Murder on the Orient Express. Home to Leyton O, Sat 23rd Dec, 15:00

[BWFC_Insane]

Ultimately possession, style, all that stuff is subjective but it’s irrelevant in the grand scheme. Irrelevant. It doesn’t make us better or worse than our results. Which are ultimately in competitive sport the king of kings.

Nobody has said anything about any of this, Insane.

Worthy said (paraphrasing) that he found it hard to get riled up over possession football against side who sit back against us.

I said there's not much doing when we're playing dominant football and sides know it. They're going to turtle and we have to stick to our tasks.

Whilst it may not thrill some fans, it's better than us having to scrap against the odds in League One to try and win games.

We're playing like a dominant, footballing side because the manager has made us one at this level. That's just obviously a good thing for the club overall, rather than us having to to battle for every inch as Sam (and yes, Bruce too) had to.

If/when we go up there will be more battles.

In this division, with this squad and this manager we are closer to an Arsenal of old or modern City than to the old Bolton Wanderers and the football reflects that.

But it’s not better. Taking away the style part for a bit. Both those managers achieved way more in a shorter time space. So what we are now is worse. It’s not where we want to or need to be.

As for style of football the major problem is as managers like Dyche and Allardyce say is that if you’ve only got one way it will fail and when it does the wheels come off. It is something the very very richest can ride a lot of the time because Man City for example can have their pick of quality.

Our problem is that we are one dimensional and when it doesn’t work we are absolutely snookered. And we’ve seen countless significant examples of it. Barnsley semi final was the ‘wake up moment’. We either have to be so good at what we do that even if it doesn’t work we win. Or we need to have something else when it doesn’t work.

And as yet unlike the great Allardyce and Rioch sides who were tactically adjustable and had variety all the time and very good tacticians as managers we don’t yet have that. Evatt isn’t very good tactically and we lack flexibility. Those things need fixing if it’s ever going to get close to those great periods.

I completely disagree that we were just ‘plucky upstarts who got lucky playing combative football’ that is a complete and utter inaccurate portrayal of either period. We went toe to toe with the best sides and outplayed them in both periods. Against the odds at times yes but that wasn’t reflected on the pitch. And that shows how magical those two eras were and how great those teams were.

This is not some great or illustrious period for the club. We are in league one. It’s hopefully the road to some sort of recovery but that’s the best you can say. If in ten years anyone is still talking about this season and how much possession we had then clearly it was a huge failure.

[GhostoftheBok]

But it’s not better. Taking away the style part for a bit. Both those managers achieved way more in a shorter time space. So what we

Again, Insane, you've totally misread something and are now just running with it for paragraph after paragraph.

What I said was that being dominant at this level is better than having to scrap for points and that whilst sometimes that produces more "ding dong do" excitement it's currently better for the club to be able to expect to comfortably outplay teams.

I didn't say Evatt was better than Bruce, or Sam. I didn't say now was better than playing in Europe. I said not having to fight a battle every week to keep our win percentage up is better for the football club at this time.

We have a 60% win percentage this season in the league. Bruce's promotion season his win percentage in the league was about 45%. This might not thrill some, but we're quite simply winning more games and doing so more comfortably.

[BWFC_Insane]

But it’s not better. Taking away the style part for a bit. Both those managers achieved way more in a shorter time space. So what we

Again, Insane, you've totally misread something and are now just running with it for paragraph after paragraph.

What I said was that being dominant at this level is better than having to scrap for points and that whilst sometimes that produces more "ding dong do" excitement it's currently better for the club to be able to expect to comfortably outplay teams.

I didn't say Evatt was better than Bruce, or Sam. I didn't say now was better than playing in Europe. I said not having to fight a battle every week to keep our win percentage up is better for the football club at this time.

We have a 60% win percentage this season in the league. Bruce's promotion season his win percentage in the league was about 45%. This might not thrill some, but we're quite simply winning more games and doing so more comfortably.

We are only dominant because of football finance. Leagues right down to here have split across haves and have nots. And we are in the haves. We should be winning games like this and probably more.

Win percentages are irrelevant unless you also correlate against league placing because that shows you relative performance vs your competitors which is what matters.

Win percentage is irrelevant if you finish third and bottle the play offs. Utterly irrelevant.

[GhostoftheBok]

Worth noting that in Bruce's first promotion season (up to the old First Division, rather than the promised land) his win percentage to finish 2nd was somewhere around 58%. So we're also currently ahead of that marker, if by a squeak.

I think a lot of people forget how poorly we started that campaign. We lost half of the first dozen games and only won 3, was that it? Then things started to kick into gear - with John and Andy scoring about 15 between them in 10 games.

As things stand (and it can change), this season has been far more comfortable.

[GhostoftheBok]

We are only dominant because of football finance.

We are outperforming our spending too, if we're saying budget should equal league placement

Really not sure what you think you're proving here, Insane. Not much, as things stand.

You've said yourself recently we need to spend more if we want to be sure of going up. So which is it? Are we underperforming or not spending enough? I'd suggest you can't just throw mud at the wall and hope enough sticks for it to sound like you've got a point.

