Curbs often said not to get too high with the highs and not too low with by lows.
Some people got far to high last week with talk of "announce promotion" and some people will over react in the opposite direction about this defeat.
Just as beating Rovers didn't make Robinson the greatest manager, Meire a great CEO and the protests redundant losing to Plymouth doesnt make all the players useless, lazy, disinterested losers or Tarbuck a bad good coach. Meire remains a bad CEO regardless. The protests were always about the owner not the results anyway and this protester, like 99% of others, wants Charlton to win every week whoever the owner is.
For those there a question.
What did Plymouth do differently in the second half? Did they change the way they played to stop us or what?
Did they improve and if so how?
I don't think the half time break made any difference. What completely changed the game was the goal ( no shit Sherlock). Up until that point Charlton had controlled the game completely without ever looking like scoring a few goals. We played at least as far as I'm concerned too deep and in league one you are always likely to concede from a set piece. It's what league one and two teams excel at. Plymouth had four very tall lads and we're always going to be dangerous at set plays. They scored and that gave them something to hang their hat on.
After the goal we weren't able or at least didn't up the tempo and again for me looked to be too deep. Given the amount of ball we had (I find it hard to believe it was just 53%) I didn't ever feel confident of an equaliser. The second goal had good fortune written all over it. Hacked clearance that was perfect for Jarvis who to be fair did very well but he should have been challenged before getting his shot off.
Edit: Chris Solly is I'm afraid looking decidedly iffy. I thought so last week and said so and I think he was our weakest again this week. Hope it's a blip.
Not sure if he's a striker buy we should poach their no 14 Jervis. Got both goals and caused us problems all game. Remember the last player we signed from Plymouth?
Not sure if he's a striker buy we should poach their no 14 Jervis. Got both goals and caused us problems all game. Remember the last player we signed from Plymouth?
Watched jervis a number of times now. I have been impressed each time. I am confident he could do a job for us at this level.
Not sure he would be a regular at a higher division but that would be a nice problem to worry about if it ever happens.
Curbs often said not to get too high with the highs and not too low with by lows.
Some people got far to high last week with talk of "announce promotion" and some people will over react in the opposite direction about this defeat.
Just as beating Rovers didn't make Robinson the greatest manager, Meire a great CEO and the protests redundant losing to Plymouth doesnt make all the players useless, lazy, disinterested losers or Tarbuck a bad good coach. Meire remains a bad CEO regardless. The protests were always about the owner not the results anyway and this protester, like 99% of others, wants Charlton to win every week whoever the owner is.
For those there a question.
What did Plymouth do differently in the second half? Did they change the way they played to stop us or what?
Did they improve and if so how?
Difficult to pinpoint it to one single factor.
They eventually punished us with the height advantage for the first goal which you could see them doing in the first half with us having no answer for.
I think Magennis tired so became ineffective.
Our crossing wasn't good enough and we didn't play with a quick enough tempo especially being a goal down. We also fell prone to the offside trap a couple of times.
And Plymouth probably got a rocket from the manager at half time.
I doubt he gave them a rocket based on a post match interview on radio devon. He said that he was happy for us to play nice passing and possession football away from the danger zone.
Seems like this was their game plan and it worked well. We simply lacked penetration as our final ball was always lacking. They then decided to take more pssession and attack more as the game went on.
If that was the game plan then it really was a risky one as we could have been 3-0 up and out of sight at half time.
Let's not get this out of proportion. We were very decent but we flatter to deceive. We have ball and quality players but we don't have a plan b and don't have a striker capable of changing a game. On today's performances I think we will be up there but no way threaten the top four. We just won't score enough goals. We are improving on last years piss poor turn out but we lack that special something. We are however a team. Haven't been able to say that for a while.
If we are going to be a team that is short on goals then we need to be able to keep clean sheets, I believe we have a pretty good defence. I'm all for giving a player a few games to get j to form and get bedded in, but on two performances I worry about Amos, his handling v Rovers was very suspect and i think (from watching on tv) he should have done better with the 2nd yesterday.
If you can't score up top, then you can't afford to give away sloppy goals at the back.
I said before the game, where are the goals coming from. We have got some good footballers in Fosu, Reeves, Holmes etc. We need at least another forward, preferably two. I have been worried about our physicality. We can't always out football a team. We need to be able to do the ugly things against a big side.
