Cheers for the above responses, usually pay more attention but was babysitting a Malaysian lad at his first ever game and way too focussed on providing an abbreviated, inebriated version of Oz football history from wogs, sheila’s and poofters through to present day.
If the last few weeks have proved anything it’s that posters here are more likely to pick the winning Lotto numbers than what Uffy will actually send out, just hoping we have a proper go.
We started unacceptably conservative on Saturday given we were the home team and especially considering the week CCM had leading in. Lost count of the number of “protagonist” “on the front foot” etc quotes from players all year, time to really prove it. If we’re bashing down the door and cop one on the counter, so be it, nothing changes and we carry on. But if we start super cautious and then go behind, you’re not only 2 goals down but also having to flick an imaginary switch mid-game and create that momentum. It ain’t gonna happen.
I think this is actually meant to be JCP playing high and Grant inverting. Similar system to Macarthur.
Hard to tell a bit, as we were pretty loosey goosey but I really doubt JCP was intended to be in the LW role.
It was the midfield that didn’t work, imo. JGR, Brattan, Hollman + Caceres + Grant inverting was too narrow. JGR off and Burgess on gave us better balance and if we set up with a proper front 3 and Caceres behind them, I think the system can work.
We just need JGR to be fit (and not get sent off). Otherwise I don’t know who is meant to be next to Brattan.
Caceres was roaming. He was in that attacking role with a lot of freedom to roam in the 2nd and final third of the pitch. Which didn’t work, as we didn’t have two wide players stretching their defence allowing him to float into space. JCP was playing left, but spent most of that first 20 mins way too central. There was no one on the right to balance it out - as we put JGR in midfield alongside Holman and Brattan.
That is what I was seeing before I got angry and started to drink heavily anyway…Caceres might have meant to been on the right, but he didn’t actually stay there and reverted to his usual role.
Whether that was an error, or just Uffy shitting the bed - we may not ever know.
The graphic was absolutely mangled. Presumably made by some producer who’s not familiar with us - or maybe football in general. I dont think the teams sheets clubs submit have shapes do they? If so it was just someone fucking with them.
He definitely started on the right. It think they rejigged a bit later in the half and then after the sending off he was mostly in his usual role this season.
I have a strange feeling about this game. Everything is in favour of the Mariners, they’re a goal ahead on aggregate, they will be playing against a compromised Sydney team, and they’re at home. A prime scenario for them to choke. The pressure is on them, we will be the underdogs. There’s the added pressure that we beat them in the FFA Cup final, and beat them in both regular season games, and of course, they couldn’t do better than a 1 goal advantage against 9 men on Friday. So, in conclusion,… we’re going to get arse blasted.
Mostly jives with what I remember - though I thought that first 10 was again more right focused. I’d have to go and watch it again but if that’s the case we must have been very lop sided in that first 10.
We’re heavy underdogs with little chance, therefore I’m confident, therefore we’ll get blasted.
I also feel zen and at peace with losing as we’ve outperformed based on our start this season, and Gosford hosting the GF would be great for them - therefore it will be an unfortunate loss in the most disappointing manner possible.
It means fullbacks, instead of overlapping and taking up wide and forward positions in attack, they “invert” and take up a position on the inside of the player in front of them and in line with the 6.
It’s been all the rage in Europe since Guardiola did it at Bayern Munich.