[BWFC_Insane]

We are only dominant because of football finance.

We are outperforming our spending too, if we're saying budget should equal league placement

Really not sure what you think you're proving here, Insane. Not much, as things stand.

You've said yourself recently we need to spend more if we want to be sure of going up. So which is it? Are we underperforming or not spending enough? I'd suggest you can't just throw mud at the wall and hope enough sticks for it to sound like you've got a point.

That’s debatable but the point is that leagues are less even than they were in the 90’s.

Relative performance matters not win percentages because relative performance is how good you are compared to all the other sides in your league.

My broad point is to stop comparing Evatt and this team to Bolton greats when this is a league one side that has not as yet achieved 5% of those sides and managers.

It’s not a comparison….yet. When we achieve that sort of success against the best teams in the country and beyond we can have a conversation. But not about some team struggling to escape the lower leagues. That’s all we are. A league one side. Until we prove otherwise.

[truewhite15]

We are only dominant because of football finance.

We are outperforming our spending too, if we're saying budget should equal league placement

Really not sure what you think you're proving here, Insane. Not much, as things stand.

You've said yourself recently we need to spend more if we want to be sure of going up. So which is it? Are we underperforming or not spending enough? I'd suggest you can't just throw mud at the wall and hope enough sticks for it to sound like you've got a point.

That’s debatable but the point is that leagues are less even than they were in the 90’s.

Relative performance matters not win percentages because relative performance is how good you are compared to all the other sides in your league.

My broad point is to stop comparing Evatt and this team to Bolton greats when this is a league one side that has not as yet achieved 5% of those sides and managers.

It’s not a comparison….yet. When we achieve that sort of success against the best teams in the country and beyond we can have a conversation. But not about some team struggling to escape the lower leagues. That’s all we are. A league one side. Until we prove otherwise.

So we're not allowed to compare the side right now with performances in the past, because you say so. Except when you do it. Which you do frequently. Then it's ok.

Gotxha.

[GhostoftheBok]

My broad point is to stop comparing Evatt and this team to Bolton greats when this is a league one side that has not as yet achieved 5% of those sides and managers.

It’s not a comparison….yet. When we achieve that sort of success against the best teams in the country and beyond we can have a conversation. But not about some team struggling to escape the lower leagues. That’s all we are. A league one side. Until we prove otherwise.

But I didn't, you did.

I said the style comes from being more dominant in games. I didn't compare the success of this side to anything, you brought that up because you misread a post and jumped in like Faye tackling Fabregas...except you missed.

[TANGODANCER]

I the Jury.....

Very respectfully, and after reading all the views, I think you're whistling in the wind in trying to forecast anything because football's so unpredictable. Leagues are only in existence because of the fact that there is no predictable sameness between clubs. Before you get the stones out, we will never win repeatably unless we accept that a "different strokes for different folks" situation exists and play to suit it rather than try to perfect a "one size fits all" model. Add the fact that you may well not be playing the same Leyton Orient, Plymouth, Blackpool etc, etc, that you faced last season. Clubs are learning how to play against us, and the only answer is to have more than one strategy in our armoury.

As just one example, every time we kick off the ball goes backwards for a pass the parcel session that inevitably ends in a throw-in or goal kick, even a corner for the opposition. Just occasionally, why not adopt the rugby territory tactic of launching the ball forward and signal our intent by getting some bodies forward right off. Change and doing the unexpected is far better than a Blackadder cunning plan that invites the neighbours in for a pot-shot session.

Amen.

[Harry Genshaw]

Interesting debate and lots to agree with but I found myself nodding along to this more than most.

Our problem is that we are one dimensional and when it doesn’t work we are absolutely snookered. And we’ve seen countless significant examples of it. Barnsley semi final was the ‘wake up moment’. We either have to be so good at what we do that even if it doesn’t work we win. Or we need to have something else when it doesn’t work.

It's possibly one of the reasons we hear calls for a Karl Henry type now and again. Someone, who when our style of play isn't having the desired effect, (cliche incoming) grabs the game by the scruff of the neck, puts in a few reducers, direct balls etc that has the opposition thinking "Christ. Where did that come from?"

[BWFC_Insane]

Interesting debate and lots to agree with but I found myself nodding along to this more than most.

Our problem is that we are one dimensional and when it doesn’t work we are absolutely snookered. And we’ve seen countless significant examples of it. Barnsley semi final was the ‘wake up moment’. We either have to be so good at what we do that even if it doesn’t work we win. Or we need to have something else when it doesn’t work.

It's possibly one of the reasons we hear calls for a Karl Henry type now and again. Someone, who when our style of play isn't having the desired effect, (cliche incoming) grabs the game by the scruff of the neck, puts in a few reducers, direct balls etc that has the opposition thinking "Christ. Where did that come from?"

I mean maybe but I think often the discussion about style does become reductive. On Saturday Evatt went to a target man when santos was sent off and we went more direct.

So there was a change.

