A very Posh affair, hope it keeps fine for it. Versus Peterborough away 14-12-2019

[Bertie Wooster]

Saying Hill was a CB our defending is the worst I've ever known in 30 odd years, its shambolic week after week we just gift the opposition goals. its Sunday League standard - a bit like the Manager.

[Bruce Rioja]

Saying Hill was a CB our defending is the worst I've ever known in 30 odd years, its shambolic week after week we just gift the opposition goals. its Sunday League standard - a bit like the Manager.

He was nay Bobby Moore, the lad.

[TANGODANCER]

I always knew getting rid of the Elephants was a bad idea. Losing to super-soft given- away goals has happened so often "Ad Infinitum" should replace "Supera Moras" on our crest. Doesn't matter what the excuses or reasons are, are, they exist as surely as "Bolton Wanderers Nil".

[Harry Genshaw]

On a positive note, it's the same score as when we last played this fixture when we had the highest wage bill in the division. Despite gifting them several chances, we obviously defended much better than in our last away game.

We move on. Next Saturday is way more important

[Montreal Wanderer]

On a positive note, it's the same score as when we last played this fixture when we had the highest wage bill in the division. Despite gifting them several chances, we obviously defended much better than in our last away game.

We move on. Next Saturday is way more important

Good to see there is still an optimist around....

[irie Cee Bee]

Just glad I have a club to support and when the injury gods believe that they have punished us enough, we will start winning games. We are not that far off. I have no problems with what Hill is doing to date. He is building a team with his hands tied behind his back (embargo). I will give him time.

[The_Gun]

That was the first game I'd been to this season and my thoughts this morning are:

- Bridcutt at CB did not work at all
- Luke Murphy wasn't anywhere near our players or theirs during the first half and was thus constantly giving them a spare man
- We were the better team during the second half, and if we'd had someone like Crawford in the team I think we'd have scored
- That second half performance gives me encouragement that we'd survive with a fully fit squad/some reinforcements
-Away support was pretty good

[officer_dibble]

Bridcutt at centre back after Accrington debacle is as mental as anything Owen Coyle ever did. He’s got the whiff of a mentalist has Hill.

[LeverEnd]

Sounds like Posh have been robbed at 1 nil up! This is only going to get worse sadly. Hard to blame Hill when you look at what he's got to work with.
I'm predicting 5-0

Yes it must be so hard for Hill only having the likes of Bridcutt, Jason Lowe, L Murphy, D Murphy, Wright, Verlinden, Emmanuel, Earl - all championship players in the past 1-2 years. I wonder how many recent championship players the likes of Accrington, Southend, AFC Wimbledon, MK Dons, Tranmere etc & the likes have in their squad.

1-0 is flattering to us today that 1st half was shambolic, this should actually have been 4 or 5-0 to P/Boro, I honestly don't know what Hill is doing as a manager, tactically or in training to improve the way we play or the way we compete - I just don't get him or what he actually does or is doing.

It's based on the fact they're in and out injured and half fit and he's having to play them when he wouldn't normally due to lack of alternatives.
I'm not his biggest fan but recognise he's a cheap lower league option for a skint club. I'll not judge him.too harshly at the moment though.
Next game is important to win well to keep chins up. Not because we've got any real chance of staying up but because there's a lot of season left and it could get unpleasant if they lose at home to Southend.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Intriguing game. Didn’t look like the teams would be two divisions apart next year. For some reason Posh changed their usual shape and dropped/rested their usual No10 Marcus “Not That One” Maddison. As it happened that meant they played a back three, like us, but with subtle differences, and not just in that theirs had Beevers in the middle and ours had Bridcutt.

Although all formations are (or at least should be) fluid, they seemed to be playing 3-5-2 while we were, initially at least, more of a 3-4-3, with Darcy and Dodoo either side of Dmurph and presumably told to do the old Stelios shuffle: you’re an attacker when we attack, a midfielder when we defend. Which is fine in itself, but as we attacked much more down the right than the left, it often meant Emmanuel and Dodoo getting in each other’s way out wide while the three home centre-backs dealt with Daryl and the largely theoretical threat of Darcy, who was never going to win a header. Result: very little penetration. Very little. I think we had one attempt on goal, which IIRC was the only time the three combined: from a Daryl knockdown, Dodoo played Darcy in and the kid fired just over.