I listened to our (increasingly iffy, even poor) commentary on Valley Pass. My take is that Plymouth rode the storm, drew our sting, sussed us out, grew in confidence, got the predictable set piece goal, defended stoutly, and got a second late on as we searched for an equaliser. In short it sounds like a classic and predictable victory. We do not have the players to be unstoppable at this level, and we seem to lack nous and flexibility (maybe personelle) to have a plan B or C.
You can see how they got out of Div 2 and they are going to be comfortable this season.
Second half they pressed us higher to stop us building from the back and played the ball high to a giant playing against Dasilva. A giant with a very good touch and no little skill.
For all our possession we had little penertration and were so pedestrian.
I also agree the Solly comments. Still a good back but poor going forward.
Nice ground, great pitch and friendly supporters. Bar staff could prove strong competition to us for the worst in the league.
I listened to our (increasingly iffy, even poor) commentary on Valley Pass. My take is that Plymouth rode the storm, drew our sting, sussed us out, grew in confidence, got the predictable set piece goal, defended stoutly, and got a second late on as we searched for an equaliser. In short it sounds like a classic and predictable victory. We do not have the players to be unstoppable at this level, and we seem to lack nous and flexibility (maybe personelle) to have a plan B or C.
I listened to our (increasingly iffy, even poor) commentary on Valley Pass. My take is that Plymouth rode the storm, drew our sting, sussed us out, grew in confidence, got the predictable set piece goal, defended stoutly, and got a second late on as we searched for an equaliser. In short it sounds like a classic and predictable victory. We do not have the players to be unstoppable at this level, and we seem to lack nous and flexibility (maybe personelle) to have a plan B or C.
Was at the game and that's about right except for the defended stoutly bit in the second half. Our delivery and final ball was rarely good enough to challenge them - all they had to do was keep their shape and force us to cross against their giant CBs or take long shots which rarely troubled the keeper (only one from KAG on target looked to threaten).
Curbs often said not to get too high with the highs and not too low with by lows.
Some people got far to high last week with talk of "announce promotion" and some people will over react in the opposite direction about this defeat.
Just as beating Rovers didn't make Robinson the greatest manager, Meire a great CEO and the protests redundant losing to Plymouth doesnt make all the players useless, lazy, disinterested losers or Tarbuck a bad good coach. Meire remains a bad CEO regardless. The protests were always about the owner not the results anyway and this protester, like 99% of others, wants Charlton to win every week whoever the owner is.
For those there a question.
What did Plymouth do differently in the second half? Did they change the way they played to stop us or what?
Did they improve and if so how?
Difficult to pinpoint it to one single factor.
They eventually punished us with the height advantage for the first goal which you could see them doing in the first half with us having no answer for.
I think Magennis tired so became ineffective.
Our crossing wasn't good enough and we didn't play with a quick enough tempo especially being a goal down. We also fell prone to the offside trap a couple of times.
And Plymouth probably got a rocket from the manager at half time.
I doubt he gave them a rocket based on a post match interview on radio devon. He said that he was happy for us to play nice passing and possession football away from the danger zone.
Seems like this was their game plan and it worked well. We simply lacked penetration as our final ball was always lacking. They then decided to take more pssession and attack more as the game went on.
If that was the game plan then it really was a risky one as we could have been 3-0 up and out of sight at half time.
Whilst i agree that we passed the ball around well, i cant agree with the 3-0 possible score. We were very unlucky with McCormick's fine double save but we were also lucky they didn't get on the end of the low cross about 5 yards out late on right in front of us. Toe just inches away from turning it in.
might be interesting today to see Wigan v Bury .. how the teams are set up (4 3 3 .. 3 4 3 etc) and IF Ajose starts for Bury .. at least I'll be very interested in what two of (probably) our main rivals are up to this season
Curbs often said not to get too high with the highs and not too low with by lows.
Some people got far to high last week with talk of "announce promotion" and some people will over react in the opposite direction about this defeat.
Just as beating Rovers didn't make Robinson the greatest manager, Meire a great CEO and the protests redundant losing to Plymouth doesnt make all the players useless, lazy, disinterested losers or Tarbuck a bad good coach. Meire remains a bad CEO regardless. The protests were always about the owner not the results anyway and this protester, like 99% of others, wants Charlton to win every week whoever the owner is.
For those there a question.
What did Plymouth do differently in the second half? Did they change the way they played to stop us or what?
Did they improve and if so how?
