Key points from today - Reality Check

[Pickles]

One lad behind us screamed “f****ing sh*te this, get it forward”. The talk under the turnstiles from some shortly before half time was similar.

A question asked earlier in the week was ‘how long does VK get before some fans start running out of patience, despite him asking for patience?’

The answer to that question is 41 minutes into the 2nd game of the season. We really do have some drongos following us.

Bloody hell that's depressing.

[123EasyasBFC]

Reality check? Jeezz a sloppy 10min then we bossed the game, we where sloppy for 7minutes against Huddersfield then bossed the game. Clear the areas that are missing and Kompany knows that, benson is a sign of what was missing, nothing but positive signs.
Only weakness is our height we need a big strong CB

[Grandpa Claret]

Idiotic fans are at every club. Thats just the way it is. Idiotic people in the world. Thats just the way it is.

[Rileybobs]

Reality check? Jeezz a sloppy 10min then we bossed the game, we where sloppy for 7minutes against Huddersfield then bossed the game. Clear the areas that are missing and Kompany knows that, benson is a sign of what was missing, nothing but positive signs.
Only weakness is our height we need a big strong CB

I don’t think height is our only weakness. 29 shots in our opening 2 games and just 2 goals. 1 shot on target from 13 today. A lot of the puzzle pieces seem to be in place, but we’re lacking goals.

[JR1882]

- We need a new younger striker that’s mobile and can score us goals. Barnes doesn’t fit this system.

-We will concede soon from a Muric error.

-Defensive wise we look soft and weak we are all over the place from set pieces.

-We can have all the possession in the world but it doesn’t win you games.

Big wake up call, Luton was always going to be a different test. We beat a bad Huddersfield side and people thought we would p1ss the league. We are a long LONG way off in my eyes.

What was the attendance ? The stream I watched it on announced it as 16,414 which surely was wrong ? It looked full.

The fans sounded loud today on the TV.

UTC !!

Agree a quality centre forward and we walk this league.

Disagree defensively, we have conceded 2 shots on target in 2 games, although we do seem vulnerable to physical teams.

Possession doesn’t win you games but the other team can’t score when you have the ball (as per the shots on target point). We just need a focal point, Barnes and Costelloe have both done well but neither look like scoring.

We have played 2/4 teams in last seasons playoffs and picked up 4 points, early days, still players to come in and still need to gel - I’ll take it.

[agreenwood]

The reality check is that the manager and his coaching staff have been in post for 5 weeks. On top of that 8 of the 13 players who featured today made their competitive debuts for us in the last 8 days.

We played well last week. Less so this week.

If you’re making snap judgements on how things will pan out in the next 44 games, I’m not sure you’ve fully grasped the scale of the change we’re going through. It’ll be a good while before we really know what we’ve put together, particularly as it’s clear that there’s more change to come.

The only thing I do agree with is that the version of Barnes we’ve got now looks an ill fit with the types of players around him.

[Spiral]

I thought our biggest weakness today was a lack of tall players given we were playing against “the land of the giants”. Having said that, it was so much more enjoyable watching a team passing and moving like we did. I am very happy with our start.

Mentioned this before the season even started in a thread about our build-up. Like the potential for goalkeeper and centre back mistakes, it's something we need to price-in to our system with the design that over a season the rewards to be gained from a focus on technicality far surpass the punishment of the mistakes that can happen with our high-risk, high-reward play, and the weaknesses such as the potential to be dominated aerially which can be exposed in such a system.

The height thing is a weakness in the system we cannot easily overcome (all styles of football have their fundamental flaws). Our flaw is that to do what we're doing tactically and with the ball, but with players all across the park who are 6'1", is impossible, because players who can turn like Cullen, play with the intensity of Brownhill, read the game like Cork, press like Bastien, attack so aggressively from a fullback position like Maatsen — players capable of doing all those things equally as well as our players are doing them, but with the added bonus of being massive units capable of dominating aerially, those players just simply do not play in the championship, they earn £100k a week in the premier league.

[Dark Cloud]

I do struggle myself at times tbh, but I really think some on here find it difficult to see the difference between people genuinely commenting on the "reality check" and whinging/negativity.

[Stayingup]

One key point is almost gifting them at least one goal.from playing out. It is dangerous at times and takes top players to do it.

