Wolves 2-1 Man City: Verdict Thread

[Tredman]

One of the most pleasing elements for me, after re-watching the game, was how we didn't wilt under the pressure after the equaliser, when most of the football world would have expected them to pull away 3-1 or something as we tired.

To actually regain the lead through a composed counter attack was so satisfying...

That was the big plus for me too - felt very different to Liverpool. Then we went up but went ultra defensive and didn’t look to be able to break. That was not the case today, the players able to run with the ball looked at if they’d be given license to do so regardless of where they were on the field.

 

[jlo]

Not really sure why Cunha attracts such negativity. I can certainly see why Lope wanted him. Seems to me that his price tag is what he is being judged by.

I think he has done OK since arriving and is clearly learning what the Prem is all about. His best game was at Old Trafford and the way he can carry a ball is a really good attribute. Yes, he has weaknesses but I'm sure he will improve those in time. Frankly, he's far from our worst problem.

I agree, I think Cuhna has been really important in both our wins this season too. He gets criticised more on the goals scored count really, which isn't unfair, but I suspect it's a matter of time with unselfish play. I reckon had Dias not deflected Neto's crossed, it was firmly Cuhna's goal too.

Maybe others at the game can verify, but I sensed a slightly less selfish Silva today also. Barring the one rubbish pass into space at the end, his energy looked pretty handy at the end.

The only player to come away without any credit for me was Jonny, just seemed way way off the pace. But I'm not sure in a 10 minute cameo is that fair to judge him either.

 

[sycophantia]

One of the most pleasing elements for me, after re-watching the game, was how we didn't wilt under the pressure after the equaliser, when most of the football world would have expected them to pull away 3-1 or something as we tired.

To actually regain the lead through a composed counter attack was so satisfying...

Yep it was an all round good performance, hard to find anything to criticise really. I do have one tiny one but it would be churlish given the cream of the game.

 

[Mel Evo]

One of the most pleasing elements for me, after re-watching the game, was how we didn't wilt under the pressure after the equaliser, when most of the football world would have expected them to pull away 3-1 or something as we tired.

To actually regain the lead through a composed counter attack was so satisfying...

Watching again, and this is a bit pedantic (what, online?!), but it’s pleasingly not even a real counter attack by my understanding anyway (though clearly it was counter to the general flow of the game). It was a goal that strangely incorporated various elements that are so often missing, go wrong etc:

Played out by Sa on the floor.
Intelligent forward pass from Kilman into space.
Purposeful run and cross from Semedo.
Composure and bodies in the box.

At the time I was a bit confused as to what had just happened and when I put it down on paper now I can see why it was all a bit hard to take in.

 

[Carsy]

One of the most pleasing elements for me, after re-watching the game, was how we didn't wilt under the pressure after the equaliser, when most of the football world would have expected them to pull away 3-1 or something as we tired.

To actually regain the lead through a composed counter attack was so satisfying...

I messaged my mate as soon as it went 1-1 ‘here we go’ and expected 2 to follow very quickly. But we didn’t wilt which was good to see

Nice to get a bit of luck as well. Well, we were surely due some

 

[Lycan]

What does everyone think of the formation going forward? I feel 3 at the back hides the significant weaknesses of Dawson/Kilman at the back, takes attacking impetuous away from Gomes/Lemina in the middle and shifts it more onto the wing backs and Neto/Cunha/Hwang, as proven yesterday, will cause problems for any defence.

We can't play the way we did yesterday (low block, defending man-to-man) against every team, we tried it against Brighton and they thumped us, but the actual shape I feel makes us much more solid and suits more players than the 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 we've tried to play with so far.

 

[sycophantia]

What does everyone think of the formation going forward? I feel 3 at the back hides the significant weaknesses of Dawson/Kilman at the back, takes attacking impetuous away from Gomes/Lemina in the middle and shifts it more onto the wing backs and Neto/Cunha/Hwang, as proven yesterday, will cause problems for any defence.

We can't play the way we did yesterday (low block, defending man-to-man) against every team, we tried it against Brighton and they thumped us, but the actual shape I feel makes us much more solid and suits more players than the 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 we've tried to play with so far.

Yep, yesterday formation is good for some games, he has to find another way(s) for games we have more possession without burning out by half time.
I'd probably stick with 3 atb for Villa, might not mean we win but hopefully follow up yesterday with a point.

 

[prawnking]

O'Neil has expressly stated that he wants the team to be able to do 'everything' tactically/formation-wise rather than have a rigid style.

