Season 24/25 | The Official Match Thread | Swansea City 1 Derby County 0 | Att: 16,501 | The EFL Championship

[Darran]

This happened at most home games. The autograph hunters must drive you nuts.

It can be an invasion of privacy on times but it is what it is.

 

[Andrew - North Hill]

Fair points, but if I had a pound for every time we have played a team in the bottom quarter of our division and I’ve worked out where we could end the night in table terms after a 4-0 victory, only to see us lose stupidly after under-estimating the will of the opposition to win and leaving gaps in our defence, I’d have £273 now.

This.

How many times in the last few years have we seen fairly ordinary teams come down here with a fairly basic game plan of letting us have the ball because we won't hurt them, then hitting us down the flanks (always our weakest spots) or just waiting for us to make an inevitable mistake.

 

[sainthelens]

It can be an invasion of privacy on times but it is what it is.

Think what could happen if they were aware of your celebrity connections?

 

[Darran]

Think what could happen if they were aware of your celebrity connections?

That’s why I never bring attention to my celebrity connections.

 

[sainthelens]

That’s why I never bring attention to my celebrity connections.

If I was you, I'd post a photo or 2 just to let em know.

 

[Darran]

If I was you, I'd post a photo or 2 just to let em know.

Nah that’s not my style my friend.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

Harsh. I didn’t see the game or manage to listen to it so was dependent on this forum and BBC for updates. He put out a packed defence and negative looking midfield, switched to a much more attacking 4-2-3-1 in the final quarter and won the game. From that perspective the idea that it was a tactical decision rather than just a disastrous error that he was too stubborn to change until it was nearly too late seemed reasonable to me. What I hadn’t factored in was that I am idiot. Thanks Lisa, the remaining years of my life will be much easier to manage now I know.

Lord grant me the confidence to tell someone who’s watched the match that they’re wrong because I followed updates on the BBC…

The tactics were awful. For the first half and much of the second we had zero shots. Not on target shots, shots of any kind. On the other hand, our back three managed to pass back and forth between themselves at a snail’s pace which increased our possession stats while achieving absolutely nothing.
They had nowhere to move it to, as the absence of a body in midfield (because we had one too many at the back) meant we had zero space. So inevitably, the passing back and forth bit ended with either Cabango or Darling hitting a diagonal over the head of Ronald or Tymon, or passing it back to Vig who booted it long to our ‘target man’, who was Liam Cullen !!!

Thankfully, Derby are very very bad. Still, there was always the danger of them nicking a goal due to them effectively having a corner every time they had a throw in in the attacking part of the field as they had a player with a particularly long throw.

We only even vaguely looked a threat when we reverted to a back four, bringing on Vipotnik and pushing Cullen back into a number 10 position. We also brought on Eom who created more in his brief time than Ronald has in the last half a dozen matches put together.

As I said, the only thing that really mattered was winning, but when it was mentioned that some would see the result as a vindication of Sheehan’s tactics (including the selection of the team), I said that you’d have to be an idiot to think that. We were playing an absolutely dreadful team and only managed to beat them due to a world class tackle from Joey and their player not having an extra half an inch on his leg length when a lovely cross from their right into our box was missed by a whisker previously.

I stand by my comment. Sorry you took offence, but if you’d seen any of the match you may realise where I was coming from. Arguing about it when you didn’t see any of it is just bizarre.

 

[sainthelens]

Nah that’s knotmy style my friend.

 

[FearOfAJackPlanet]

 

[LaJollaJack]

Jeez, we’ve some proper fannies supporting us from afar nowadays, aye.

With no grip on the realities of playing football at the elite level against a team of brutes, desperate for survival. Sheez and his diluted quorum delivered a professional job.

Proper entitled plastic armchairs, get a grip.

 

[Cinio Dydd Sul]

Jeez, we’ve some proper fannies supporting us from afar nowadays, aye.