[KRBFC]

I must admit, I don't see what Bastien offers in an attacking left midfield role. Maybe he could be a good Cork replacement in a deeper role?

Shame we're missing Twine because I assume that's Twine's spot in the team once fit.

[Billy Balfour]

Given the short time VK has been here, and the number of new signings, I think 4 points from our first two games is mighty fine. Mind you, some on here won't be happy until we are picking up 4 points per game.

[RVclaret]

I must admit, I don't see what Bastien offers in an attacking left midfield role. Maybe he could be a good Cork replacement in a deeper role?

Shame we're missing Twine because I assume that's Twine's spot in the team once fit.

Agree, I think he was brought in more for CM in Cork’s role and that’s where we’ll see him at his best. Just with the lack of numbers in that attacking mid role (Twine injury, failure to land O’Hare) he’s had to play there.

[Burnley Ace]

I have moved seat and have ended up sitting in front of someone who doesn’t stop moaning, it’s a constant whine. Is it too late to swap back because I don’t think I can put up with it all season!

[Boss Hogg]

I have moved away from a seat with someone constantly moaning behind me. You must have my old seat

[TheFamilyCat]

Can't really be arsed reading the full thread and not sure that the OP deserves a reply, but here it is anyway: if we play like that all season we will win more games than we don't. That'll do for me.

[Jakubclaret]

Given the short time VK has been here, and the number of new signings, I think 4 points from our first two games is mighty fine. Mind you, some on here won't be happy until we are picking up 4 points per game.

It’s a case of being grounded & admitting things are going roughly ok we aren’t storming the league 6 in 2 but some people are making out we are world beaters especially post Huddersfield who are a poor side I guess standards & expectations have slipped this is the new normality for people, a newly relegated side dropping down it’s to be expected we would be doing “mighty fine”.

[123EasyasBFC]

I don’t think height is our only weakness. 29 shots in our opening 2 games and just 2 goals. 1 shot on target from 13 today. A lot of the puzzle pieces seem to be in place, but we’re lacking goals.

Take your point a goalscorer is needed but least we are creating the chances, Barnes hasn’t been the answer for 2 seasons now especially playing as a lone striker, he needs help.

We still need barnes is grit in this side

[Stevie Morgan]

Twine seems certain to make a difference. Any word on injury?

[ClaretSam]

I must admit, I don't see what Bastien offers in an attacking left midfield role. Maybe he could be a good Cork replacement in a deeper role?

Shame we're missing Twine because I assume that's Twine's spot in the team once fit.

Completely agree, not quick enough. Great touch and turn and good range of passing, Centre mid all day for me. Find Cullen/cork a little bit similar. Could do with a bit of urgency in the middle of the park

[BabylonClaret]

Luton played well without looking like a "good side". They were well organised and squeezed us out well. We conceded a soft goal and then struggled to get any penetration (our passing was very slow first half - light years away from the fluid movement of last week).

Second half we came out more aggressively Nd looked to push them back and it paid off - it also showed we can play that quick progressive game against better sides so it's likely that whilst Luton were more solid than Huddersfield we also made them (Huddersfield) look worse too - not just them being bad.

Ultimately it should have been 3 points today but there's still time for us to improve

[KRBFC]

Completely agree, not quick enough. Great touch and turn and good range of passing, Centre mid all day for me. Find Cullen/cork a little bit similar. Could do with a bit of urgency in the middle of the park

Yeah a little bit of forward drive would be nice in there but I think Kompany likes the structured sitting 2, to allow the fullback to bomb forward more.

I do wonder where O'Hare would've played, It's more of a 4231 than a 4222 on the pitch.

would it have been

Brownhill Cullen
Benson O'Hare Twine

or

Cullen Cork
Brownhill O'Hare Twine

[Matt_Whalley]

Tall CB as important as a striker for me. Luton played on that for their goal, and had other chances following ill- advised (on our part) bouts of head tennis.

McNally is 6’4!

[Big Vinny K]

I have moved seat and have ended up sitting in front of someone who doesn’t stop moaning, it’s a constant whine. Is it too late to swap back because I don’t think I can put up with it all season!

Was he called Jakub and talking about hanging people in public ?
If so I think we might know him.

[Matt_Whalley]

Many on this board (and elsewhere) said it would take too long for the players to learn the system, we’d struggle until after the WC etc.

