Brief Synopsis!!! (Shrewsbury) | Page 7 | PASOTI
  • This site is sponsored by Lang & Potter.

Brief Synopsis!!! (Shrewsbury)

Well. If ever there was going to be a turning point for us it should have been today.
A deserved win against the unbeaten league leaders would have been a massive boost to everyone
and given us a fantastic base to build from. But DA, hold your hands up boyo, you made one
almighty boo boo today.
4141 is a perfectly good defensive formation and has worked well for you plenty of times
over the last 3 seasons. So why change it when its working really well and then worse virtually
out of knowhere decide on a 3 CB formation. Which weakened us in centre mid just like it did at the start of
the blackpool home game just recently. In fact DA moved yanner into CM that day as we were being overrun there.
4141 gives us def cover on the flanks and in the centre and we were controlling the game so why
change it for a system hardly used by you and us during your tenure here?
So the mighty STFC brought on 2 strikers was your answer apparently. So what! They cant hurt us if
their not getting the service and with one less defender we could even get a second on the counter.
Just like we did against charlton.
It totally transformed the game in their favour with the equaliser coming from within the space
vacated by the formation change. Other efforts from distance followed which led to another DA change
to a 532 with 3 CMs again but now they were doubling up on us down the flanks and very nearly
got the winner from that route. Which would have been a total injustice after all the effort and
good play previous and not forgetting a fabulous goal by GC10 which so deserved to be a match winner.
Its so frustrating. Lets hope these 2 dropped points dont come back to haunt us at the end of
the season.
However, there were plenty of positives before all this.
Young fletch did a great job as the lone ranger and at just 18 is already beginning to look the part.
Toumani(MOM) is exactly what the team has needed for some time. He gives us more steel in CM plus
crucial experience and lookslike he can play a bit as well. Another lilian nalis?
It was also noticeable how vocal he was too. He looks a great signing.
Our 2 leftie full backs could have been weak links but both stuck to their jobs and played well.
Yanner and ryan both had good games and complemented each other again as a pair at CB. Though all
the defenders had good protection in front to help them.
Joel and GC10 worked hard covering on the flanks and foxy, in his usual central playmaking role,
along with sarce and toums protecting the centre.
The game plan was obviously to keep the game tight at first and then gradually gain more control of
the game which we did in the main from about 30 mins onwards. We just needed a goal as ever.
And it finally arrived early in the second half with a GC10 golden booted get in there special. :D
Maybe curved in as their keeper seemed rooted, staring at it in admiration perhaps.
So home park erupts. The crowd and the team are right up for it now. So what you gonna do now argyle?
Keep that accelerator pedal firmly down or use some unrequired braking with the winning line in sight.
Under DAs management?.....hmmm.
So 13 games and 6 points is where we are now with 2 away games in a week to take us to the 15 game
mark. A third of the way through the season coming up fast and usually its a good guide as to where we are
and likely heading to.
So these 2 away games, especially the wombles game, could be the tipping point for DA either way.
We need points desperately now. Good performances, which was the case in the main today to be fair, isnt
going to keep us up unfortunately.
So come on you argyle boys lets get going please. Time to bag some wins beginning at ewood on tuesday
and an excellent opportunity for some wembley wombley revenge next saturday. :scarf:
 
Dec 3, 2005
7,264
1,755
Biggs":3qot0kjt said:
djg145":3qot0kjt said:
Dan Ellard":3qot0kjt said:
Cobi Budge":3qot0kjt said:
I don't think the defensive substitution was the problem, didn't have an issue with getting another body in at the back and tightening things up, the problem was simply how deep we dropped, and we kept dropping, until Shrewsbury had enough space just outside the box to get their shots away.

Spot on. It's all about application. 5-4-1 can effectively become 3-4-3 if the wide players push on more. The team as a whole (centre-midfield in particular) dropped off too much and it cost us the match.

We were WINNING when the substitution was made - changing the system - we conceded, how can you say that was a good decision?? Baffling

Whether it was the right or wrong decision, how can you say it was baffling?

A manager attempting to protect the lead happens in almost every game, surely it's not surprising.

I happen to think it was way too early, but it's strange to question the logic.

Maybe we'd have conceded twice if we keep attacking..

I can say it was baffling, because I found it totaly baffling.

