Thoughts on today v Luton

Neil Dawson said:
Yeah that I get… it was the implying that we took a quick option so we could wait for Parker that I don’t get. Surely once they appointed JT it was for the long haul had he not been so bad.
Click to expand...

Difficult to know. I suspect Tindall was given a go rather than being seen as long term. They didn't hang about when it went to sh*t and sacked him pretty sharpish for a long haul manager. I do agree that him being a stopgap for Parker seems unlikely although Parker was clearly their no 1 choice when they made all three recent managerial decisions.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
I completely agree with you. I think you should have looked at Tindall this way too.
Click to expand...
If he had had to have played four academy debutants and a rooky goalkeeper in his first four games while trying to implement a whole new philosophy and coaching staff I would have.
 
Neil Dawson said:
If he had had to have played four academy debutants and a rooky goalkeeper in his first four games while trying to implement a whole new philosophy and coaching staff I would have.
Click to expand...

No you wouldn't. You said earlier that he had "the benefit of a full pre-season" as if we've all forgotten the circumstances of 2020/21 pre-season. Possibly the toughest ever season to try and begin as a manager, and a squad ultra low on confidence with the star players sold without replacement....yet did you give him the ultra sympathetic approach you're now giving Parker?
 
Topfarrier said:
Really interesting detailed breakdown of the match......must say I like the XT stat (expected threat)...in terms of how many threatening positions each team and individual players got into .....as stats go I imagine that could be quite enlightening.............https://www.google.com/amp/s/eflana...ip-stats-afc-bournemouth-vs-luton-town/10/amp
Click to expand...

Certainly a stat fest - the xT should include the pass just missing the man in the box, but it does get more subjective, and we get enough disbelief in the xG rating as it is. The key sentence in this analysis for me was:

"It was a strong defensive performance from AFC Bournemouth in a match where they were dominated by their opposition. They were firm and strong and held on to their lead. Luton would be really unhappy on leaving the match without a single point, which they certainly feel they deserved to take after such a dominating second-half performance."

I'm v pleased to be top of the table, but it does seem we are riding our luck at times. Those looking at the xG last season were saying that Reading couldn't keep up their conversion rate and would drop down the league, as ultimately happened.

Impressed with Parker so far, so hope he can push on to better things performance wise. (although it is hard to improve on our league position :grinning: :utc:)
 
"xT timeline shows that the visitors had the upper hand during the start of the match but the home team quickly took a two-goal lead in the first half. Luton completely dominated the second half and pulled one goal back, eventually falling short in the end."
Funnily enough, that's what seemed to have happened from watching the game:unsure:
 
LewSwimmin said:
"xT timeline shows that the visitors had the upper hand during the start of the match but the home team quickly took a two-goal lead in the first half. Luton completely dominated the second half and pulled one goal back, eventually falling short in the end."
Funnily enough, that's what seemed to have happened from watching the game:unsure:
Click to expand...
Nice to have it confirmed before Neil convinces us all we're were actually brilliant!
 
Topfarrier said:
Nice to have it confirmed before Neil convinces us all we're were actually brilliant!
Click to expand...
Don’t remember him saying that. Just that we had a very good spell in the match which is true. Nobodies deluding themselves here, the performances have been far from perfect. We are having long spells in matches where we don’t look like creating anything at all, but it’s okay to acknowledge that we are also having spells in which we are looking very good as well. Interestingly in the XG table we are seventh in terms of the position we should (take the use of the word should with a pinch of salt) be in given our XG for and against. Not perfect by any means, but something to build on at least. We lost comfortably our best player (in terms of natural ability) from last season as well as our player of the season (Begovic) and our best performing centre back in CCV, not to mention our best creative midfielder hasn’t been available yet. A lot of new faces have come in and young players integrated into the first team, under the circumstances I think we’ve done okay up until this point. Over time we do need to start looking more threatening over more extended periods though.
 
Waz afcb said:
Don’t remember him saying that. Just that we had a very good spell in the match which is true. Nobodies deluding themselves here, the performances have been far from perfect. We are having long spells in matches where we don’t look like creating anything at all, but it’s okay to acknowledge that we are also having spells in which we are looking very good as well. Interestingly in the XG table we are seventh in terms of the position we should (take the use of the word should with a pinch of salt) be in given our XG for and against. Not perfect by any means, but something to build on at least. We lost comfortably our best player (in terms of natural ability) from last season as well as our player of the season (Begovic) and our best performing centre back in CCV, not to mention our best creative midfielder hasn’t been available yet. A lot of new faces have come in and young players integrated into the first team, under the circumstances I think we’ve done okay up until this point. Over time we do need to start looking more threatening over more extended periods though.
Click to expand...
I think we all recognise that there has been positive and negative aspects to every game but it's very rare that you see such extremes in the same game....we seem to go from Terrible to Brilliant and then terrible again..... that's got nothing to do with missing players...it's a mindset that we have....you said yourself after the match that us becoming so negative in the second half seems to be a choice rather than it being forced upon us.....I mean how on earth is it that when teams like Luton... Blackpool and QPR come out and go toe to toe with us we're the ones that retreat?.....

For the last few seasons we've wanted teams to do that because we knew we would kill them on the counter......how is it acceptable for us to have no attacking threat for an entire half?..... I can't listen to all that guff about teams changing their tactics which forces us to go defensive because it's boll0x.... it was Luton ffs!...it shouldn't be that easy for them to dominate us like that.....we'd soon see how many bloody full backs they'd push forward if we left 3 forwards up!.......

I didn't criticise Eddie much tbh but I did in that home game where we tried to defend for 90mins.......we had injuries fair enough but it was shameful imo......why would I think that doing the same thing in the second half against Luton would be any more acceptable?
 
This thread is starting to get tedious, how many ways can we say great first half, poor (not unacceptable) second half.
We've won 4 on the trot ffs, yes there's room for improvement, I'm sure all at the club know that to.

Bring on the next game, hopefully some lessons learnt, but games don't always go to plan, otherwise we'd all be managers
 
CherryBare said:
This thread is starting to get tedious, how many ways can we say great first half, poor (not unacceptable) second half.
We've won 4 on the trot ffs, yes there's room for improvement, I'm sure all at the club know that to.

Bring on the next game, hopefully some lessons learnt, but games don't always go to plan, otherwise we'd all be managers
Click to expand...
Nobody is forcing you to read it tbf.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;