I would have been happy if all we saw in the first couple of games was some application to commit to a new way of playing. VK said as much too.

We’ve had two very good performances and barring a poor first 10 minutes today we’d have 6 points. 4 is a good return from a side that has made such a dramatic transition.

Lots of positives. Try to enjoy it!

[Pickles]

Many on this board (and elsewhere) said it would take too long for the players to learn the system, we’d struggle until after the WC etc.

I would have been happy if all we saw in the first couple of games was some application to commit to a new way of playing. VK said as much too.

We’ve had two very good performances and barring a poor first 10 minutes today we’d have 6 points. 4 is a good return from a side that has made such a dramatic transition.

Lots of positives. Try to enjoy it!

In his first speech to the players I think he said it'll take four or five months for it to all come together.

We're playing well. It'll be fun. Enjoy the ride.

[Grandpa Claret]

It’s a case of being grounded & admitting things are going roughly ok we aren’t storming the league 6 in 2 but some people are making out we are world beaters especially post Huddersfield who are a poor side I guess standards & expectations have slipped this is the new normality for people, a newly relegated side dropping down it’s to be expected we would be doing “mighty fine”.

People are just so happy to see the start of a fantastic project, that is playing brilliant football. I would have settled for 4 points at this stage considering the massive turn around in players and style.
Are you not excited by the football we are playing already? I am still super excited. Not bothered if we finish half way down the league. It's a breath of fresh air

[buzzclarets79]

Observations on today:-

Not quite clicking in the final third. Thought Barnes put a shift in, does what Barnes does, closes down, works hard, and is a real pain in the ass for defenders, all of which is great but I can’t see him scoring many. Think Jay Rod will suit the system Better and can see him scoring more. A new striker is required.

Still not all that convinced about Taylor as a CB. Not that he did much wrong, but just don’t see him as a CB. Work is required on the back line.

Can definitely see the way we want to play, just need time to gel.

Was a good overall performance, it’s just we didn’t start quite as well as we did vs Huddersfield, and let them score. Signs are still overall good, and I think once we get a few more bodies in we’ll be absolutely fine.

[Burnleyareback2]

- We need a new younger striker that’s mobile and can score us goals. Barnes doesn’t fit this system.

-We will concede soon from a Muric error.

-Defensive wise we look soft and weak we are all over the place from set pieces.

-We can have all the possession in the world but it doesn’t win you games.

Big wake up call, Luton was always going to be a different test. We beat a bad Huddersfield side and people thought we would p1ss the league. We are a long LONG way off in my eyes.

What was the attendance ? The stream I watched it on announced it as 16,414 which surely was wrong ? It looked full.

The fans sounded loud today on the TV.

UTC !!

Key Points
Try and watch it live if you can pal at the Turf.

[tarkys_ears]

The reality check was obvious after 25 mins last match when we should have been 0-4 up.

The serious number of mistakes and inability to bury the ball was staggering, especially how Huddersfield let us run around in the first half.

People got far too carried away last week.

[tiger76]

Agree a quality centre forward and we walk this league.

Disagree defensively, we have conceded 2 shots on target in 2 games, although we do seem vulnerable to physical teams.

Possession doesn’t win you games but the other team can’t score when you have the ball (as per the shots on target point). We just need a focal point, Barnes and Costelloe have both done well but neither look like scoring.

We have played 2/4 teams in last seasons playoffs and picked up 4 points, early days, still players to come in and still need to gel - I’ll take it.

An excellent concise summary, 4 points from 2 games against sides in last season's play-offs, well bedding in virtually a new starting XI has to be considered a decent enough start in my book.

What was encouraging today after a below par 1st half, they came out firing 2nd half, that has to be seen as a sign of character within the squad,

A point after falling behind isn't to be sniffed at, and we were the ones pushing for the win in the latter stages.

If there is one criticism to be labelled it's the fact that we rarely troubled their keeper, despite dominating possession, but that cohesion will come in time.

Benson looks a bag of tricks on his debut, and what I like about him is he isn't afraid to try things, now of course they won't always come off, but it's great to see he wasn't overawed by the occasion.

[Spiral]

It’s different but apart from streaming & the radio I never attended previously when BLM became involved prior to that I did, the style of football must surely be balanced with results if the ambition is promotion, lots of people use the word project without projecting where this will end up, I prefer to use the word experiment without a clue where we’ll end up in that sense it’s exciting in a quirky kind of way.