Difficult to pinpoint it to one single factor.
They eventually punished us with the height advantage for the first goal which you could see them doing in the first half with us having no answer for.
I think Magennis tired so became ineffective.
Our crossing wasn't good enough and we didn't play with a quick enough tempo especially being a goal down. We also fell prone to the offside trap a couple of times.
And Plymouth probably got a rocket from the manager at half time.
I doubt he gave them a rocket based on a post match interview on radio devon. He said that he was happy for us to play nice passing and possession football away from the danger zone.
Seems like this was their game plan and it worked well. We simply lacked penetration as our final ball was always lacking. They then decided to take more pssession and attack more as the game went on.
If that was the game plan then it really was a risky one as we could have been 3-0 up and out of sight at half time.
Whilst i agree that we passed the ball around well, i cant agree with the 3-0 possible score. We were very unlucky with McCormick's fine double save but we were also lucky they didn't get on the end of the low cross about 5 yards out late on right in front of us. Toe just inches away from turning it in.
Yes I can accept that was a close shave but they still didn't make contact with the ball to get it on target but I do see the point you make. Either way we were unlucky not to be comfortably in the lead at half time.
Not surprised we wore blue yesterday as when you look at the number of teams in this league whose home colours are blue, we will be wearing red in he majority of away games
Shame Amos is another keeper like Phillips and Rudd that simply isn't good enough. It seems no keeper we get at the moment is good enough, which tells me we have a defensive issue too.
watching that it looks as though just as last season we were 'unlucky' and 'profligate' with our finishing though their keeper and defenders did well .. Amos should have stopped the second goal .. goalkeeping is still a major worry for us .. despite Amos's shaky start, Phillips is still NOT the answer so far as I am concerned .. goal scoring ? .. so close, we COULD have won this comfortably .. thing is we didn't and that is a cause for concern but nothing that can't be improved upon .. thing is. is there a 20/25 goal striker with experience of this league who is available ? .. I think not
Our pretty passing game was lovely to watch but needs to be mixed up with some direct stuff at times.
We often seemed to over-elaborate, playing one pass too many - sure we retained possession, but Argyle defended in pairs denying us space and closing us down quickly. And that became much of the pattern of the game.
As said already, Argyle were a big and physical side, generally very well organised and contained us, working hard for each other. They played like like they were the away side. The first goal gave them the belief and confidence that they could get a result.
As the game wore on they become more physical and got away with it. But we ran out of ideas, no movement and not enough urgency to cause them any panic.
It's all about taking chances: Argyle too theirs and we didn't.
As one of my local Argyle mates said, the result could have gone either way. Another day, we'll play much worse and win.
PS: Good to meet up again with Tellytubby and LewisCoaches. And Ketman, Gumbo and co.
It's a dilemma because Solly is still a decent defender and an experienced head.
But he has been no real attacking threat for a long while now, so automatically makes his right-midfielder play deeper. For instance, I thought JBG had to play far too deep when he had Solly behind him and was much more effective once Motta pushed him forward.
Given Solly's injury record, it's likely that Dijksteel will get games and it'll be up to him to take his chance.
Need to keep Djiksteel under wraps until Feb. Barnes suffered against a quality winger last time, but has the pace to be a better replacement for Chris. Would give us some much needed height on set pieces also.
Yes but Sheffield Utd have a player called Billy Sharp who has scored 52 goals in 92 appearances. We have no one who gets close to Carl Leaburn's goals per game ratio and no one who could lay on as many chances as Carl did.
As has been said throughout the thread (and elsewhere) we need a strike force which is capable of finding the net. Consistently.
I quite enjoyed (most of) the game on Saturday and we played some neat passing football particularly during the first half. But in the cold light of day it's clear why it went wrong - it was generally powder puff stuff. There was precious little pace, innovation or forward passing. It was a bit like having 10 dodgy clones of Ray Wilkins on the pitch. Then there's the quick short free kicks. These have a place in any game but doing it all the time whatever the circumstances becomes counter-productive and easy for the opposition to come to terms with.
In addition, it would have been obvious to the worst manager ever, even Karel Fraeye, that we are a diminutive side and that he needed to plan to take advantage of that. That makes us extremely easy to beat with trashy, classless but effective football. How many half decent chances did Plymouth have? Three I can remember and they scored with two of them. This is likely to be out downfall this season unless we find a few a couple more players with power, height and strength. Ooh and a bit of skill too.
