Match Thread: Lincoln City v Rotherham United

[buckielugger]

The trouble is Bozzy will probably replace Bolger who has done okay in our recent slump, whereas Shackell (who will be leaving at the end of the season thankfully) will keep his place, despite head in hands distribution.

Well indeed. Unless for once it's Shackell that gets to sit things out...

 

[brisimp]

Cant Knock what Jason Shackell has done at the club maybe his age has caught up with him , To be fair hes not young to be playing at this level so hes done very well.

 

[JT_LCFC]

Thought Shackell and Bolger overall defended very well on Friday. The poor ball by Shackell was ultimately what decided the game.

 

[plumbob]

Thought Shackell and Bolger overall defended very well on Friday. The poor ball by Shackell was ultimately what decided the game.

Bolger gets stick for giving it away, for me, Shackel is equally culpable, if not more so.

 

[bristolimp]

If we insist in football pinball in the box with the “clever” play between the defenders and the goalkeeper it is going to end badly - for one thing we don’t have the pitch for it.

At first BBC Lincs were diplomatic but at times on Friday particularly Thommo, the vocalisations were telling.

it’s funny how we seem to beat to those teams that play it around at the back but not those who are more old
Fashioned in their play!

 

[PerthImp]

Thought Shackell and Bolger overall defended very well on Friday. The poor ball by Shackell was ultimately what decided the game.

I can only comment from what I saw on I-Follow, but for me Bolger put Shackell in a difficult position initially by passing to him when Shackell had a player in front of him. As Bolger played the pass I took a sharp intake of breath as I could see Shackell being closed down quickly. He then in turn put Melbourne (?) under pressure by passing the buck to him. As soon as the goal was scored my reaction was Bolger had started the chain of events. One of those ‘decision’ moments MA referred to previously.

 

[NottyImp]

I can only comment from what I saw on I-Follow, but for me Bolger put Shackell in a difficult position initially by passing to him when Shackell had a player in front of him. As Bolger played the pass I took a sharp intake of breath as I could see Shackell being closed down quickly. He then in turn put Melbourne (?) under pressure by passing the buck to him. As soon as the goal was scored my reaction was Bolger had started the chain of events. One of those ‘decision’ moments MA referred to previously.

I think I agree. But we're never going to have Premiership decision-making skills in a L1 back-four, no matter how good on the ball they are. So this kind of thing is going to happen. And it has, resulting in 5 goals scored against us to date.

 

[NottyImp]

Sincilbanks - ever the jolly fellow - floated a theory at the game that by the 4th pass at the back, we're already in trouble and about to give the ball away. He's probably not far wrong.

 

[Sincilbanks]

There's basically 3 sorts of mistakes you can make when playing it around at the back:
1) Poor pass execution, the player selects a reasonable pass but simply executes it poorly
2) Poor pass selection, the player has several options and chooses the wrong one
3) Poor decision making, the player selects to pass the ball when he shouldn't or elects to hang on to the ball when he should pass.

We are currently regularly guilty of all 3, and sometimes combine them together for extra "disaster points". Bridcutt in the 2nd half managed all 3 in the space of 15 minutes at one point.
A sign of our current lack of understanding of our methods came in the 2nd half, from a goalkick which started a great move:
Vickers was trying to clip the ball out to Eardley but the team wasn't set up because Anderson was still in position for the long kick downfield. Morrell has to literally whistle and wave to Anderson to bring him infield to give Eardley the space to receive the ball and give him a first time pass, which once done sets us off down the right flank to create a lovely move.
Full marks to Morrell for sorting it out, but this is a set piece and I would have thought we would have our options and setups from this (whether it's on to knock it short and play it out, or push it long and fight for 2nd ball or drill it into midfield) pretty much nailed on by now.

 

[Scotimp]

I can't help thinking we may be being a little narrow-minded with this. The tactic is clearly costing us goals at the moment, but it is a new tactic being played by players who are neither familiar with nor competent at it. That does not mean it cannot be effective in due course. Appleton has been successful with it before, and we all realise there will be changes in the goalkeeping/defensive area in the summer. This is about the future, more than the present, and there may be some pain along the way. Patience and trust appear to be at a premium in today's game. Personally, I find it all very interesting: new manager, new players, new philosophy, new style of playing.

 

[bbh 11]

In the current football environment and change in laws allowing defenders to receive the ball in the box, all different standards of teams are trying the play out from the back start from a goal kick. I know someone who is a Luton fan and reckons it has cost them no end this season. How often do we see premiership teams doing it and costing them goals, with the lot higher quality of player. If I recall correctly I remember Man City having a bad day with this away at Norwich.