I'm going to totally ignore your obsessive fixation with BLM, your own personal cause célèbre, and skip on to your comment on the style of play which you appear to be deriding by the implication in your choice of words that playstyle and results are independent of one another; separate components of different machines; that our style of football (which is to say, tactics, as is appreciated by 99.99% of this forum) must for some reason be moderated in service of some golden mean that does away with the extremes of 'playing well' and 'winning'. Can you see how when viewed in these terms, the notion of creating separation between 'playing well' and 'winning' is preposterous? Your argument can be responded to in one single sentence: the style of play we have adopted is a means to results, not a coincidental aesthetic, nor a piece of theatre performed in between the actual business of winning games. You imply that anything outside of those actions which directly contribute to results are somehow superfluous, and this betrays an ignorance in your knowledge and appreciation of football. That the pass from the goalkeeper to the centre half is less obvious to you in its significance to a goal being scored from the play that develops from this move does not make this first pass insignificant. You're one of about the five or six Burnley fans on the entire planet who have yet to grasp this point.

[Jakubclaret]

I'm going to totally ignore your obsessive fixation with BLM, your own personal cause célèbre, and skip on to your comment on the style of play which you appear to be deriding by the implication in your choice of words that playstyle and results are independent of one another; separate components of different machines; that our style of football (which is to say, tactics, as is appreciated by 99.99% of this forum) must for some reason be moderated in service of some golden mean that does away with the extremes of 'playing well' and 'winning'. Can you see how when viewed in these terms, the notion of creating separation between 'playing well' and 'winning' is preposterous? Your argument can be responded to in one single sentence: the style of play we have adopted is a means to results, not a coincidental aesthetic, nor a piece of theatre performed in between the actual business of winning games. You imply that anything outside of those actions which directly contribute to results are somehow superfluous, and this betrays an ignorance in your knowledge and appreciation of football. That the pass from the goalkeeper to the centre half is less obvious to you in its significance to a goal being scored from the play that develops from this move does not make this first pass insignificant. You're one of about the five or six Burnley fans on the entire planet who have yet to grasp this point.

Seriously can’t be arsed speak clear concise English & I will respond I don’t have the time for life stories about general comments.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Re the OP it really isn't hard to fathom.

We are lacking a pacy striker, we are also lacking dominance in the air at the back which I posted yesterday (that goal came from an uncleared high ball and CB confusion). But the primary cause of this one was 1 shot on target (the goal) in the match, from 13 efforts.

That isn't a reality check, it is reality.

Shout out to Brownhill though, Kompany spoke well saykng him staying was crucial. Big player at this level, and could be the difference.

[NRC]

the style of play we have adopted is a means to results, not a coincidental aesthetic, nor a piece of theatre performed in between the actual business of winning games.

Don’t know about that, Spiral. Football belongs to the entertainment industry, as do all sports. Getting results is one aspect, but by definition, being entertained is too. Ideally results are achieved while entertaining, it is not enough to get results only. And frankly how many teams actually achieve outcomes, eg winning promotion or cups? Mainly speaking then, the entertainment derives from each game. The typical depth of entertainment in football is tainted by unconditional loyalty to a club. fans are not transient normally, so we’ll put up with low forms of entertainment because we’re invested. I recently walked out of a Janet Jackson concert after three songs because I wasn’t entertained. I would never leave a football game involving Burnley.

I’d suggest to you entertainment needs factoring in. I would rather watch the type of football VK is trying to achieve and not get promoted than watch sterile football while getting promoted. Results alone are not enough, and the style of play can go a long way towards compensating for a lack of results

[Spiral]

Don’t know about that, Spiral. Football belongs to the entertainment industry, as do all sports. Getting results is one aspect, but by definition, being entertained is too. Ideally results are achieved while entertaining, it is not enough to get results only. And frankly how many teams actually achieve outcomes, eg winning promotion or cups? Mainly speaking then, the entertainment derives from each game. The typical depth of entertainment in football is tainted by unconditional loyalty to a club. fans are not transient normally, so we’ll put up with low forms of entertainment because we’re invested. I recently walked out of a Janet Jackson concert after three songs because I wasn’t entertained. I would never leave a football game involving Burnley.