With no grip on the realities of playing football at the elite level against a team of brutes, desperate for survival. Sheez and his diluted quorum delivered a professional job.

Proper entitled plastic armchairs, get a grip.

Told you......

Uncanny

 

[cadleigh]

Lord grant me the confidence to tell someone who’s watched the match that they’re wrong because I followed updates on the BBC…

The tactics were awful. For the first half and much of the second we had zero shots. Not on target shots, shots of any kind. On the other hand, our back three managed to pass back and forth between themselves at a snail’s pace which increased our possession stats while achieving absolutely nothing.
They had nowhere to move it to, as the absence of a body in midfield (because we had one too many at the back) meant we had zero space. So inevitably, the passing back and forth bit ended with either Cabango or Darling hitting a diagonal over the head of Ronald or Tymon, or passing it back to Vig who booted it long to our ‘target man’, who was Liam Cullen !!!

Thankfully, Derby are very very bad. Still, there was always the danger of them nicking a goal due to them effectively having a corner every time they had a throw in in the attacking part of the field as they had a player with a particularly long throw.

We only even vaguely looked a threat when we reverted to a back four, bringing on Vipotnik and pushing Cullen back into a number 10 position. We also brought on Eom who created more in his brief time than Ronald has in the last half a dozen matches put together.

As I said, the only thing that really mattered was winning, but when it was mentioned that some would see the result as a vindication of Sheehan’s tactics (including the selection of the team), I said that you’d have to be an idiot to think that. We were playing an absolutely dreadful team and only managed to beat them due to a world class tackle from Joey and their player not having an extra half an inch on his leg length when a lovely cross from their right into our box was missed by a whisker previously.

I stand by my comment. Sorry you took offence, but if you’d seen any of the match you may realise where I was coming from. Arguing about it when you didn’t see any of it is just bizarre.

Thanks for replying, even though you seem to have doubled down on the insult in the process…

I’ve been reading your football reviews since the days of dial-up internet and I have the greatest respect for your footballing knowledge. It’s way above mine.

I wasn’t at the game. I didn’t see what you saw.

But the facts are: we played a game against an in-form side with four wins on the trot, we spent 70 minutes inviting them in and not trying to score with a 5-3-2 formation, then we went 4–2-3-1 and got the win.

You see that as an accidental win after a series of tactical blunders. I respectfully question that. Nothing you have written there is incompatible with the idea that Sheehan didn’t want us taking any shots for the first 70 minutes.

I’m not even arguing that this was the case - just putting it out there as a hypothesis.

But I wouldn’t characterise anyone who feels different as an idiot.

 

[Londonlisa2001]

Thanks for replying, even though you seem to have doubled down on the insult in the process…

I’ve been reading your football reviews since the days of dial-up internet and I have the greatest respect for your footballing knowledge. It’s way above mine.

I wasn’t at the game. I didn’t see what you saw.

But the facts are: we played a game against an in-form side with four wins on the trot, we spent 70 minutes inviting them in and not trying to score with a 5-3-2 formation, then we went 4–2-3-1 and got the win.

You see that as an accidental win after a series of tactical blunders. I respectfully question that. Nothing you have written there is incompatible with the idea that Sheehan didn’t want us taking any shots for the first 70 minutes.

I’m not even arguing that this was the case - just putting it out there as a hypothesis.

But I wouldn’t characterise anyone who feels different as an idiot.

It is a characterisation made in the context of what was being said not in isolation.
BTW - If Sheehan planned for us not having any shots for 70 minutes then I really don’t know what to say…

 

[Ringwood]

Pundits fancy a 0-1 Plymouth win Wednesday even though they have the worst away record in the league. Maybe them beating Norwich will spook Sheehan into a another all hands to the pump 8 man defence.

 

[monmouth]

It is a characterisation made in the context of what was being said not in isolation.
BTW - If Sheehan planned for us not having any shots for 70 minutes then I really don’t know what to say…

Sheehan's an idiot...?