We were winning, we were gaining confidence, Shrewsbury did not look like they were going to score, then the change, the baffling change. Replacing a forward with an defender, saying to the top team - come on then, we will let you play - hey they score - shock horror. Then the mighty manager decides its time to bring on a forward and play two upfront - and suddenly we look dangerous going forward - shock horror. We should have, could have won this game. I do not understand his thinking. Yes before the game a point would have been good, but this game was there for winning and we didn't. Just my opinion mind.
 
Sep 2, 2006
92
10
Paignton
The substitution sent a clear message to the other team..........
We are ahead now but are mentally very weak. So have a full 25 minutes of your attack against our fragile defence and see what happens.....
We all saw what happened!
Very very poor decision by Derek. Simple :(
 
Feb 8, 2005
4,544
2,701
As I have said on a previous thread, the substitution of Bradley for Fletcher was made as a result of the opposition making a substitution and adding an extra striker to the front line. We had been playing with two centre halves at the back to their one striker, and Bradley then made it three centre halves to their front two.
Adams has done this on numerous occasions when we had the lead, and allowed the opposition to come at us. The defence and midfield are methodically trained to play this way, and it does not allow the opposition any space in our penalty area. Take Liverpool, for example, we allowed them the ball, but they could not break us down in open play.

In this instance, the system fell down because someone wasn't doing their job, and allowed the striker to get a shot off. I cannot recall but it may have been the new boy, who may not have had the system so ingrained into him just yet, but for whatever reason the striker scored.

It was not as a result of the substitution, but as a result of a breakdown of the system.

It shouldn't happen, but it did.

At the end of the day, we were disappointed that we did not end up with three points as we scored first, but things are not all bad, we would have taken a point off the divisional leaders at the start of the match as everything pointed to a Shrewsbury win, and we can say that we toppled the leaders as they now sit in second place.
 
Apr 20, 2008
4,180
737
Plymouth
djg145":1ue3ggv5 said:
Dan Ellard":1ue3ggv5 said:
Cobi Budge":1ue3ggv5 said:
I don't think the defensive substitution was the problem, didn't have an issue with getting another body in at the back and tightening things up, the problem was simply how deep we dropped, and we kept dropping, until Shrewsbury had enough space just outside the box to get their shots away.

Spot on. It's all about application. 5-4-1 can effectively become 3-4-3 if the wide players push on more. The team as a whole (centre-midfield in particular) dropped off too much and it cost us the match.

We were WINNING when the substitution was made - changing the system - we conceded, how can you say that was a good decision?? Baffling

I'm struggling to see where I've said it was a good decision?

5-4-1 COULD have been good if the 4 in midfield pushed out more, supported Jervis and stopped the ball coming straight back at us when we hoofed it to one guy all on his own up front. Sadly, we did nothing of the sort.

Adams' decision to play a 5-4-1 in the manner that he did, with no pressure on the ball (especially in central areas), was a shocker.
 
Aug 11, 2013
2,298
783
Thought Carey’s goal masked a team with a lot of problems and a manager who’s clearly under pressure with his decision making. Was I the only one who thought he was going to play Bradley up front as a makeshift striker. That was the only thing I could think he was thinking of. Nothing else made sense. The defence then looked shaky as suddenly they had someone else next to them and it unsettled everyone.

The first 20 minutes was the worst I’ve seen Argyle play in a long time. Bereft of confidence. No composure and like we were at Home to Real Madrid such was the respect we showed them. We look so timid. We don’t impose ourselves yet the ability to do that is there. Mustn’t be too adventurous is the maxim. If we are going out of this league I’d rather we went out with a bang rather than a whimper and it’s time for a change at home. Go for the jugular from a he off rather than watch 20 minutes of the opposition stroking it around on our great surface as if it’s a meaningless friendly.

We have the ability to hurt people with this squad but we’re using a paintbrush as a hammer.

If Adams can’t see it maybe it is time to move on. If he’s a one trick pony playing one up front then it’s clear this is a failed system at this level.
 
Apr 5, 2008
1,510
327
Dan Ellard":pk38gu7v said:
djg145":pk38gu7v said:
Dan Ellard":pk38gu7v said:
Cobi Budge":pk38gu7v said:
I don't think the defensive substitution was the problem, didn't have an issue with getting another body in at the back and tightening things up, the problem was simply how deep we dropped, and we kept dropping, until Shrewsbury had enough space just outside the box to get their shots away.

Spot on. It's all about application. 5-4-1 can effectively become 3-4-3 if the wide players push on more. The team as a whole (centre-midfield in particular) dropped off too much and it cost us the match.