I’d suggest to you entertainment needs factoring in. I would rather watch the type of football VK is trying to achieve and not get promoted than watch sterile football while getting promoted. Results alone are not enough, and the style of play can go a long way towards compensating for a lack of results

I'd really like to focus in on the second part of your post, and I really can sympathise with that viewpoint. Let's reduce 'football supporter' to 'consumer of entertainment'. From the viewpoint of a consumer of a piece of entertainment, what is the point of witnessing 'success' based on the arbitrary metrics determined by the form of a piece of entertainment, according to which a piece of entertainment is deemed to be a success or a failure, if you as an observer thoroughly hate on a moment-to-moment basis what it is you're actually consuming? To use an analogy, why would I care for what happens in the third act of a film if I thoroughly detested what my eyeballs and ears and mind were subjected to in the first and second act? So yes, the total irrationality of being a supporter of a football club notwithstanding, football being pleasant to the eye of a football fan is generally speaking quite important to the continued participation of that fan, and I wouldn't ever deny that.

But then there's this: if football were played in a forest and no one were around to watch it, would the manager, coaches and players play to entertain, or would they play to win? I want to separate the intent of the participant in sport from the preferences of the viewer of sport. Imagine a league without fans. A competitive league with prizes to be won, and careers to be made, but still no fans. I don't mean without fans in attendance, I mean without fans at all. What is the goal of the teams in that league? To win or to entertain? I think you know the answer intuitively. Within the substratum of football, as in all sports by their very nature of being sports, exists an imperative to win. Entertainment is derived from the striving toward this imperative, it is not placed on top of this imperative as decoration, especially so when the impulse to entertain might come at the expense of victory.

And this gets to the heart of the matter. Never in the history of competitive sport has a participant sought to entertain at the necessary expense of victory. Some fools might have entertained and lost, but I doubt they ever intended to lose. This is the point of contention I have with Jakubclaret's, and any other argument made, which suggests we are placing an incidentally entertaining playstyle (more commonly referred to as tactics) at the expense of a result. If I could stress my point, I would stress that any entertainment to be found within sport is [/i]incidental[/i], or more precisely, it is immanent. Any person who suggests or implies, as Jakubclaret does, that we aspire to entertain at the cost of results simply misunderstands that what can so often be entertaining in football is inextricably linked to what is successful in football. We do not aspire to entertain, we aspire to win. The way we strive to that goal can be entertaining, but it is primarily done with an intent to win. This is why I take umbrage to any opinion that playstyle and results are two separate things. I see them as one and the same, in service of each other.

My argument to Jakubisfullofshit is this: to separate success from the tactical means by which that success is achieved is nonsensical. By the implication of the very words he has written, Jakubclaret has framed our playstyle as being necessarily detrimental to results by implying, by way of his desire for a mythical so-called "balance", that results must come at the necessary cost of playstyle, that playstyle must come at the necessary cost of results, and that there is a 'common sense' middle way to be negotiated (as though this has never been pondered before). This is total b0llocks. By definition, successful commitment to playstyle begets results. The two are linked. The question then becomes one of your trust in the playstyle. Are you committed to these ways, or do you scramble for the illusion, the fantasy of a perfect middle way at the first sign of weakness, at the risk of overcorrecting and undermining everything you've put in place?

Contained within the argument implied that 'this style comes at the expense of results' is the notion that the style could be done away with and results would thus come naturally. I say that this way of playing is precisely how we achieve results. I'm on a rampage against the admittedly small "get it forward" crowd of vocal muppets who are inevitably going to turn on this team at the soonest opportunity they can find simply because they'd prefer to watch us play football like Leeds did in the 70's.

[Vegas Claret]

Are we going to have these kinds of overreactions after every game? It’s been a great start to the season!

wait until we dare to lose a game

[NRC]

I'd really like to focus in on the second part of your post, and I really can sympathise with that viewpoint. Let's reduce 'football supporter' to 'consumer of entertainment'. From the viewpoint of a consumer of a piece of entertainment, what is the point of witnessing 'success' based on the arbitrary metrics determined by the form of a piece of entertainment, according to which a piece of entertainment is deemed to be a success or a failure, if you as an observer thoroughly hate on a moment-to-moment basis what it is you're actually consuming? To use an analogy, why would I care for what happens in the third act of a film if I thoroughly detested what my eyeballs and ears and mind were subjected to in the first and second act? So yes, the total irrationality of being a supporter of a football club notwithstanding, football being pleasant to the eye of a football fan is generally speaking quite important to the continued participation of that fan, and I wouldn't ever deny that.

