It's Obvious to us all except Slade

I like nearly all at the stadium tonight were in despair. We were in total control in the first half. Ten minutes into the second half bearing in mind recent results we had to be sensible. Watt needed to come off to keep him for Birmingham. Jones was needed to defend set pieces where he excels and to hold up play in attack. Therefore we did not need to change like for like. As they had more midfielders than us and so gave them possession and out gunning us, we needed to bring on Witts and play him in front of the centre backs to get him on the ball. He would have kept it easily and deprived the opposition of the ball. This would've enabled Gunner and Ralls to provide the energy and support. It's not rocket science. It just makes sense. You do not have to drop deep to preserve the lead you just keep control of the ball and starve the opposition of it and they then lose heart. Why can't Slade just not see it? It's just incredible.

Well put, mate.
As you say, everyone else could see it.

I like nearly all at the stadium tonight were in despair. We were in total control in the first half. Ten minutes into the second half bearing in mind recent results we had to be sensible. Watt needed to come off to keep him for Birmingham. Jones was needed to defend set pieces where he excels and to hold up play in attack. Therefore we did not need to change like for like. As they had more midfielders than us and so gave them possession and out gunning us, we needed to bring on Witts and play him in front of the centre backs to get him on the ball. He would have kept it easily and deprived the opposition of the ball. This would've enabled Gunner and Ralls to provide the energy and support. It's not rocket science. It just makes sense. You do not have to drop deep to preserve the lead you just keep control of the ball and starve the opposition of it and they then lose heart. Why can't Slade just not see it? It's just incredible.

Totally agree

I like nearly all at the stadium tonight were in despair. We were in total control in the first half. Ten minutes into the second half bearing in mind recent results we had to be sensible. Watt needed to come off to keep him for Birmingham. Jones was needed to defend set pieces where he excels and to hold up play in attack. Therefore we did not need to change like for like. As they had more midfielders than us and so gave them possession and out gunning us, we needed to bring on Witts and play him in front of the centre backs to get him on the ball. He would have kept it easily and deprived the opposition of the ball. This would've enabled Gunner and Ralls to provide the energy and support. It's not rocket science. It just makes sense. You do not have to drop deep to preserve the lead you just keep control of the ball and starve the opposition of it and they then lose heart. Why can't Slade just not see it? It's just incredible.

well said

Yep. Well said.

Ok it worked out ok in the end last night but as weve seen with Burnley and Sheff Weds then thats not always the case.

A tad concerning that 3 homes games on the trot and the penny still hasnt dropped mind.

Whilst I agree with the OP I'm a bit staggered that some people are only just seeing this.This thing about defending 20m deeper every time we score first has been with us for years,even in Lenny Lawrences time we were the same.Its been going on far longer than Slades tenure so Ive come to the decision that it must be a club culture thing.

Whilst I agree with the OP I'm a bit staggered that some people are only just seeing this.This thing about defending 20m deeper every time we score first has been with us for years,even in Lenny Lawrences time we were the same.Its been going on far longer than Slades tenure so Ive come to the decision that it must be a club culture thing.

We can only judge our own team as they are the ones we see most of. But like you for years I have wondered why this kind of thing seems to happen to us so often?

Things over a season are supposed to level out but it is hard to think of a season where we have come back from 2 down more often than the other way.

My memories are dominated by losing a 4-0 half-time lead to Peterborough a 3-0 at Plymouth I think the same to WBA and so many 2-0's (including Norwich at home last season).

These leads have been surrendered under other managers not just Slade and it does make you wonder if it is a cultural thing.

I like nearly all at the stadium tonight were in despair. We were in total control in the first half. Ten minutes into the second half bearing in mind recent results we had to be sensible. Watt needed to come off to keep him for Birmingham. Jones was needed to defend set pieces where he excels and to hold up play in attack. Therefore we did not need to change like for like. As they had more midfielders than us and so gave them possession and out gunning us, we needed to bring on Witts and play him in front of the centre backs to get him on the ball. He would have kept it easily and deprived the opposition of the ball. This would've enabled Gunner and Ralls to provide the energy and support. It's not rocket science. It just makes sense. You do not have to drop deep to preserve the lead you just keep control of the ball and starve the opposition of it and they then lose heart. Why can't Slade just not see it? It's just incredible.

Spot in it was.obvious and this is why slade won't win over fans. Even Bruno could have been added. Mason is not even any good. The slowest closing down I have ever seen. Can he not sprint?