I'm quite cynical about how realistic this is, but if they can master a couple of approaches I'd have no problem with playing 3 at the back in a 'horses for courses' way

 

[The Saturday Boy]

3 at the back was fine yesterday because we effectively ceded central midfield to Man City from the start deliberately . Lemina and Gomes were not looking to get on the ball and play about with it…they were hunting. It felt like we learnt a lot from the Liverpool game when we struggled as they stepped up on us…bar one or two moments, defensively we were untroubled.

It will be interesting to see if we keep it for Villa….I have a feeling we might.

 

[Aikiwolf]

What does everyone think of the formation going forward? I feel 3 at the back hides the significant weaknesses of Dawson/Kilman at the back, takes attacking impetuous away from Gomes/Lemina in the middle and shifts it more onto the wing backs and Neto/Cunha/Hwang, as proven yesterday, will cause problems for any defence.

We can't play the way we did yesterday (low block, defending man-to-man) against every team, we tried it against Brighton and they thumped us, but the actual shape I feel makes us much more solid and suits more players than the 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 we've tried to play with so far.

I think we will play it more often than not for the foreseeable.

Helps Kilman/Dawson and allows Toti to come in without dropping Kilman (who looked much more comfortable yesterday btw).

For teams who are harder to break down we may tweak the midfield by bringing in Bellegarde?

 

[Tony Towner]

What does everyone think of the formation going forward? I feel 3 at the back hides the significant weaknesses of Dawson/Kilman at the back, takes attacking impetuous away from Gomes/Lemina in the middle and shifts it more onto the wing backs and Neto/Cunha/Hwang, as proven yesterday, will cause problems for any defence.

We can't play the way we did yesterday (low block, defending man-to-man) against every team, we tried it against Brighton and they thumped us, but the actual shape I feel makes us much more solid and suits more players than the 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 we've tried to play with so far.

It's clearly now an option for games against evidently better sides, but in games where we should be expecting to match the opposition I'm not a fan, you are setting up to protect your weaknesses rather than exaggerate your strengths. In a binary sense you are picking Toti over Bellgarde, I'd be pissed off if we do that against Bournemouth for example

 

[prawnking]

Could go Santi/Dawson/Kilman too (if Santi is any cop)

 

[WsWolf]

Think playing deeper suits our defenders more as it tends to hide Dawson's lack of pace and Kilman's poor positioning. Also helps the front 3 as they can pick it up deeper and drive at the back 4.

 

[Lycan]

Think playing deeper suits our defenders more as it tends to hide Dawson's lack of pace and Kilman's poor positioning. Also helps the front 3 as they can pick it up deeper and drive at the back 4.

Definitely helps Sá as well, he's at his worst when the ball is played into the gap between him and the back line.

Crazy how we've tried so hard and turned over so many players to get away from playing 3 at the back and it might end up still being our most effective shape.

 

[prawnking]

Allows Doc more opportunity to get back in the team too

 

[WsWolf]

Definitely helps Sá as well, he's at his worst when the ball is played into the gap between him and the back line.

Crazy how we've tried so hard and turned over so many players to get away from playing 3 at the back and it might end up still being our most effective shape.

Helps with build up aswell, if it's rolled out there's better passing angles for the CB. I don't mind a back 3 with the right midfield if can be an attacking formation, we have the dynamism in there now to make 343 work better than we've had before.

 

[Squeak]

What does everyone think of the formation going forward? I feel 3 at the back hides the significant weaknesses of Dawson/Kilman at the back, takes attacking impetuous away from Gomes/Lemina in the middle and shifts it more onto the wing backs and Neto/Cunha/Hwang, as proven yesterday, will cause problems for any defence.

We can't play the way we did yesterday (low block, defending man-to-man) against every team, we tried it against Brighton and they thumped us, but the actual shape I feel makes us much more solid and suits more players than the 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 we've tried to play with so far.

I think we have to play the system that gives us the most chance of picking up points and for now, stuff performances. If that is 3 at the back, then so be it. Have to say, I think we are a much better team when we do play it and we look far more solid. Having a player like Neto means we will always have a couple of opportunities per game and the ability to break away through Cunha carrying the ball is also an opportunity.

 

[prawnking]

Makes it seem like everything from the last Nuno season onwards has been for nothing though!

 

[Tony Towner]

Makes it seem like everything from the last Nuno season onwards has been for nothing though!

...and with worse defenders doing it. It's a retrograde step if it becomes the favoured formation with this personnel imo

 

[Wolvensam]

I’ve no problem with us playing 3 at the back if it’s the most effective and suits the players we have. We can play it without regressing to the horseshoe and ultra negativity that was seen in the latter games under Nuno and most games under Lage.

I think it suits the forward players on the counter-attack a lot more, and hides the defensive frailties.