In midfield, the initial problem was that LMurph and J-Lowe were outnumbered; to someone’s credit (player or management) Darcy started to tuck in a bit more from the left, but this only exacerbated the isolation of Daryl as Dodoo was still pulling wide. Surely better to get another striker in the middle and let Emmanuel - not always brilliant, but rarely less than energetic - roam the wide prairies.

Just as few midfielders can be equally billed as both “passers” and “tacklers”, few full-backs are equally adept in attack and defence. Chicksen is better on the back foot (see notes above re The Isolation Of Daryl), Emmanuel is better going forward. The only goal we conceded came when completely forgot to track Ivan Toney, who promptly scored his 15th in 25 games this season and deservedly wiggled his “pineapple” at the away fans. (If you’re gonna give it out, you’ve got to learn to take it.)

To give Josh credit, though, he did clear one off the line as potent Posh threatened to turn a lead into a leathering. And he later buccaneered forward to set up our best chance of the match for LMurph to nod wide. Emmanuel is not the complete player, but neither is he a complete washout. Some patience may be needed, as may playing him to his strengths.

At some point we had to change to chase the game and Hill did it reasonably early, 10 minutes after the oranges. It wasn’t a surprise to see Darcy make way – he’d looked like what he is, which is a teenager fast-tracked into a man’s league – or for Thibaud Verlinden to come on, but the other switch was less predictable: O’Grady on for Zouma.

That meant a switch from a back three to an attacking 4-4-2 which was in effect more often a 2-4-4 as T-bone and Dodoo flanked the old guys up top and our full-backs, without wingers to mark, tried to overload the opposition wingbacks. Understandably, we also went a bit more direct, trying to unsettle Posh with T-bone’s pace, COG’s muscle and Daryl’s nous, and Posh started to wobble. Something seeming cheekily like belief washed over the team and the away stand (wooden seats a la Manny Road, albeit bolted onto concrete rather than wooden floorboards). Peterborough had averaged over two goals per game, but if any team looked likelier to score now it was Bolton.

Sadly, we didn’t, because the best chance – fashioned when Emmanuel kept jinking forward until, with our newly attacking formation overloading the Posh defence, he found room to pick out a perfect cross – fell to the wrong Murphy, Luke nodding wide.

There might have been two other good chances created but free-kicks in good positions were stupidly wasted – one hugely overhit cross by golden boy Verlinden, another a wasted shot from (IIRC) Dodoo. Football managers talk about maximising those “one percents”, but set pieces are worth more than that. They need to be worked on and the apparent lack of a clear plan – even as far as who takes them – seems a dereliction of duty.

Other than that, I can’t much complain. On here and in the flesh I’ve railed as much as anyone against the decision to cast Bridcutt as one of two centre-backs at Accrington, but I’m relatively happy with the experiment of playing him at quarterback between two proper defenders (or as close as we can find under the circumstances). The main defensive risk is him sitting too deep and playing opponents onside, but this was quickly negated after some frantic handwaving from Hill (branded trainers) and Flicker (polished-black boots). And while I was surprised he was left in the backline after the switch here, it was a ballsy attacking move and worked out rather well, giving him more room to ping around passes than he would have found 15 yards further forward.

But passing shouldn’t be a one-man job. Too often in the first half particularly, those in front of Bridcutt chose to work the ball backwards to him rather than chancing some creativity themselves. There’s nothing wrong with keeping possession – one first-half round of passes drew away-section olés that were only slightly sarcastic – but it often masks a lack of self-belief. Or perhaps in this instance the easy option, because the first-half formation needs some tweaking if it is to offer attacking threat as well as relative defensive solidity: players need to find the spaces that hurt the opposition.

In the end, “only losing 1-0” never kept a team up, and the odds that already overshadowed the season are lengthening by the weekend. But, and it’s a big but, good teams should have more than one way to play. At Peterborough we had a good poke around at not just one but two new ways of being. It didn’t bear fruit yet, but here’s hoping it will in time – perhaps as early as Saturday's six-pointer.

[DJBlu]

Could someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think we haven't won a game with Liam Bridcutt in the side.

[nicholaldo]

Could someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think we haven't won a game with Liam Bridcutt in the side.

You are wrong - we just about beat MK Dons with him anchoring our midfield. But we've only won four times anyway and, in this instance, I don't think correlation implies causation.

