up front so we eked out a plucky 1-4 defeat, but we already knew we could do that last season.

I agree entirely, but this tactic only works longer term if you then pick up the points against the teams you "should" do. That's what Plucky did for years, but now they've started getting beaten by the teams around them they've found themselves in a world of trouble.

 

[Yes Chef]

Quite a lot of floral prose but is patent drivel, City spent more on full backs than we did on our stadium.
Didn't read the comment section, that way madness lies

 

[LamieRobertson]

It's a fancy metaphor, but not an acute analysis and doesn't give enough credit to Manchester City. He says that we are a team 'you relish playing', not 'City would relish playing'. The latter would be a fair statement given the two results against them this season. Potter hasn't worked out a way to play City and trying to play our game against them sees us get steamrollered, especially as we had nothing to combat their quick and aggressive ball recovery.

However, none of the teams who have failed to score against us in the last three away games would have relished playing Brighton. Most of our defeats this season have actually been hard fought and we have been draw specialists, suggesting that we're not easy to beat.

The comment about the defence is silly. On the strength of watching the City game alone, you would think that the defence needs sorting, but given that he also suggests that there is a top ten side in there, he cannot possibly be basing his analysis on that single game. We showed nothing in that match to suggest that we have any potential at all. Therefore if his analysis is based on the wider season, his assumption that it is the defence that needs sorting out to improve us is very wide of the mark. Over the season we have conceded a similar number of goals to Chelsea. It is the fact that we have scored just over half as many that leaves us in the bottom half. Only three teams in this division have scored less goals than us this season. Sorting the defence out would not overcome our main weakness.

Liew's whole report on that game was style over substance: In some parts wonderful to read, but to the detriment of accuracy. If he can improve his willingness to kill his darlings, there may be a top ten writer in there.

Nicely put and I entirely agree

 

[Mackenzie]

It’s an opinion piece, but I do think that to play our system well requires the whole team to be technically good and confident, hopefully that’ll come. I would like to see us have the option of a fast counter attack to help worry the opposition press.

 

[elwheelio]

I agree entirely, but this tactic only works longer term if you then pick up the points against the teams you "should" do. That's what Plucky did for years, but now they've started getting beaten by the teams around them they've found themselves in a world of trouble.

100% agree. It's fine to pat ourselves on the back for playing nice football against better teams but unless we get results against those around us we will be in trouble. For all the talk of us playing well this year, we have put in some truly awful performances and got some terrible results against teams around us.

 

[Acker79]

I’d be more inclined to go for lacking in the required quality upfront and in midfield (on the goal scoring front). You don’t stay in this division for three years (fingers crossed) if you are mentally weak FACT ( second time I have used FACT in a post today ;smile: )

I really hope we can address this striker and goal scoring midfield problem this close season, it has been going on for too long.

I think that sums up my thoughts. The number of games we have dominated and failed to score/score enough is frustrating (Southampton pre-Andone red, Newcastle, Palace, etc) Goals in those games would give us the push up the table to be challenging for top ten.

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Exactly.

Lazy journalist say we are shit, and certain Brighton supporters, still suffering from imposter syndrome, nod in agreement.

I still see games like that last Citeh one as a training exercise - Potter can use it to see and show to the players where we lack a bit if we have any ambition to play expansive football and do well. He could easily have played 5 at the back and Murray up front so we eked out a plucky 1-4 defeat, but we already knew we could do that last season.

It is true we aren't a nasty side, a bullying side, a niggling side, but that's the way we like it. We have a nasty player on our books, but plenty on NSC just couldn't wait to see the back of him. Flozza, I mean.

I'm not interested in smarty pants journalists talking us down. They can faaaak off and watch Arsenal as far as I'm concerned.

Yeah this.

Plenty of comments on here wanting us to "have a go" at the big boys last season.
Now the mood seems to have changed with many wanting us to "have a plan B" (play Hughton's style) when we're up against City.

I was interested in Potter's response in a couple of games where he has stated something like "playing our game, against the better teams is the best way of improving" .
This ties in nicely with his ethos of playing without fear. He believes in what he's doing and takes responsibility when it goes wrong.

Some players will indeed improve from the chastening experience against City far more than if they were told, "your first touch is good enough when your playing Palace, but FFS hoof it long when your playing against good teams!"