And WHY oh WHY make the sub when we are defending a corner!!!!! That is school boy stuff

I like nearly all at the stadium tonight were in despair. We were in total control in the first half. Ten minutes into the second half bearing in mind recent results we had to be sensible. Watt needed to come off to keep him for Birmingham. Jones was needed to defend set pieces where he excels and to hold up play in attack. Therefore we did not need to change like for like. As they had more midfielders than us and so gave them possession and out gunning us, we needed to bring on Witts and play him in front of the centre backs to get him on the ball. He would have kept it easily and deprived the opposition of the ball. This would've enabled Gunner and Ralls to provide the energy and support. It's not rocket science. It just makes sense. You do not have to drop deep to preserve the lead you just keep control of the ball and starve the opposition of it and they then lose heart. Why can't Slade just not see it? It's just incredible.

Spot on when you are winning 2-0 its all about keeping procession of the ball and there is no one better than Peter Whittigham

And WHY oh WHY make the sub when we are defending a corner!!!!! That is school boy stuff

And have 2 players standing in no mans land next to the corner taker and no one on the back post

And WHY oh WHY make the sub when we are defending a corner!!!!! That is school boy stuff

And have 2 players standing in no mans land next to the corner taker and no one on the back post

Well that should be Marshalls job as keeper and captain to make sure he has men on the post.

Agree with the op though, whitts could have been brought on to slow things down and keep possession.

Some comments above about dropping deep being a 'cultural' issue. Sorry, I don't agree with that. The job of the manager is to dictate tactics and philosophy.

Its because Slade is so tactically inept that we dropped 4 points against Burnley and Sheffield Wednesday and deprived us of a top six place. It was just sheer luck that we didn't drop another 2 points last night.

If we finish 7th at the end of the season, those dropped points will haunt us. Sorry, my opinion that Slade has to go remains unchanged.

Some comments above about dropping deep being a 'cultural' issue. Sorry, I don't agree with that. The job of the manager is to dictate tactics and philosophy.

Its because Slade is so tactically inept that we dropped 4 points against Burnley and Sheffield Wednesday and deprived us of a top six place. It was just sheer luck that we didn't drop another 2 points last night.

If we finish 7th at the end of the season, those dropped points will haunt us. Sorry, my opinion that Slade has to go remains unchanged.

"sheer luck"... What a joke!

So dropping a 2 goal lead and scoring in the 92nd minute was a genius tactical decision from Slade was it?

Sorry. That's a worse tactic than anything Slade has come up with.
Whitts is a hopeless defender and would be about as much help as a chocolate fire guard.
He hardly ever wins a tackle and his marking is appalling.
Jones would be hopeless on his own up front, besides the fact he was struggling anyway, he is far to slow at closing down.

Just goes to show- fans slag him off, and then come up with even worse ideas !

It was a tough call as Mason is also a bit weak, it's a pity we didn't have KD to bring on as he could have blocked up the middle with one of the others backing KJ up.

The other striker on the bench was Macheda- another who you don't bring on to help hold a lead.

Not easy when you are also trying to protect Watt and Polkington and had No one out on his feet with 15-20 to go- and another player who's hopeless defensively.

Some comments above about dropping deep being a 'cultural' issue. Sorry, I don't agree with that. The job of the manager is to dictate tactics and philosophy.

Its because Slade is so tactically inept that we dropped 4 points against Burnley and Sheffield Wednesday and deprived us of a top six place. It was just sheer luck that we didn't drop another 2 points last night.

If we finish 7th at the end of the season, those dropped points will haunt us. Sorry, my opinion that Slade has to go remains unchanged.

So it was luck scoring in the last minute with2 of the subs involved , a 3rd player who'd been tactically moved involved and the scorer being a player many would have brought off, but Burnley getting a freak 95th minute o,g winner wasn't luck but just Slades poor tactics.

Some of the stuff on here is so biased it burns my eyes to read it !

Sorry. That's a worse tactic than anything Slade has come up with.
Whitts is a hopeless defender and would be about as much help as a chocolate fire guard.
He hardly ever wins a tackle and his marking is appalling.
Jones would be hopeless on his own up front, besides the fact he was struggling anyway, he is far to slow at closing down.

Just goes to show- fans slag him off, and then come up with even worse ideas !

It was a tough call as Mason is also a bit weak, it's a pity we didn't have KD to bring on as he could have blocked up the middle with one of the others backing KJ up.

The other striker on the bench was Macheda- another who you don't bring on to help hold a lead.

Not easy when you are also trying to protect Watt and Polkington and had No one out on his feet with 15-20 to go- and another player who's hopeless defensively.