[nicholaldo]

Intriguing game. Didn’t look like the teams would be two divisions apart next year. For some reason Posh changed their usual shape and dropped/rested their usual No10 Marcus “Not That One” Maddison. As it happened that meant they played a back three, like us, but with subtle differences, and not just in that theirs had Beevers in the middle and ours had Bridcutt.

Although all formations are (or at least should be) fluid, they seemed to be playing 3-5-2 while we were, initially at least, more of a 3-4-3, with Darcy and Dodoo either side of Dmurph and presumably told to do the old Stelios shuffle: you’re an attacker when we attack, a midfielder when we defend. Which is fine in itself, but as we attacked much more down the right than the left, it often meant Emmanuel and Dodoo getting in each other’s way out wide while the three home centre-backs dealt with Daryl and the largely theoretical threat of Darcy, who was never going to win a header. Result: very little penetration. Very little. I think we had one attempt on goal, which IIRC was the only time the three combined: from a Daryl knockdown, Dodoo played Darcy in and the kid fired just over.

In midfield, the initial problem was that LMurph and J-Lowe were outnumbered; to someone’s credit (player or management) Darcy started to tuck in a bit more from the left, but this only exacerbated the isolation of Daryl as Dodoo was still pulling wide. Surely better to get another striker in the middle and let Emmanuel - not always brilliant, but rarely less than energetic - roam the wide prairies.

Just as few midfielders can be equally billed as both “passers” and “tacklers”, few full-backs are equally adept in attack and defence. Chicksen is better on the back foot (see notes above re The Isolation Of Daryl), Emmanuel is better going forward. The only goal we conceded came when completely forgot to track Ivan Toney, who promptly scored his 15th in 25 games this season and deservedly wiggled his “pineapple” at the away fans. (If you’re gonna give it out, you’ve got to learn to take it.)

To give Josh credit, though, he did clear one off the line as potent Posh threatened to turn a lead into a leathering. And he later buccaneered forward to set up our best chance of the match for LMurph to nod wide. Emmanuel is not the complete player, but neither is he a complete washout. Some patience may be needed, as may playing him to his strengths.

At some point we had to change to chase the game and Hill did it reasonably early, 10 minutes after the oranges. It wasn’t a surprise to see Darcy make way – he’d looked like what he is, which is a teenager fast-tracked into a man’s league – or for Thibaud Verlinden to come on, but the other switch was less predictable: O’Grady on for Zouma.

That meant a switch from a back three to an attacking 4-4-2 which was in effect more often a 2-4-4 as T-bone and Dodoo flanked the old guys up top and our full-backs, without wingers to mark, tried to overload the opposition wingbacks. Understandably, we also went a bit more direct, trying to unsettle Posh with T-bone’s pace, COG’s muscle and Daryl’s nous, and Posh started to wobble. Something seeming cheekily like belief washed over the team and the away stand (wooden seats a la Manny Road, albeit bolted onto concrete rather than wooden floorboards). Peterborough had averaged over two goals per game, but if any team looked likelier to score now it was Bolton.

Sadly, we didn’t, because the best chance – fashioned when Emmanuel kept jinking forward until, with our newly attacking formation overloading the Posh defence, he found room to pick out a perfect cross – fell to the wrong Murphy, Luke nodding wide.

There might have been two other good chances created but free-kicks in good positions were stupidly wasted – one hugely overhit cross by golden boy Verlinden, another a wasted shot from (IIRC) Dodoo. Football managers talk about maximising those “one percents”, but set pieces are worth more than that. They need to be worked on and the apparent lack of a clear plan – even as far as who takes them – seems a dereliction of duty.

Other than that, I can’t much complain. On here and in the flesh I’ve railed as much as anyone against the decision to cast Bridcutt as one of two centre-backs at Accrington, but I’m relatively happy with the experiment of playing him at quarterback between two proper defenders (or as close as we can find under the circumstances). The main defensive risk is him sitting too deep and playing opponents onside, but this was quickly negated after some frantic handwaving from Hill (branded trainers) and Flicker (polished-black boots). And while I was surprised he was left in the backline after the switch here, it was a ballsy attacking move and worked out rather well, giving him more room to ping around passes than he would have found 15 yards further forward.

But passing shouldn’t be a one-man job. Too often in the first half particularly, those in front of Bridcutt chose to work the ball backwards to him rather than chancing some creativity themselves. There’s nothing wrong with keeping possession – one first-half round of passes drew away-section olés that were only slightly sarcastic – but it often masks a lack of self-belief. Or perhaps in this instance the easy option, because the first-half formation needs some tweaking if it is to offer attacking threat as well as relative defensive solidity: players need to find the spaces that hurt the opposition.