Finally a refereeing observations. First how can any vaguely competent referee give an indirect free-kick for an offside when the Charlton player was coming back from an offside position AND allow the opposition to take the free-kick from well inside the Charlton half?
watching that it looks as though just as last season we were 'unlucky' and 'profligate' with our finishing though their keeper and defenders did well .. Amos should have stopped the second goal .. goalkeeping is still a major worry for us .. despite Amos's shaky start, Phillips is still NOT the answer so far as I am concerned .. goal scoring ? .. so close, we COULD have won this comfortably .. thing is we didn't and that is a cause for concern but nothing that can't be improved upon .. thing is. is there a 20/25 goal striker with experience of this league who is available ? .. I think not
To be fair having just watched the hi-lights the save from the keeper and the headed clearance were both worldies, on another day they both go in and we win comfortably.
On yesterdays performance i'm not convinced that Amos is that good but let's give him a few more games.
Interesting when KR says that details around the WATT move will stay internal, will he be able to bring in another striker? We all know that's what's needed and would make sense as he has brought in some reasonable signings so far.
We let in 2 goals against Plymouth so our defence is also a problem. Another mediocre season beckons!
Amos's goalkeeper for the second goal was awful! ! It was a ok shot from 20+ yards but a decent keeper would have saved it! Phillips would have! Martin would have! Bolder ,Salmon and Brownie would have! Send him back to Bolton!
Plymouth were more Physical and closed us down quicker. We needed to be more agressive and should have pushed up and squeezed the play a bit more.
We should be passing the ball more quickly, Magennis didn't look match fit and he could also do with a bit more support, we need another striker and KR could then consider changing to a 442 formation. Not sure if KR has a plan B but early days so lets wait and see.
4 2 3 1 is a decent formation if you are playing in the premier league or the champions league, because you have players who are intelligent enough to make it work. We are playing in league one and there is a reason for that. We should be playing 4 4 2 and try not to overcompliate things. The problem is that Robinson is obsessed with his system and has no plan B. Mid table as things stand I'm afraid.
4 2 3 1 is a decent formation if you are playing in the premier league or the champions league, because you have players who are intelligent enough to make it work. We are playing in league one and there is a reason for that. We should be playing 4 4 2 and try not to overcompliate things. The problem is that Robinson is obsessed with his system and has no plan B. Mid table as things stand I'm afraid.
I agree! 4-4-2 everytime for me! We should definitely play it at The Valley and in away games like Plymouth and play with one up top against teams like Blackburn or Wigan if they was at top and doing well, otherwise Robbo is relying to much on Holmes,Clarke or Reeves to score most the goals!!!!! If Holmes has a quite games we are are stuffed
Our pretty passing game was lovely to watch but needs to be mixed up with some direct stuff at times.
We often seemed to over-elaborate, playing one pass too many - sure we retained possession, but Argyle defended in pairs denying us space and closing us down quickly. And that became much of the pattern of the game.
As said already, Argyle were a big and physical side, generally very well organised and contained us, working hard for each other. They played like like they were the away side. The first goal gave them the belief and confidence that they could get a result.
As the game wore on they become more physical and got away with it. But we ran out of ideas, no movement and not enough urgency to cause them any panic.
It's all about taking chances: Argyle too theirs and we didn't.
As one of my local Argyle mates said, the result could have gone either way. Another day, we'll play much worse and win.
PS: Good to meet up again with Tellytubby and LewisCoaches. And Ketman, Gumbo and co.
Have we ever had a Scottish manager? I can't think of one! Anyway most of them seem to get the best out of there teams!
Our pretty passing game was lovely to watch but needs to be mixed up with some direct stuff at times.
We often seemed to over-elaborate, playing one pass too many - sure we retained possession, but Argyle defended in pairs denying us space and closing us down quickly. And that became much of the pattern of the game.
As said already, Argyle were a big and physical side, generally very well organised and contained us, working hard for each other. They played like like they were the away side. The first goal gave them the belief and confidence that they could get a result.
As the game wore on they become more physical and got away with it. But we ran out of ideas, no movement and not enough urgency to cause them any panic.
It's all about taking chances: Argyle too theirs and we didn't.
As one of my local Argyle mates said, the result could have gone either way. Another day, we'll play much worse and win.
PS: Good to meet up again with Tellytubby and LewisCoaches. And Ketman, Gumbo and co.