Agree, Whittingham wasn't the answer but in the absence of Digkacoi Slade had O'Keefe on the bench. He may be no great shakes but as a holding midfield player with fresh legs he could have helped out enormously with 30 minutes to go. I think Slade does need to jettison the 4-4-2 on times.

Sorry. That's a worse tactic than anything Slade has come up with.
Whitts is a hopeless defender and would be about as much help as a chocolate fire guard.
He hardly ever wins a tackle and his marking is appalling.
Jones would be hopeless on his own up front, besides the fact he was struggling anyway, he is far to slow at closing down.

Just goes to show- fans slag him off, and then come up with even worse ideas !

It was a tough call as Mason is also a bit weak, it's a pity we didn't have KD to bring on as he could have blocked up the middle with one of the others backing KJ up.

The other striker on the bench was Macheda- another who you don't bring on to help hold a lead.

Not easy when you are also trying to protect Watt and Polkington and had No one out on his feet with 15-20 to go- and another player who's hopeless defensively.

Agree, Whittingham wasn't the answer but in the absence of Digkacoi Slade had O'Keefe on the bench. He may be no great shakes but as a holding midfield player with fresh legs he could have helped out enormously with 30 minutes to go. I think Slade does need to jettison the 4-4-2 on times.

I'm not sure OKeefe would help either.
He looked lost when he came on v Burnley.
KD is the best DM we have by a long way, but isn't very mobile if we need to chase the game.

What's the matter with him ?
It's all been a bit quiet about his injury

Sorry. That's a worse tactic than anything Slade has come up with.
Whitts is a hopeless defender and would be about as much help as a chocolate fire guard.
He hardly ever wins a tackle and his marking is appalling.
Jones would be hopeless on his own up front, besides the fact he was struggling anyway, he is far to slow at closing down.

Just goes to show- fans slag him off, and then come up with even worse ideas !

It was a tough call as Mason is also a bit weak, it's a pity we didn't have KD to bring on as he could have blocked up the middle with one of the others backing KJ up.

The other striker on the bench was Macheda- another who you don't bring on to help hold a lead.

Not easy when you are also trying to protect Watt and Polkington and had No one out on his feet with 15-20 to go- and another player who's hopeless defensively.

Agree, Whittingham wasn't the answer but in the absence of Digkacoi Slade had O'Keefe on the bench. He may be no great shakes but as a holding midfield player with fresh legs he could have helped out enormously with 30 minutes to go. I think Slade does need to jettison the 4-4-2 on times.

I'm not sure OKeefe would help either.
He looked lost when he came on v Burnley.
KD is the best DM we have by a long way, but isn't very mobile if we need to chase the game.

What's the matter with him ?
It's all been a bit quiet about his injury

I'm not sure, I'd love to know, its all been kept quiet. I agree he's far better than O'Keefe and he would have been ideal last night. Personally I would like to see him slotted between Gunnar and Ralls and the two centre backs so allowing Gunnar and Ralks to reclaim more of the space and momentum higher up the pitch. Its an experiment I'd love to see particularly for some away matches.

So dropping a 2 goal lead and scoring in the 92nd minute was a genius tactical decision from Slade was it?

your obviously entitled to your opinion,I just remember shouting the odds about the same thing 15 years ago.

Sorry. That's a worse tactic than anything Slade has come up with.
Whitts is a hopeless defender and would be about as much help as a chocolate fire guard.
He hardly ever wins a tackle and his marking is appalling.
Jones would be hopeless on his own up front, besides the fact he was struggling anyway, he is far to slow at closing down.

Just goes to show- fans slag him off, and then come up with even worse ideas !

It was a tough call as Mason is also a bit weak, it's a pity we didn't have KD to bring on as he could have blocked up the middle with one of the others backing KJ up.

The other striker on the bench was Macheda- another who you don't bring on to help hold a lead.

Not easy when you are also trying to protect Watt and Polkington and had No one out on his feet with 15-20 to go- and another player who's hopeless defensively.

Macheda was not on the bench

Lets be honest people on here love negativity

Our fans are quite quick to get on the back of the team. That will bring them into their spell possibly? As others have said it's not just a Slade thing as much as people like to blame him for it.

Some comments above about dropping deep being a 'cultural' issue. Sorry, I don't agree with that. The job of the manager is to dictate tactics and philosophy.

Its because Slade is so tactically inept that we dropped 4 points against Burnley and Sheffield Wednesday and deprived us of a top six place. It was just sheer luck that we didn't drop another 2 points last night.