From our point of view we are presently stuck as our side, apart from three out of the four defenders, we have in footballing terms a short side, which means that the old fashioned high goal kick down the field will almost certainly be won by an opposition header, which leaves the option of playing out from the back.

 

[johnolbe]

How many goals have we conceded this season as a result of a long hopeful punt upfield by the Keeper, lightweight challenge from Walker etc resulting in a dominant header from the opposition CH and eventually through on our goal. No idea myself.

 

[NottyImp]

How many goals have we conceded this season as a result of a long hopeful punt upfield by the Keeper, lightweight challenge from Walker etc resulting in a dominant header from the opposition CH and eventually through on our goal. No idea myself.

Me neither. But you wouldn't really categorise that as an easily preventable error. Also, a long punt isn't the only other option. I think that's a fairly weak defence of the tactic, to be honest.

 

[NottyImp]

I can't help thinking we may be being a little narrow-minded with this. The tactic is clearly costing us goals at the moment, but it is a new tactic being played by players who are neither familiar with nor competent at it. That does not mean it cannot be effective in due course. Appleton has been successful with it before, and we all realise there will be changes in the goalkeeping/defensive area in the summer. This is about the future, more than the present, and there may be some pain along the way. Patience and trust appear to be at a premium in today's game. Personally, I find it all very interesting: new manager, new players, new philosophy, new style of playing.

Oh, it's definitely intended for the future. However, we don't currently have the personnel or pitch to make it work very well. I'd leave it to the summer and time on the training pitch and the friendlies. I don't really see the point of doing it now, especially as the back 4 and 'keeper are likely to be substantially different next season.

But yes, interesting times, if somewhat frustrating.

 

[Chimpimp]

Me neither. But you wouldn't really categorise that as an easily preventable error. Also, a long punt isn't the only other option. I think that's a fairly weak defence of the tactic, to be honest.

The logical answer is every time we gain possession we kick the ball straight off the pitch. Then see if the opposition can score. We will then definitely have no easily preventable errors.

Or every time we have the ball we pass to one of our players until we work our way down the pitch and score.

Am I oversimplifying?

 

[plumbob]

The logical answer is every time we gain possession we kick the ball straight off the pitch AND AS FAR UP IT AS POSSIBLE. Then see if the opposition can score. We will then definitely have no easily preventable errors.

Or every time we have the ball we pass to one of our players until we work our way down the pitch and score.

Am I oversimplifying?

Edited for you.

 

[Sincilbanks]

The logical answer is every time we gain possession we kick the ball straight off the pitch. Then see if the opposition can score. We will then definitely have no easily preventable errors.

Or every time we have the ball we pass to one of our players until we work our way down the pitch and score.

Am I oversimplifying?

John Beck went a long way with the former strategy, just sayin'

 

[Chimpimp]

John Beck went a long way with the former strategy, just sayin'

Clarity in what you are trying to do, is always good.

 

[nlondonimp]

There's basically 3 sorts of mistakes you can make when playing it around at the back:
1) Poor pass execution, the player selects a reasonable pass but simply executes it poorly
2) Poor pass selection, the player has several options and chooses the wrong one
3) Poor decision making, the player selects to pass the ball when he shouldn't or elects to hang on to the ball when he should pass.

We are currently regularly guilty of all 3, and sometimes combine them together for extra "disaster points". Bridcutt in the 2nd half managed all 3 in the space of 15 minutes at one point.
A sign of our current lack of understanding of our methods came in the 2nd half, from a goalkick which started a great move:
Vickers was trying to clip the ball out to Eardley but the team wasn't set up because Anderson was still in position for the long kick downfield. Morrell has to literally whistle and wave to Anderson to bring him infield to give Eardley the space to receive the ball and give him a first time pass, which once done sets us off down the right flank to create a lovely move.
Full marks to Morrell for sorting it out, but this is a set piece and I would have thought we would have our options and setups from this (whether it's on to knock it short and play it out, or push it long and fight for 2nd ball or drill it into midfield) pretty much nailed on by now.

for me that highlights the difference between a player with, and without, a football brain.

 

[nlondonimp]

I can't help thinking we may be being a little narrow-minded with this. The tactic is clearly costing us goals at the moment, but it is a new tactic being played by players who are neither familiar with nor competent at it. That does not mean it cannot be effective in due course. Appleton has been successful with it before, and we all realise there will be changes in the goalkeeping/defensive area in the summer. This is about the future, more than the present, and there may be some pain along the way. Patience and trust appear to be at a premium in today's game. Personally, I find it all very interesting: new manager, new players, new philosophy, new style of playing.

appleton has not been successful with it before, because the change in rules was only brought in over the summer.