• Welcome, guest!

    This is a forum devoted to discussion of Wolverhampton Wanderers.
    Why not sign up and contribute? Registered members get a fully ad-free experience!

Pre-Season Fixture thread (22/23)

Not a great 2nd half. Flashes of opportunities and not much else. Defended ok though they had a couple of wayward shots.
 
The Bear said:
Not a great 2nd half. Flashes of opportunities and not much else. Defended ok though they had a couple of wayward shots.
Click to expand...
We tired badly. Lage should've made changes much earlier.

We desperately need a STR and to bin Donk off. He's no business being on the pitch for us.
 
Missed the first half and 10 minutes of the 2nd, but what I did see we looked like we can defend in a 4. Not much quality attacking play in the 35 minutes or so I managed to see. Have no idea why Campbell got booked, it looked like he was nowhere near the player! Ref looked a bit shit. Unsurprisingly so did Hwang. I really want to be positive about him and believe I'm being harsh on the lad, but I can't and I'm not. He's just terrible. Couldn't trap a bag of cement.
 
Johnny75 said:
We tired badly. Lage should've made changes much earlier.

We desperately need a STR and to bin Donk off. He's no business being on the pitch for us.
Click to expand...
Think it was purely for the fitness benefit accepting the drop off in ability. That said we don’t have any alternatives anyway. 2 players minimum as additions and then a Traore replacement.
 
Who was No. 77? Looked lively when he came on.
 
Back 5 seemed quite good to me

Midfield will always be let down by donk, a half decent midfielder in there would give us an extra dimension. Neves & Moutinho seem to be able to influence the game more in this formation.

Front three looked decent too until they started to tire a bit. MGW looked involved and trying to make things happen, the interplay looked very good.

We probably need to figure out how to manage games more to preserve stamina as when we tired our tight passing dropped off.
 
Very good first half and then other than Sa, very poor second half.

Still very much a work in progress, but we'll need results along the way.

Hard to know what to make of it all. We could go either way.
 
AndyWolves said:
I always thought RAN had the tools to play wing back but it never really worked for him.
Click to expand...
I think we all did and in theory he is the perfect type of player for wingback surely. But with the way we played it he had limited options, either cut it back in for Moutinho (or Neves) and then not much happened or pointless crosses as there was only 1 in the box. He could drive inside but then he's on his weak foot and without options it's easier to just run into trouble. Thinking if we play with the 3 attackers off a striker and have him driving forward with more options plus more to aim at for crosses it will be better. Prob just talking out my ass but that's what I'm thinking ha.
 
Was always clear he's a full back not a wing back, as are Jonny and Semedo. His best game last season was against Liverpool whe he essentially played there and we only lost because he went off. It was my biggest frustration about the 3 at the back. All will have good seasons when they are attacking options rather than the primary focus
 
Tony Towner said:
Was always clear he's a full back not a wing back, as are Jonny and Semedo. His best game last season was against Liverpool whe he essentially played there and we only lost because he went off. It was my biggest frustration about the 3 at the back. All will have good seasons when they are attacking options rather than the primary focus
Click to expand...
The system didn't allow anyone to flourish as a wingback for a long time. The build up was too slow which meant they were too easily isolated and became dead ends rather than outlets.

Earlier in Nuno's reign the distribution out to them was a lot quicker, remember the frequent big switches of play from Coady? Douglas got a lot more crossing opportunities than anyone who's taken his place since and Doherty ended up as a good outlet in behind later on from the same service.

The last few years that sort of distribution has largely disappeared, the wingbacks rarely got to receive the ball in such space and so were frequently asked to do things you'd have been asking of a 90's winger. If there had been better support and interplay maybe they could've worked quick exchanges to get in behind but there was rarely any chemistry between wingback and wide forward in 343, no opportunity at all with 352.

The wingbacks were always going to look more like fullbacks because the balance of the team was inherently defensive and negative. If they'd been more attacking and expansive maybe we'd have seen more from the wingbacks, we'd certainly have got a fairer sample to judge them by if nothing else.
 
If you look at our 11, we have 3 ‘kids’ who have unbelievable potential in Collins, RAN and Neto. I’m trying to stay positive and excited…
 
There's merit in some of that, but certainly not all. Semedo can't cross, shoot or beat a man. He wouldn't make a good wing back in any system.
 
Tony Towner said:
There's merit in some of that, but certainly not all. Semedo can't cross, shoot or beat a man. He wouldn't make a good wing back in any system.
Click to expand...

Doesn't sound like much of a fullback either by that critique, unless you want him to play for Tony Pulis.

There isn't a massively different skillset between the two positions, you'll get the odd one who flourish in one setup and dwindle in another but for the most part I think players who do a reasonable job of either role will be passable with the other too.
 
MARKakaJIM said:
Doesn't sound like much of a fullback either by that critique, unless you want him to play for Tony Pulis.

There isn't a massively different skillset between the two positions, you'll get the odd one who flourish in one setup and dwindle in another but for the most part I think players who do a reasonable job of either role will be passable with the other too.
Click to expand...
There’s too much of a focus on formation rather than tactics and ambition on here at times. Changing to 4 at the back isn’t a golden panacea.
 
I agree with Tredman. Intent is as important as the formation in determining whether you play attacking football or not. Three at the back could have been exciting and expansive, it’s just that we didn’t have the plan and/personnel for it to be so.
Likewise, four at the back can be boring and staid. However if played with an attacking mindset, it can equally be thrilling and adventurous.

Systems are necessary but the application and objectives are greater. The way we have approached pre-season gives me hope for a much more enjoyable year. Hopefully both the players and management don’t revert to type.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

The Bear
  • Sticky
2023/24 Fixtures-Results-Highlights-Reports-Verdicts-Stats
2 3 4
Replies
63
Views
6K
SSB
SSB
The Bear
2022/23 Fixtures-Results-Highlights-Reports-Verdicts-Stats
2 3
Replies
45
Views
6K
SSB
SSB
Back
Top