Have we ever had a Scottish manager? I can't think of one! Anyway most of them seem to get the best out of there teams!
Comments
After the goal we weren't able or at least didn't up the tempo and again for me looked to be too deep. Given the amount of ball we had (I find it hard to believe it was just 53%) I didn't ever feel confident of an equaliser. The second goal had good fortune written all over it. Hacked clearance that was perfect for Jarvis who to be fair did very well but he should have been challenged before getting his shot off.
Edit: Chris Solly is I'm afraid looking decidedly iffy. I thought so last week and said so and I think he was our weakest again this week. Hope it's a blip.
Not sure he would be a regular at a higher division but that would be a nice problem to worry about if it ever happens.
If you can't score up top, then you can't afford to give away sloppy goals at the back.
My take is that Plymouth rode the storm, drew our sting, sussed us out, grew in confidence, got the predictable set piece goal, defended stoutly, and got a second late on as we searched for an equaliser.
In short it sounds like a classic and predictable victory.
We do not have the players to be unstoppable at this level, and we seem to lack nous and flexibility (maybe personelle) to have a plan B or C.
Second half they pressed us higher to stop us building from the back and played the ball high to a giant playing against Dasilva. A giant with a very good touch and no little skill.
For all our possession we had little penertration and were so pedestrian.
I also agree the Solly comments. Still a good back but poor going forward.
Nice ground, great pitch and friendly supporters. Bar staff could prove strong competition to us for the worst in the league.
Shame Amos is another keeper like Phillips and Rudd that simply isn't good enough. It seems no keeper we get at the moment is good enough, which tells me we have a defensive issue too.
Amos should have stopped the second goal .. goalkeeping is still a major worry for us .. despite Amos's shaky start, Phillips is still NOT the answer so far as I am concerned ..
goal scoring ? .. so close, we COULD have won this comfortably .. thing is we didn't and that is a cause for concern but nothing that can't be improved upon .. thing is. is there a 20/25 goal striker with experience of this league who is available ? .. I think not
We often seemed to over-elaborate, playing one pass too many - sure we retained possession, but Argyle defended in pairs denying us space and closing us down quickly. And that became much of the pattern of the game.
As said already, Argyle were a big and physical side, generally very well organised and contained us, working hard for each other.
They played like like they were the away side. The first goal gave them the belief and confidence that they could get a result.
As the game wore on they become more physical and got away with it.
But we ran out of ideas, no movement and not enough urgency to cause them any panic.
It's all about taking chances: Argyle too theirs and we didn't.
As one of my local Argyle mates said, the result could have gone either way.
Another day, we'll play much worse and win.
PS: Good to meet up again with Tellytubby and LewisCoaches.
And Ketman, Gumbo and co.
But he has been no real attacking threat for a long while now, so automatically makes his right-midfielder play deeper. For instance, I thought JBG had to play far too deep when he had Solly behind him and was much more effective once Motta pushed him forward.
Given Solly's injury record, it's likely that Dijksteel will get games and it'll be up to him to take his chance.
As has been said throughout the thread (and elsewhere) we need a strike force which is capable of finding the net. Consistently.
I quite enjoyed (most of) the game on Saturday and we played some neat passing football particularly during the first half. But in the cold light of day it's clear why it went wrong - it was generally powder puff stuff. There was precious little pace, innovation or forward passing. It was a bit like having 10 dodgy clones of Ray Wilkins on the pitch. Then there's the quick short free kicks. These have a place in any game but doing it all the time whatever the circumstances becomes counter-productive and easy for the opposition to come to terms with.
In addition, it would have been obvious to the worst manager ever, even Karel Fraeye, that we are a diminutive side and that he needed to plan to take advantage of that. That makes us extremely easy to beat with trashy, classless but effective football. How many half decent chances did Plymouth have? Three I can remember and they scored with two of them. This is likely to be out downfall this season unless we find a few a couple more players with power, height and strength. Ooh and a bit of skill too.
Finally a refereeing observations. First how can any vaguely competent referee give an indirect free-kick for an offside when the Charlton player was coming back from an offside position AND allow the opposition to take the free-kick from well inside the Charlton half?
Interesting when KR says that details around the WATT move will stay internal, will he be able to bring in another striker? We all know that's what's needed and would make sense as he has brought in some reasonable signings so far.
Alex MacFarlane