If we finish 7th at the end of the season, those dropped points will haunt us. Sorry, my opinion that Slade has to go remains unchanged.

So it was luck scoring in the last minute with2 of the subs involved , a 3rd player who'd been tactically moved involved and the scorer being a player many would have brought off, but Burnley getting a freak 95th minute o,g winner wasn't luck but just Slades poor tactics.

Some of the stuff on here is so biased it burns my eyes to read it !

Exactly what I thought

Sorry. That's a worse tactic than anything Slade has come up with.
Whitts is a hopeless defender and would be about as much help as a chocolate fire guard.
He hardly ever wins a tackle and his marking is appalling.
Jones would be hopeless on his own up front, besides the fact he was struggling anyway, he is far to slow at closing down.

Just goes to show- fans slag him off, and then come up with even worse ideas !

It was a tough call as Mason is also a bit weak, it's a pity we didn't have KD to bring on as he could have blocked up the middle with one of the others backing KJ up.

The other striker on the bench was Macheda- another who you don't bring on to help hold a lead.

Not easy when you are also trying to protect Watt and Polkington and had No one out on his feet with 15-20 to go- and another player who's hopeless defensively.

Macheda was not on the bench

I don't think Whitts is a bad call at all It's not all about getting an extra defender on the pitch to protect a lead.

You can be the best/worst tactician in the world but I'm yet to find a manager/team that can score or create chances without the ball. With Whitts, whatever you think of him, he does not give the ball away ....... fact. Whether that's by passing backwards, sidewards or forwards it's a simple fact. Accepted that Whitts ain't going to win too many tackles but with him Gunnar and Ralls in CM for the last 30 mins on Tuesday I would put serious money on us have being able to hold out much more comfortably.

Therefore, when we're trying to close out a game by far the best way of doing so is to keep possession of the ball as without it even Barcelona would struggle Putting another defender on simply invites the team to play even deeper and allow the opposition to stream forward, OK we may be better equipped to defend our box but it only needs one mistake in the area and that's another goal lost.

The problem with Slade is that he simply won't change his formation whatever the game or circumstances within a game. For the last 3 home games we've played very well for 60 minutes, then the opposition change their system and Slade does not react other than to replace like with like (in the main). Nobody would moan if we played teams off the park for 60 mins and then played a controlled 4-5-1 for the last 30 mins to close it out, basic football tactics at any level in my experience.

Sorry. That's a worse tactic than anything Slade has come up with.
Whitts is a hopeless defender and would be about as much help as a chocolate fire guard.
He hardly ever wins a tackle and his marking is appalling.
Jones would be hopeless on his own up front, besides the fact he was struggling anyway, he is far to slow at closing down.

Just goes to show- fans slag him off, and then come up with even worse ideas !

It was a tough call as Mason is also a bit weak, it's a pity we didn't have KD to bring on as he could have blocked up the middle with one of the others backing KJ up.

The other striker on the bench was Macheda- another who you don't bring on to help hold a lead.

Not easy when you are also trying to protect Watt and Polkington and had No one out on his feet with 15-20 to go- and another player who's hopeless defensively.

Macheda was not on the bench

I don't think Whitts is a bad call at all It's not all about getting an extra defender on the pitch to protect a lead.

You can be the best/worst tactician in the world but I'm yet to find a manager/team that can score or create chances without the ball. With Whitts, whatever you think of him, he does not give the ball away ....... fact. Whether that's by passing backwards, sidewards or forwards it's a simple fact. Accepted that Whitts ain't going to win too many tackles but with him Gunnar and Ralls in CM for the last 30 mins on Tuesday I would put serious money on us have being able to hold out much more comfortably.

Therefore, when we're trying to close out a game by far the best way of doing so is to keep possession of the ball as without it even Barcelona would struggle Putting another defender on simply invites the team to play even deeper and allow the opposition to stream forward, OK we may be better equipped to defend our box but it only needs one mistake in the area and that's another goal lost.

The problem with Slade is that he simply won't change his formation whatever the game or circumstances within a game. For the last 3 home games we've played very well for 60 minutes, then the opposition change their system and Slade does not react other than to replace like with like (in the main). Nobody would moan if we played teams off the park for 60 mins and then played a controlled 4-5-1 for the last 30 mins to close it out, basic football tactics at any level in my experience.

Yes people would. If we were smashing a team for 60 minutes 442 then changed to 451 sat back and it got us into trouble people would moan at that.

Never happy.