But then there's this: if football were played in a forest and no one were around to watch it, would the manager, coaches and players play to entertain, or would they play to win? I want to separate the intent of the participant in sport from the preferences of the viewer of sport. Imagine a league without fans. A competitive league with prizes to be won, and careers to be made, but still no fans. I don't mean without fans in attendance, I mean without fans at all. What is the goal of the teams in that league? To win or to entertain? I think you know the answer intuitively. Within the substratum of football, as in all sports by their very nature of being sports, exists an imperative to win. Entertainment is derived from the striving toward this imperative, it is not placed on top of this imperative as decoration, especially so when the impulse to entertain might come at the expense of victory.

And this gets to the heart of the matter. Never in the history of competitive sport has a participant sought to entertain at the necessary expense of victory. Some fools might have entertained and lost, but I doubt they ever intended to lose. This is the point of contention I have with Jakubclaret's, and any other argument made, which suggests we are placing an incidentally entertaining playstyle (more commonly referred to as tactics) at the expense of a result. If I could stress my point, I would stress that any entertainment to be found within sport is [/i]incidental[/i], or more precisely, it is immanent. Any person who suggests or implies, as Jakubclaret does, that we aspire to entertain at the cost of results simply misunderstands that what can so often be entertaining in football is inextricably linked to what is successful in football. We do not aspire to entertain, we aspire to win. The way we strive to that goal can be entertaining, but it is primarily done with an intent to win. This is why I take umbrage to any opinion that playstyle and results are two separate things. I see them as one and the same, in service of each other.

My argument to Jakubisfullofshit is this: to separate success from the tactical means by which that success is achieved is nonsensical. By the implication of the very words he has written, Jakubclaret has framed our playstyle as being necessarily detrimental to results by implying, by way of his desire for a mythical so-called "balance", that results must come at the necessary cost of playstyle, that playstyle must come at the necessary cost of results, and that there is a 'common sense' middle way to be negotiated (as though this has never been pondered before). This is total b0llocks. By definition, successful commitment to playstyle begets results. The two are linked. The question then becomes one of your trust in the playstyle. Are you committed to these ways, or do you scramble for the illusion, the fantasy of a perfect middle way at the first sign of weakness, at the risk of overcorrecting and undermining everything you've put in place?

Contained within the argument implied that 'this style comes at the expense of results' is the notion that the style could be done away with and results would thus come naturally. I say that this way of playing is precisely how we achieve results. I'm on a rampage against the admittedly small "get it forward" crowd of vocal muppets who are inevitably going to turn on this team at the soonest opportunity they can find simply because they'd prefer to watch us play football like Leeds did in the 70's.

Ok……. Each of Sean Dyche, Mike Jackson and already Vincent Company have mentioned their desire to “bring the crowd with us” to conjure up the 12th man. How is that achieved? Not by getting a result, because by then there’s already an outcome. It is achieved by motivating the crowd in real time, during the course of the game.

How does that sit with your assertion? I’m with you on the desire to nullify the ignorance of the loudmouth that yells “get it forward” but, again, results and entertainment are not one or the other concepts

[Zenwisdom]

Key points we was out muscled at times and a lenient ref
Who gave us 2 yellows to their 1 did not reflect what I so
Football wise the 11 corners 70% possession tells the story
Enjoyed the game

[Jakubclaret]

Ok……. Each of Sean Dyche, Mike Jackson and already Vincent Company have mentioned their desire to “bring the crowd with us” to conjure up the 12th man. How is that achieved? Not by getting a result, because by then there’s already an outcome. It is achieved by motivating the crowd in real time, during the course of the game.

How does that sit with your assertion? I’m with you on the desire to nullify the ignorance of the loudmouth that yells “get it forward” but, again, results and entertainment are not one or the other concepts

He’s making a big deal out of something the 2 often go hand in hand with exciting football & results, I’m not quite sure if he’s suggesting that the fans just want exciting football but wouldn’t be bothered if we was sat at the bottom of league that wouldn’t be the case anyway the style of football the fans yearn for would yield positive results so he doesn’t make sense.

