Plan B

Serious QPR topics only. Posted images may be deleted. Off-topic or thread hijacking posts will be moved/removed and posters disallowed access to this forum. NO TICKET RELATED POSTS. ALL TICKET RELATED POSTS WILL BE DELETED. NO EXCEPTIONS. Please put ticket related posts in the right place only.

Moderators: Virginia_R, nige101uk, willesdenr, qprdotorgadmin, ZENITH R

Post Reply
JC
Level 1 dot.orger
Level 1 dot.orger
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:48 am

Plan B

Post by JC » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:54 am

At least we have one, which I'd doubted. Before the game, I'd suspected that we might find the physical approach a very different challenge, and so it proved. Our front 2 in a 3-5-2 that had looked so effective closing down opposition teams in previous games really struggled to keep any meaningful possession and our midfield struggled to get the ball down. Second half introduction of Smith and Sylla changed the dynamic - Millwall played deep, and the 2 of them unsettled their defence and allowed our now adjusted 4-3-3 to really press high and latch onto loose balls.
Well done Ollie, you surprised me tonight

User avatar
dm
dot.org player kit 2007
dot.org player kit 2007
Posts: 12273
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 5:21 pm
Location: Just over the border...

Re: Plan B

Post by dm » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:14 am

Yes, agree with that but the turning point was their sending off, which looked harsh to me. At half time they clearly decided to sit deep and hit us on the break - successfully early on in the 2nd, but ultimately they conceded too much space allowing us to mount wave upon wave of attacks. I'm not convinced we would have got back into the game if Millwall had kept 11 players on the pitch.

I've been concerned about the lack of physical presence and height throughout the squad and particularly in midfield. Last night won't be the last time we'll have to deal with teams bullying us. Hopefully Ollie and the players will have learned from the experience and can deal with it better next time.

All of that said, the players never-say-die spirit was impressive and got us the deserved point in the end.

QPR_John
Level 5 dot.orger
Level 5 dot.orger
Posts: 5884
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:35 pm
Location: Reading

Re: Plan B

Post by QPR_John » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:21 am

dm wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:14 am
Yes, agree with that but the turning point was their sending off, which looked harsh to me. At half time they clearly decided to sit deep and hit us on the break - successfully early on in the 2nd, but ultimately they conceded too much space allowing us to mount wave upon wave of attacks. I'm not convinced we would have got back into the game if Millwall had kept 11 players on the pitch.

I've been concerned about the lack of physical presence and height throughout the squad and particularly in midfield. Last night won't be the last time we'll have to deal with teams bullying us. Hopefully Ollie and the players will have learned from the experience and can deal with it better next time.

All of that said, the players never-say-die spirit was impressive and got us the deserved point in the end.
Agree about the sending off being a turning point our plan B required the opposition to lose a man that won't always be the case

User avatar
westlondonlalala
Level 5 dot.orger
Level 5 dot.orger
Posts: 6110
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 7:07 pm

Re: Plan B

Post by westlondonlalala » Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:03 am

JC wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:54 am
At least we have one, which I'd doubted. Before the game, I'd suspected that we might find the physical approach a very different challenge, and so it proved. Our front 2 in a 3-5-2 that had looked so effective closing down opposition teams in previous games really struggled to keep any meaningful possession and our midfield struggled to get the ball down. Second half introduction of Smith and Sylla changed the dynamic - Millwall played deep, and the 2 of them unsettled their defence and allowed our now adjusted 4-3-3 to really press high and latch onto loose balls.
Well done Ollie, you surprised me tonight
It wasn't rocket science jc sticking two lumps uptop.

sohamranger
Level 2 dot.orger
Level 2 dot.orger
Posts: 751
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 6:36 pm
Location: Soham

Re: Plan B

Post by sohamranger » Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:29 am

Been impressed with Olly a few times this season with his substitutions and making them at the right time .

User avatar
Systemsguy
Level 5 dot.orger
Level 5 dot.orger
Posts: 5004
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2009 9:19 pm

Re: Plan B

Post by Systemsguy » Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:25 am

Sorry but Wall going down to 10 men for over 50 minutes changed the game last night...

Plan B? my @rse...

We were shite before that and after gifting them the second goal, numbers eventually got us back in the game as they retreated further and further defending their two goal lead... We still looked vunerable on the counter..
2017/2018.... Keep Calm, no matter the season, we'll follow our team.....

Image

JC
Level 1 dot.orger
Level 1 dot.orger
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:48 am

Re: Plan B

Post by JC » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:42 pm

westlondonlalala wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:03 am
JC wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:54 am
At least we have one, which I'd doubted. Before the game, I'd suspected that we might find the physical approach a very different challenge, and so it proved. Our front 2 in a 3-5-2 that had looked so effective closing down opposition teams in previous games really struggled to keep any meaningful possession and our midfield struggled to get the ball down. Second half introduction of Smith and Sylla changed the dynamic - Millwall played deep, and the 2 of them unsettled their defence and allowed our now adjusted 4-3-3 to really press high and latch onto loose balls.
Well done Ollie, you surprised me tonight
It wasn't rocket science jc sticking two lumps uptop.
Maybe - but before he made the 2 substitutions, I'm not sure that I, or others, thought that the solution to the problem was sticking 2 lumps up front. Yes, the sending off was the significant event, but for 15 minutes after, they still carried on bossing the game.