We were WINNING when the substitution was made - changing the system - we conceded, how can you say that was a good decision?? Baffling

I'm struggling to see where I've said it was a good decision?

5-4-1 COULD have been good if the 4 in midfield pushed out more, supported Jervis and stopped the ball coming straight back at us when we hoofed it to one guy all on his own up front. Sadly, we did nothing of the sort.

Adams' decision to play a 5-4-1 in the manner that he did, with no pressure on the ball (especially in central areas), was a shocker.


It's going to be a long tiring season if Adams continues with these tactics.

Why are we constantly hoofing the ball to a lone forward.Are we not capable of playing it from the back ,trying to keep possession.

If you've got the ball the other team can't score.

In Argyle's case if we get the ball we try and get rid of it as quickly as possibly so the other team might score.

:facepalm:
 
Aug 16, 2005
540
87
Somerset
jimsing":3uf312rv said:
As I have said on a previous thread, the substitution of Bradley for Fletcher was made as a result of the opposition making a substitution and adding an extra striker to the front line. We had been playing with two centre halves at the back to their one striker, and Bradley then made it three centre halves to their front two.
Adams has done this on numerous occasions when we had the lead, and allowed the opposition to come at us. The defence and midfield are methodically trained to play this way, and it does not allow the opposition any space in our penalty area. Take Liverpool, for example, we allowed them the ball, but they could not break us down in open play.

In this instance, the system fell down because someone wasn't doing their job, and allowed the striker to get a shot off. I cannot recall but it may have been the new boy, who may not have had the system so ingrained into him just yet, but for whatever reason the striker scored.

It was not as a result of the substitution, but as a result of a breakdown of the system.

It shouldn't happen, but it did.

At the end of the day, we were disappointed that we did not end up with three points as we scored first, but things are not all bad, we would have taken a point off the divisional leaders at the start of the match as everything pointed to a Shrewsbury win, and we can say that we toppled the leaders as they now sit in second place.

OMG! This post is so sensible it's scary :clap: And of course, if we had managed to see the game out many would be applauding the substitution.
 

Lesley Somerville

✅ Evergreen
✨Pasoti Donor✨
Jan 1, 2011
1,535
821
Plymouth
I agree with everything that has been said here re DA's poor decision making and negativity. And for those who say that a change of manager alone would not achieve anything with the same group of players, look at Oldham. They got rid of Shez and have since won their last three league games. They were below us, now they're clear of the drop zone. We could do the same with a similar run of wins. But as someone has already said, the Carey goal came out of nowhere and was an individual effort. Apart from that, our system continues to stifle any possibility of creative play, and I just don't see where the goal will come from. Maybe we are so poor at taking chances when they do arrive because they happen so rarely and then the pressure is on. It must be a horrible system for the players too. It's certainly not entertaining to watch.

As for the previous post's point, for me it's not working in this league as we've seen - it's why we're bottom. Decent teams will find a way through, players will make mistakes, deflections will cause problems. And it's bloody awful to watch.
 

Lesley Somerville

✅ Evergreen
✨Pasoti Donor✨
Jan 1, 2011
1,535
821
Plymouth
Would just like to add that the last time I really enjoyed watching us as a football team (not as MY team which of course is different), was when Holloway was in charge. It was the absolute antithesis of what DA serves up.
 

PL2 3DQ

Site Owner
✨Pasoti Donor✨
🌟Sparksy Mural🌟
Oct 31, 2010
24,554
1
11,142
The contain and stifle game plan is a difficult system for the players to carry out. It requires total concentration and stamina.

The double training sessions may help or hinder this game plan but all it takes is one lapse of focus (the Shrewsbury goal scorer made a 10 yard run behind our midfield and wasn't picked up) and the system fails.

Bradley came on in the 69th minute and it was too long to sit back, let Shrewsbury have the ball and defend the 18 yard line, especially as we just had Shrewsbury rattled and could have scored a second goal.

The above tactics worked in L2 but not in L1 where the standard is higher.
 

oddball

Pasoti Quiz Winner
✨Pasoti Donor✨
Dec 30, 2004
4,089
63
oldham sacked their manager and are now well clear of a relegation position,meanwhile we don't and are still firmly rooted to the bottom of the league....so sometimes it pays to sack the manager
 
Apr 5, 2008
1,510
327
Think he is just too stubborn to change his tactics,so a really long unexciting season of football is going to continue :facepalm:


However soon he is going to have to try something different ,as Argyle could be well adrift if we dont get at least 5 points from the next 3 games