 

[raymondo]

I think there's a difference between being "nasty" and being "competitive". Andone doesn't make us more competitive because he's a bit of a loon. Maupay is a better example of the kind of player I'd like to see more of at the Albion: Snidey and a bit of a sh*thouse

Maupay doesn't give the impression of being a snidey shit house to me. He respects the opposition if they respect him. He's a combative cookie though, and I do like that.

 

[matski_98]

"About time someone battered Brighton by 9. They're just a fancy Stoke."

Bit harsh

 

[Uh_huh_him]

100% agree. It's fine to pat ourselves on the back for playing nice football against better teams but unless we get results against those around us we will be in trouble. For all the talk of us playing well this year, we have put in some truly awful performances and got some terrible results against teams around us.

You could be right but I can't think of one, but I am a bit happy clappy.

My take is (from memory):

Norwich WW - Comfortably better in both games
Villa LD Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
BMUff WL Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
Watford - WD - Smashed em off the park - fought back for a draw
WHU - DD - Tight games decent contests - fought back well after being behind
Palace DL - Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
Newcastle - D - Smashed em off the park - unlucky
Southampton - L - Red card early on killed the game
Everton - WL - Scrapped for a decent win at home- Well beaten at theirs.
Burnley - D - undone by last minute equaliser from their only shot on target.
Arsenal - WW - Enough said

I genuinely can't think of a terrible result against teams around us.
Really unlucky results (Bournemouth/Villa away) sure, but not terrible.

What's your view?

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Seems to me that the Albion are 'gloriously flawed' in much the same way that Norwich are. Both trying to play the game the right way, neither particularly good at it. REALLY need to upgrade and kick on next season else we're likely to be next season's Norwich. Can't KEEP doing that Relegation Flirtation thing, because more likely sooner rather than later there WON'T be three worse teams

 

[Cowfold Seagull]

It's hard not to agree, easy on the eye going forward, but defensively, especially when the opposition applies the press, we can be a disaster area.

 

[Seasidesage]

It's a fancy metaphor, but not an acute analysis and doesn't give enough credit to Manchester City. He says that we are a team 'you relish playing', not 'City would relish playing'. The latter would be a fair statement given the two results against them this season. Potter hasn't worked out a way to play City and trying to play our game against them sees us get steamrollered, especially as we had nothing to combat their quick and aggressive ball recovery.

However, none of the teams who have failed to score against us in the last three away games would have relished playing Brighton. Most of our defeats this season have actually been hard fought and we have been draw specialists, suggesting that we're not easy to beat.

The comment about the defence is silly. On the strength of watching the City game alone, you would think that the defence needs sorting, but given that he also suggests that there is a top ten side in there, he cannot possibly be basing his analysis on that single game. We showed nothing in that match to suggest that we have any potential at all. Therefore if his analysis is based on the wider season, his assumption that it is the defence that needs sorting out to improve us is very wide of the mark. Over the season we have conceded a similar number of goals to Chelsea. It is the fact that we have scored just over half as many that leaves us in the bottom half. Only three teams in this division have scored less goals than us this season. Sorting the defence out would not overcome our main weakness.

Liew's whole report on that game was style over substance: In some parts wonderful to read, but to the detriment of accuracy. If he can improve his willingness to kill his darlings, there may be a top ten writer in there.

Agree with this. A little look at our stats debunks this little theory. Defensively we are not bad at all our GA figure 52 is reasonable much better than any of the teams below us and better than a few above too. Goals are our problem we have scored less than all bar 3 teams in the league.. Only Watford, Norwich and you know who have scored less than us this season. The idea that we are some super expansive airy fairy team who play good football but can't defend is rubbish. We play decent possession based game are solid against most but fail to press home our advantage too often. The challenge next season is to find 10+ more goals while keeping a similar GA number.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I agree entirely, but this tactic only works longer term if you then pick up the points against the teams you "should" do. That's what Plucky did for years, but now they've started getting beaten by the teams around them they've found themselves in a world of trouble.

Yes. I'm hoping we can learn a bit an improve. No doubt that had we not beaten the Arse and Naarwich Potter would have set up differently againts Citeh, and had a completely different objective (vide Sheff U, Wolves and Leicester).

 

[Stato]

You could be right but I can't think of one, but I am a bit happy clappy.