[Ric_C]

We're actually in a pretty good position. We have money to spend and we know pretty much exactly the areas we need to fill. We also know that there probably won't be any more sales of key players.

It's a bit like when we played Birmingham at home in the title season and we drew 2-2. The team looked a bit disjointed in places, but we knew we needed a CM and a striker, so we brought in Gray and Barton.

For me the signs are good. I think any "walk the league" comments after Huddersfield should just be taken tongue in cheek. It was just people being a bit giddy.

4-5 more decent signings and I think we have a really good squad for this league. I don't think others have much cash to spend and may even lose their key players before the window closes.

[Tricky Trevor]

For all the good stuff written about Ian Maatsen so far if he had jumped with their far post guy he might not have had such an easy knock down for their goal. Standing off is not the way to go on the 6yd line.

[taio]

For all the good stuff written about Ian Maatsen so far if he had jumped with their far post guy he might not have had such an easy knock down for their goal. Standing off is not the way to go on the 6yd line.

He can't make himself a foot taller.

[Jakubclaret]

We're actually in a pretty good position. We have money to spend and we know pretty much exactly the areas we need to fill. We also know that there probably won't be any more sales of key players.

It's a bit like when we played Birmingham at home in the title season and we drew 2-2. The team looked a bit disjointed in places, but we knew we needed a CM and a striker, so we brought in Gray and Barton.

For me the signs are good. I think any "walk the league" comments after Huddersfield should just be taken tongue in cheek. It was just people being a bit giddy.

4-5 more decent signings and I think we have a really good squad for this league. I don't think others have much cash to spend and may even lose their key players before the window closes.

Won’t be any more sales of key players because nobody’s left if brownhill or taylor were wanted with value attached they’d have gone it’s only because they are aren’t they are still here. Regarding money to spend that’s true I’ll concede there but that means nothing if the will to spend it isn’t there or at least a considerable sum of it to enable a decent striker.

[northernpowerhouse]

One interesting thing from yesterday was we only had 0.49 xg compared to 1.06 for Luton. While that might improve with a better striker making runs and pulling defenders out if position I think we will struggle to create chances with Brownhill and Basten in the attacking midfield roles. We miss a proper number 10 like Twine or O'Hare.

[Tinribs]

- We need a new younger striker that’s mobile and can score us goals. Barnes doesn’t fit this system.

-We will concede soon from a Muric error.

-Defensive wise we look soft and weak we are all over the place from set pieces.

-We can have all the possession in the world but it doesn’t win you games.

Big wake up call, Luton was always going to be a different test. We beat a bad Huddersfield side and people thought we would p1ss the league. We are a long LONG way off in my eyes.

What was the attendance ? The stream I watched it on announced it as 16,414 which surely was wrong ? It looked full.

The fans sounded loud today on the TV.

UTC !!

so you saw all this from your Armchair….Jesus wept

[Tricky Trevor]

He can't make himself a foot taller.

I didn’t mean win the header. I meant get his body into him to make the header more difficult. Players all over the country do this every week.

[Stayingup]

Posession up. But apart from when Benson came on we were too pedestrian in our play and created virtually nothing. I am also concerned about our defence. Its not goid enough. Barnes has been critisized but what sevice did he get with that slow build up? None. There is a lot of work to do with this team.

[forzagranata]

Posession up. But apart from when Benson came on we were too pedestrian in our play and created virtually nothing. I am also concerned about our defence. Its not goid enough. Barnes has been critisized but what sevice did he get with that slow build up? None. There is a lot of work to do with this team.

Yes the slow tempo of our build up made it too easy for Luton. Improved after the break but still too many passes to players who were stood still. I am sure VK will be working on getting the approach play faster and with better movement.

[claretandy]

For all the good stuff written about Ian Maatsen so far if he had jumped with their far post guy he might not have had such an easy knock down for their goal. Standing off is not the way to go on the 6yd line.

He miss-headed it, the guy was going for goal.

[It Is What It Is]

The players did really well yesterday. Refreshing to see new young players full of energy and a passion to go forwards.
Maatson and Benson were terrific and can only get better.
Charlie T too small for CB role. He will be outjumped everytime.
Watford away...big test. A clean sheet there will be a great result.
Exciting times ahead boys....