Plymouth Match Thread

Quoted from pen penfras

But you have to doubt Holloway if he's setting us up to play this way against teams we simply aren't good enough to do it against. I'm all for pretty, attacking football, but playing a high line with 2 sloggers in defence is exposing them to getting caught out.

You could argue though that the free pass that the remainder of this season essentially is, has been a time to assess whether the players we have got now can play in the system/style that we're going to play next season. Do we play a deep defensive line and thus alter our whole playing style to suit what we've got now in certain areas, or does he say, right, this is what we're going to be doing next season so we're going to run with it now, look at who's capable of playing to this philosophy and deal with summer retention/recruitment accordingly.

With last night, I don't actually think it was the high line that caused any of the goals. It was the urine poor defending. Their second goal, after Green loses the ball, they didn't hit the space behind our back line. It was a just pass to their forward, who Waterfall had somehow got the wrong side of (Davis just as culpable for me for not either sorting it or covering round). The other two goals were just as dopey again but not through playing a high line with slow defenders. First one, between Whitehouse and Garmston they let a guy run in and head home unchallenged. The third one was a typical Town goal to concede it seems, where the ball seems to be in our 6 yard box for about 5 seconds without the goalkeeper or CB's dealing with it.

Quoted from pen penfras

Our defending at set pieces is appalling, that's not the players, we weren't conceding these goals from set pieces under Jolley. I have no idea what our marking system is, because a player looks like he's marked, then suddenly whoever was closest to him has sprinted off towards the ball and it's a tap in. Our full backs are either up the attacking end of the pitch or playing like a centre back leaving their wide players to put crosses in at will. These aren't all faults of the players, it's the way they're told to play.

Sorry can't agree with this either. If we're conceding goals from set pieces, it is absolutely the players' fault. Players are letting opposition players run off them and knock it in unchallenged and you're trying to blame the manager for it? Unbelievable.

Quoted from Tommy

You could argue though that the free pass that the remainder of this season essentially is, has been a time to assess whether the players we have got now can play in the system/style that we're going to play next season. Do we play a deep defensive line and thus alter our whole playing style to suit what we've got now in certain areas, or does he say, right, this is what we're going to be doing next season so we're going to run with it now, look at who's capable of playing to this philosophy and deal with summer retention/recruitment accordingly.

With last night, I don't actually think it was the high line that caused any of the goals. It was the urine poor defending. Their second goal, after Green loses the ball, they didn't hit the space behind our back line. It was a just pass to their forward, who Waterfall had somehow got the wrong side of (Davis just as culpable for me for not either sorting it or covering round). The other two goals were just as dopey again but not through playing a high line with slow defenders. First one, between Whitehouse and Garmston they let a guy run in and head home unchallenged. The third one was a typical Town goal to concede it seems, where the ball seems to be in our 6 yard box for about 5 seconds without the goalkeeper or CB's dealing with it.



Sorry can't agree with this either. If we're conceding goals from set pieces, it is absolutely the players' fault. Players are letting opposition players run off them and knock it in unchallenged and you're trying to blame the manager for it? Unbelievable.

But it's the manager's fault if he can't coach the players to defend in the way that he wants them to. We didn't look anywhere near as shambolic at set pieces under Jolley with virtually the same players. Vice versa, some of the players look completely different in a positive regard to what they did under Jolley. You can't have it both ways that Jolley gets slated for us having a shite attack but good defence and Ollie is a messiah for making us play football, but the defending is nothing to do with him. There's a balance to be made and against the better sides we've not got it right under Ollie. It's not slagging him off, it's a learning experience and I think we're going to have to get used to having games go like this. But lets not pretend we didn't get torn apart because of his tactics, because that absolutely is what happened.

Quoted from Tommy

You could argue though that the free pass that the remainder of this season essentially is, has been a time to assess whether the players we have got now can play in the system/style that we're going to play next season. Do we play a deep defensive line and thus alter our whole playing style to suit what we've got now in certain areas, or does he say, right, this is what we're going to be doing next season so we're going to run with it now, look at who's capable of playing to this philosophy and deal with summer retention/recruitment accordingly.