My take is (from memory):

Norwich WW - Comfortably better in both games
Villa LD Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
BMUff WL Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
Watford - WD - Smashed em off the park - fought back for a draw
WHU - DD - Tight games decent contests - fought back well after being behind
Palace DL - Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
Newcastle - D - Smashed em off the park - unlucky
Southampton - L - Red card early on killed the game
Everton - WL - Scrapped for a decent win at home- Well beaten at theirs.
Burnley - D - undone by last minute equaliser from their only shot on target.
Arsenal - WW - Enough said

I genuinely can't think of a terrible result against teams around us.
Really unlucky results (Bournemouth/Villa away) sure, but not terrible.

What's your view?

You're right that we haven't been awful against those in the bottom half. We were worse last year. However, the number of times you write 'smashed em off the park - unlucky' suggests a pattern. As luck is by definition, patternless, I think a fairer description would be 'dominated but failed to capitalise.' This has happened enough times this season to be seen as a particular weakness. The main challenge for next season surely has to be to how to turn large periods of footballing superiority into goals.

 

[blue-shifted]

You could be right but I can't think of one, but I am a bit happy clappy.

My take is (from memory):

Norwich WW - Comfortably better in both games
Villa LD Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
BMUff WL Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
Watford - WD - Smashed em off the park - fought back for a draw
WHU - DD - Tight games decent contests - fought back well after being behind
Palace DL - Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
Newcastle - D - Smashed em off the park - unlucky
Southampton - L - Red card early on killed the game
Everton - WL - Scrapped for a decent win at home- Well beaten at theirs.
Burnley - D - undone by last minute equaliser from their only shot on target.
Arsenal - WW - Enough said

I genuinely can't think of a terrible result against teams around us.
Really unlucky results (Bournemouth/Villa away) sure, but not terrible.

What's your view?

I think you're being a little generous about the Muff away game. Brittle as. (going in 2 down after having about 98% possession in the first half hurt)

Apart from that, can't really argue. We've battered the entire bottom half 1-1 all season. what would be great is the winners were no longer determined by the number of goals they scored, but with artistic merit points from a judging panel compromising Len Goodman and Chris Waddle.

 

[Dick Swiveller]

I agree with your well put piece, you have quite possibly outclassed the journalist.
My only issue is I think Graham will come up with a plan B and hope he deploys it against those hardworking saints tonight. A draw would be great.

I'm sure he will - just don't think he has one at the moment. We really need a Murray replacement. A big man with a speed merchant to get on the end of flick ons would give the high pressing teams pause for thought. You just need the option to allow you to mix it up and use the passing from the back as well. A footballing "corridor of uncertainty" if you will. You press us too high and you better make sure you can stop our number 9 winning headers.

 

[gripper stebson]

That had me chuckling, it’s so true, we can give it the biggun with some beautiful one touch football, but the moment the opposition says ‘no, we’re not having this’ we shit ourselves and fall apart.

Beautifully put.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

You could be right but I can't think of one, but I am a bit happy clappy.

My take is (from memory):

Norwich WW - Comfortably better in both games
Villa LD Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
BMUff WL Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
Watford - WD - Smashed em off the park - fought back for a draw
WHU - DD - Tight games decent contests - fought back well after being behind
Palace DL - Smashed em off the park both games but were unlucky
Newcastle - D - Smashed em off the park - unlucky
Southampton - L - Red card early on killed the game
Everton - WL - Scrapped for a decent win at home- Well beaten at theirs.
Burnley - D - undone by last minute equaliser from their only shot on target.
Arsenal - WW - Enough said

I genuinely can't think of a terrible result against teams around us.
Really unlucky results (Bournemouth/Villa away) sure, but not terrible.

What's your view?

Spot on.

The worst example of 'seeing what they want to see', and infusing their assessment with an inferiority complex, was by the poster who I won't name who rightly got pasted for screaming Potter Out last autumn.

It is hard to see things for what they are when it really matters to you, though. So maybe my positivity and scorn for lazy journalism is part-funded by my own positive biases.

Maybe it is all about opinions after all

 

[blue-shifted]

Jeez, those comments are a car crash, clearly we’re not very popular but you do get the impression that the majority of people commenting only really know about the top 6 teams etc.

I've made it a personal philosophy to never take personally any comments made in a Newspaper messageboard. The Guardian one is probably the least insane, but is still in no way a reflection of the thoughts and views of a normal cross section of people.