But too often for me when plan A fails we don’t try something else. At home if a team camps in then what is wrong with early delivery into the box? It means teams can’t just sit in and watch it go sideways. There is a difference between expecting us to become some physical direct side and having a variety of tools to employ during a game. I mean Liverpool aren’t some lump it long side but if they can’t break a team down they aren’t shy of using a longer cross to get the ball into the box.

We sometimes do this but often as a last resort. I’d hope also that CMG gets going as I feel he could be a game changer and score some goals out of nothing. Again though I think we might need to change to accommodate him when he comes on as he probably needs to play from one of the wide areas.

[TANGODANCER]

A Mark Davies, Alan Thompson, Per Frandsen, Kevin Nolan..In this League I 'd almost settle for an Andy Todd.

[DJBlu]

2 games and it's transcended into this?

Blips happen. Got to show that is all it is on Saturday.

Vic and Charles up top.

Sheehan back in the middle along side Maghoma and Thomason.

Any wing backs you like with Toal, Jones and Forrester in the back three.

Get us back to winning ways just to silence our fans because we're not allowed a couple of bad games.

COYWM!!!!

[Worthy4England]

2 games and it's transcended into this?

Blips happen. Got to show that is all it is on Saturday.

Vic and Charles up top.

Sheehan back in the middle along side Maghoma and Thomason.

Any wing backs you like with Toal, Jones and Forrester in the back three.

Get us back to winning ways just to silence our fans because we're not allowed a couple of bad games.

COYWM!!!!

In defence, my OP on it was nothing at all to do with most of this, just that I didn't find possession based football very exciting a lot of the time, even when winning.

[Harry Genshaw]

Transcended. Blimey. I thought this was a forum!

[GhostoftheBok]

In defence, my OP on it was nothing at all to do with most of this, just that I didn't find possession based football very exciting a lot of the time, even when winning.

Don't worry, I got it. Sometimes on here it feels like those married couples you see arguing in the supermarket over cheese. It's not really about the cheese, Jeremy...it's not really about the cheese.

[GhostoftheBok]

It's possibly one of the reasons we hear calls for a Karl Henry type now and again. Someone, who when our style of play isn't having the desired effect, (cliche incoming) grabs the game by the scruff of the neck, puts in a few reducers, direct balls etc that has the opposition thinking "Christ. Where did that come from?"

Anyone who plays that role to the required standard is going to be more valuable to a side that uses him every week than to a side that needs him four or five times a season. Making it a bad use of funds.

The response to sides breaking down our play is not to throw in a midfielder who does it for them. It's to improve the play.

It's 3 1/2 years in now and we keep improving our record against the types of sides that people were saying we absolutely couldn't deal with unless we had that Karl Henry in there - yet here we are.

At some stage people are going to have to realise that they've been wrong about what we need for over 40 months...that's a long time to not learn from what's going on in front of you on a football pitch.

The real issue is transitional defence. That's what is now costing us points. It's not putting in reducers and hoofing the ball, it's dealing with the first 30 seconds after we lose possession. It's why we wanted Baccus in the summer. We are much better at that side of things this season than last; but it's still something we need to work on. We have started to settle a bit defensively now and the last two games look like slips and not some radical collapse.

There is nothing about this team that Karl Henry (or his clone) would improve. He'd break our possession play and not deal with our weakness. We need a very different kind of midfielder if we're making a change there in January.

The reality of this has been playing out for what, 158 league games? 78 in front of the home fans who are shouting this nonsense at Evatt.

20/21 - 50% league wins and 1.71 PPG
21/22 - 45% league wins and 1.58 PPG (a league up)
22/23 - 50% league wins and 1.76 PPG
23/24 - 60% league wins and 1.95 PPG

People really need to learn now. This isn't Keith Hill and the allotment boys with a barrow full of well-understood onions. This is a coaching team that understands how to win football matches and delivers continuous improvement.

Every piece of advice about Karl Henrys and getting it in the mixer is the exact opposite of how you improve this football team. Anyone giving that advice should be ignored and you can point to 3 1/2 years of evidence to back that conclusion.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I have to say, when we're struggling to break teams down, I have never once thought "What we need here is a walking yellow card of a defensive midfielder who never scored more than three times in a season."

I might think "What we need is an Ameobi" - someone who can win a game with individual skill rather than playing to the set patterns (which, to their credit, keep improving us). But that's another discussion.

[GhostoftheBok]

I have to say, when we're struggling to break teams down, I have never once thought "What we need here is a walking yellow card of a defensive midfielder who never scored more than three times in a season."

I might think "What we need is an Ameobi" - someone who can win a game with individual skill rather than playing to the set patterns (which, to their credit, keep improving us). But that's another discussion.

Oddly, we're missing players like Keanu Baccus and Kane Wilson. Strange, that.

[Mar]

I have to say, when we're struggling to break teams down, I have never once thought "What we need here is a walking yellow card of a defensive midfielder who never scored more than three times in a season."

I'd have to agree. I think that only comes up in conversation when we're up against it as per the Wigan and Pompey second half.