In the end, “only losing 1-0” never kept a team up, and the odds that already overshadowed the season are lengthening by the weekend. But, and it’s a big but, good teams should have more than one way to play. At Peterborough we had a good poke around at not just one but two new ways of being. It didn’t bear fruit yet, but here’s hoping it will in time – perhaps as early as Saturday's six-pointer.

A very interesting report. I initially found it strange that Hill chose to make yet another change to the defensive set-up, simply because he's been forced to make so many alterations to our centre-back pairings that I thought he'd take the opportunity to develop familiarity by playing the same shape and personnel when able to. Although I personally have serious misgivings about moving away from a back four, and am still sceptical of playing Bridcutt as a member of the back line, it's reassuring to read that you think it has the potential to work well. He often drops very deep to collect from the centre-backs anyway, so I can see the benefit of having him in there as a de facto defender, particularly if it allows him to provide additional cover for the marauding Emmanuel, and particularly as a tactic away from home.

It's also pleasing to read that we affected proceedings in a positive way by taking the initiative. I'm more tolerant of pragmatism than I think most are, but we have to find a way to improve our dreadful away record somehow, and I have no problem with us doing that by being bold and getting more bodies forward if it's effective and if circumstances demand it.

[nicholaldo]

By the way, has it been reported anywhere why Hill didn't pick Wright?

[Prufrock]

Cheers DSB much appreciated.

As noted, once a ball is moving notional formations are often little more than starting points. From what I've seen of Bridcutt in a white shirt he plays that holding role as a quarterback dropping v deep to pick it up off the centre backs. V little difference then between a 433 with one holding and a 343. Especially if the full backs are encouraged to press on, tough preferably not just as a diagonal is hit into our box.

[Hoboh]

Cheers DSB much appreciated.

As noted, once a ball is moving notional formations are often little more than starting points. From what I've seen of Bridcutt in a white shirt he plays that holding role as a quarterback dropping v deep to pick it up off the centre backs. V little difference then between a 433 with one holding and a 343. Especially if the full backs are encouraged to press on, tough preferably not just as a diagonal is hit into our box.

Wtf?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I’m all for adaptability - so far he’d basically only played a 4-3-3 so this game gives us two options.

As I say I think Emmanuel is more wingback than full-back and although I haven’t seen him I suspect the same of Joe Bunney, so this starting formation could come good later. Also notable that although it could be called a back five, it’s effectively pushing two defenders forward and playing a midfielder as a defender/quarterback. (To give credit to Bridcutt he also contributed a good couple of tackles on a Posh side who seemed peculiarly susceptible to gravity.)

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Cheers DSB much appreciated.

As noted, once a ball is moving notional formations are often little more than starting points. From what I've seen of Bridcutt in a white shirt he plays that holding role as a quarterback dropping v deep to pick it up off the centre backs. V little difference then between a 433 with one holding and a 343. Especially if the full backs are encouraged to press on, tough preferably not just as a diagonal is hit into our box.

Wtf?

basically a deep-lying midfielder playing long passes. Think Campo, if it helps.

[Prufrock]

Cheers DSB much appreciated.

As noted, once a ball is moving notional formations are often little more than starting points. From what I've seen of Bridcutt in a white shirt he plays that holding role as a quarterback dropping v deep to pick it up off the centre backs. V little difference then between a 433 with one holding and a 343. Especially if the full backs are encouraged to press on, tough preferably not just as a diagonal is hit into our box.

Wtf?

I mean, between performatively liking your steak rare and your coffee black as some sort of personality substitute you obviously know what that phrase means...

[Hoboh]

Cheers DSB much appreciated.

As noted, once a ball is moving notional formations are often little more than starting points. From what I've seen of Bridcutt in a white shirt he plays that holding role as a quarterback dropping v deep to pick it up off the centre backs. V little difference then between a 433 with one holding and a 343. Especially if the full backs are encouraged to press on, tough preferably not just as a diagonal is hit into our box.

Wtf?

I mean, between performatively liking your steak rare and your coffee black as some sort of personality substitute you obviously know what that phrase means...

Medium and White one sugar if consumed outside of home unless a latte and yes, the introduction of yet another Americanisum.