User avatar
westlondonlalala
Level 5 dot.orger
Level 5 dot.orger
Posts: 6110
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 7:07 pm

Re: Plan B

Post by westlondonlalala » Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:53 pm

JC wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:42 pm
westlondonlalala wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:03 am
JC wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:54 am
At least we have one, which I'd doubted. Before the game, I'd suspected that we might find the physical approach a very different challenge, and so it proved. Our front 2 in a 3-5-2 that had looked so effective closing down opposition teams in previous games really struggled to keep any meaningful possession and our midfield struggled to get the ball down. Second half introduction of Smith and Sylla changed the dynamic - Millwall played deep, and the 2 of them unsettled their defence and allowed our now adjusted 4-3-3 to really press high and latch onto loose balls.
Well done Ollie, you surprised me tonight
It wasn't rocket science jc sticking two lumps uptop.
Maybe - but before he made the 2 substitutions, I'm not sure that I, or others, thought that the solution to the problem was sticking 2 lumps up front. Yes, the sending off was the significant event, but for 15 minutes after, they still carried on bossing the game.
Don't get me wrong I was pleased with the effort in the second half but it was obvious from the first half that we coudnt string an attack together everything was pedestrian and there was no cohesion in our approach play.

At half time I thought a man up the only solution is to stick the two big lads uptop and pepper them with crosses, there was no other option imo.

City or Arsenal could have passed there way through the 10 men of Millwall last night we on the other hand looked clueless in our approach play in the first half, Smith & Sylla was pretty obvious to me.

I would have got Mackie and a defender off at half time I wouldn't have waited around, but like I say can't fault the lads for effort just a shame we went to sleep at the back.

User avatar
Esox Lucius
dot.org legend
dot.org legend
Posts: 19688
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:17 pm
Location: Banbury, Oxon.

Re: Plan B

Post by Esox Lucius » Wed Sep 13, 2017 1:10 pm

I would say that the goals came from errors made by midfielders rather than our defence which looked to be coping fairly well.
Edit. Watched it again and it is Robinson, not Scowen as I originally thought who got mugged for their second. I would also apportion some of the blame for their first to Smithies but that seems very niggardly considering some of the cracking save he made during the game.
Last edited by Esox Lucius on Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.
It's not the despair that will kill you, it's the hope.

QPR_John
Level 5 dot.orger
Level 5 dot.orger
Posts: 5884
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 12:35 pm
Location: Reading

Re: Plan B

Post by QPR_John » Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:23 pm

JC wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 12:42 pm
westlondonlalala wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:03 am
JC wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:54 am
At least we have one, which I'd doubted. Before the game, I'd suspected that we might find the physical approach a very different challenge, and so it proved. Our front 2 in a 3-5-2 that had looked so effective closing down opposition teams in previous games really struggled to keep any meaningful possession and our midfield struggled to get the ball down. Second half introduction of Smith and Sylla changed the dynamic - Millwall played deep, and the 2 of them unsettled their defence and allowed our now adjusted 4-3-3 to really press high and latch onto loose balls.
Well done Ollie, you surprised me tonight
It wasn't rocket science jc sticking two lumps uptop.
Maybe - but before he made the 2 substitutions, I'm not sure that I, or others, thought that the solution to the problem was sticking 2 lumps up front. Yes, the sending off was the significant event, but for 15 minutes after, they still carried on bossing the game.
You should have been in the SAR stand many around me were calling for Smith even before half time.

JC
Level 1 dot.orger
Level 1 dot.orger
Posts: 211
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 10:48 am

Re: Plan B

Post by JC » Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:45 pm

Smith, yes - but also added Sylla and went for what was essentially a 4-3-3 with Lua Lua on the left.

Devonranger
Level 5 dot.orger
Level 5 dot.orger
Posts: 6164
Joined: Fri Jan 18, 2008 12:20 am
Location: Exeter

Re: Plan B

Post by Devonranger » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:54 pm

Another positive for me is that we can bring these new lads from Exeter and Blackpool at a reasonable development schedule, without throwing them straight in and expecting/needing them to do the business from the off.

Still existing squad members that want to break into the starting XI so a good sign going forwards at the moment.

User avatar
Greyhound
Level 3 dot.orger
Level 3 dot.orger
Posts: 1374
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 12:19 pm

Re: Plan B

Post by Greyhound » Wed Sep 13, 2017 9:55 pm

Sadly, Millwall deserve some credit for doing their homework on us. They got in amongst our midfield 3 and forced us out wide, banking on their ability to cope with crosses. With a numerical disadvantage, this strategy began to crumble.

User avatar
Andy_N19
Level 3 dot.orger
Level 3 dot.orger
Posts: 3096
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2007 7:37 pm

Re: Plan B

Post by Andy_N19 » Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:20 pm

Systemsguy wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 11:25 am
Sorry but Wall going down to 10 men for over 50 minutes changed the game last night...

Plan B? my @rse...

We were shite before that and after gifting them the second goal, numbers eventually got us back in the game as they retreated further and further defending their two goal lead... We still looked vunerable on the counter..
Agree with all that.
Staff Benda Bilili

User avatar
westlondonlalala
Level 5 dot.orger
Level 5 dot.orger
Posts: 6110
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 7:07 pm

Re: Plan B

Post by westlondonlalala » Thu Sep 14, 2017 5:26 am

They went down to 10 the sat b4 @ wolves and only lost 1-0, apparently prior to the red it was a very close game & the stats would suggest that's right actually, they managed not to conceed whilst being a man short so obviously know how to defend.

I think don't quote me on it but they beat Norwich 4-0 @ home recently so maybe they aren't as bad as what there league position suggests, the first half against us they were good value for there lead.

I'm more pleased with remaining unbeaten at home, the more games you go without loosing at home the more psychologically it starts to stick, I remember reading a piece on Ipswich a while back on winning at home & how it became a habit they used to go into each game with the mindset of we've won so many at home this season that nobody is gonna turn us over, I believe it starts to stick in the mind so the longer we can go unbeaten at home the better imo.. been a while since we had a really good home record

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 21 guests