With last night, I don't actually think it was the high line that caused any of the goals. It was the urine poor defending. Their second goal, after Green loses the ball, they didn't hit the space behind our back line. It was a just pass to their forward, who Waterfall had somehow got the wrong side of (Davis just as culpable for me for not either sorting it or covering round). The other two goals were just as dopey again but not through playing a high line with slow defenders. First one, between Whitehouse and Garmston they let a guy run in and head home unchallenged. The third one was a typical Town goal to concede it seems, where the ball seems to be in our 6 yard box for about 5 seconds without the goalkeeper or CB's dealing with it.



Sorry can't agree with this either. If we're conceding goals from set pieces, it is absolutely the players' fault. Players are letting opposition players run off them and knock it in unchallenged and you're trying to blame the manager for it? Unbelievable.

You've nailed it there. Ollie has said many times they all train the same way - ie the way he wishes to play. Those who adapt may be worth keeping unless he has a better replacement in mind. It's no good playing the rest of this season with a style he doesn't like as it wont show him anything.

Our defenders aren't nearly good enough unless we play an ultra defensive game as per Jolley and even then couldn't manage many clean sheets.

We are entering a whole new era of attacking football with better players, and defenders who can take care of things at the back.

Nobody likes losing, but in the great scheme of things Ollie has done wonders so far and all eyes are on next season with new players and the current ones who can play the Ollie way.

Quoted from pen penfras

But it's the manager's fault if he can't coach the players to defend in the way that he wants them to.

But in the instances of set pieces or last night's first goal, it's not a case of being coached to defend in a certain way, it's taking responsibility and following your man - something you're taught at 9 years old.

Quoted from pen penfras

We didn't look anywhere near as shambolic at set pieces under Jolley with virtually the same players.

I've no idea if that's true or not, to be honest. But if you're right about that, I do wonder if it had anything to do with Jolley's method of bringing everyone back to defend set pieces. Everyone shat their pants about him doing it but I wonder if we did concede less goals doing that. I know there's the whole debate about it coming straight back for a second phase if we clear the first one, and personally I would leave a couple of players upfield, but there's a reason dozens of teams employ the tactic of bringing everyone back at various levels despite it not being to everyone's liking here.

Quoted Text

But in the instances of set pieces or last night's first goal, it's not a case of being coached to defend in a certain way, it's taking responsibility and following your man - something you're taught at 9 years old.

Yes, that's what you get taught at 9 years old, but zonal marking came along and then the hybrid zonal+man marking thing too. I couldn't tell you which system we are trying to play, because every game players are unmarked but nobody is taking control of any zone. And to be fair, this was still happening under Jolley from open play. We just weren't getting exposed by it so many times in a game.

Quoted Text

I've no idea if that's true or not, to be honest. But if you're right about that, I do wonder if it had anything to do with Jolley's method of bringing everyone back to defend set pieces. Everyone shat their pants about him doing it but I wonder if we did concede less goals doing that. I know there's the whole debate about it coming straight back for a second phase if we clear the first one, and personally I would leave a couple of players upfield, but there's a reason dozens of teams employ the tactic of bringing everyone back at various levels despite it not being to everyone's liking here

I think that is one factor, and the statistics state that it's better even if it is frustrating to watch. But there seems more to it than that. Not every team that leaves players forwards gets punished from the second phase almost every game.

Holy Defending Batman...

just watched the highlights.....i mentioned on a different thread after last weeks game how much schoolboy defending we were doing lately and those highlights highlight it even more....so many people ball watching it made the Plymouth players look world class when in reality they havn't done anything special in their own movement or runs to find themselves in acres.
We just stared at the ball whilst their players did the simple things like anticipating what might happen next.

Quoted from moosey_club

their players did the simple things like anticipating what might happen next.

Which is something too many of our current squad be it at the back (especially) in midfield or up front appear incapable of doing

Not a popular view but if we are going to do well next season go away to the “big teams” and set up not to lose. Three in midfield 2 of whom are relative rookies won’t work

Quoted from HertsGTFC

Not a popular view but if we are going to do well next season go away to the “big teams” and set up not to lose. Three in midfield 2 of whom are relative rookies won’t work

Next seasons team will be vastly different though. We all know the Holloway mindset is to let the opposition worry about us which sounds great.

There might be the odd case to respect the opposition a bit more - maybe Man City away in the cup!

I might be setting myself up for a fall but I would expect next seasons team to be feared.

I hope so anyway.

Has anyone considered if the team stayed over the day before.  Travelling a long way can bring on fatigue especially towards the backend of the season.