Sunday 28 August 2011

Ipswich 2-1 Leeds

I decided to give last weeks game vs Peterborough a miss, it wouldn't have helped my mental anguish to try and put down in words exactly went wrong last week, sorry if anybody was expecting anything...!

First half

On to yesterday's game v Leeds, we again lined up with a formation that I didn't think suited the personnel playing. We started again with a 4132 formation, where I felt we would be loading the central midfield with Kennedy, Leadbitter and Andrews, while allowing JET and Murphy to act as 2 widemen support strikers. However, Murphy started up front with Chopra and JET seemed to be playing on the right of a midfield 3.

In the first half we again struggled to get the ball down and play and create chances, with no genuine width we struggled to keep hold of the ball. The 2 widemen from Leeds were allowed too much freedom, and Snodgrass twice was shown inside and allowed to pick out Ross McCormack with far too much ease. Leadbitter didn't get close enough to him, and was left exposed by Jewell sticking him out in a wider position than he's used to, and the second time, after Stockdale had saved his blushes first time, we were punished and went 1-0 down.

As per the Southampton game, when we went behind, Jewell shifted the formation to a more orthodox 442, with JET on the right side and Kennedy on the left side:

This seemed to stop the threat from Leeds 2 widemen. Gradel still caused Edwards problems, but that is to be expected from one of the best wingers in the division, against Edwards who is still liable to positioning errors and gets caught out too often. However Kennedy and Cresswell seemed to stop the threat coming from Snodgrass.

Second half

At the start of the second half, before the game had had a chance to settle down (i.e. before I'd worked out how we were playing!) a long ball went over the top to JET, who outmuscled White before being dragged down. White was sent off and JET was (eventually) taken off injured. Leadbitter was also replaced at this time as a double change saw Carson and Bullard on.

By this point, Kennedy was holding in front of the back 4, Bullard was buzzing around and getting on the ball and trying to make things happen. Andrews was playing in a slightly more advanced role and Murphy was helping Cresswell on the left hand side while also supporting Chopra. Carson was being used as an out and out wide man, hugging the touchline in order to keep the game spread and utilise our extra man advantage.
From here on in the game was relatively even, McCormack had been replaced by O'Brien and Leeds lined up in a 441 formation, Gradel was still a relatively advanced winger and became their only outlet to attack through. However we still were not really creating any chances.

Jason Scotland then came on for Kennedy and went up front with Chopra, this led to us playing a very attacking 442/424 formation. When you look at the starting positions being taken up by the wingers at the end of the game as opposed to the 442 employed when we were 1-0 down, it is clear that Murphy and Carson where given far more attacking licence by Jewell than JET and Kennedy were in the first half.

For the last 20 minutes we were chasing the game, and Leeds naturally began to drop deeper and deeper but we finished the game for the first time with 4 out and out attacking players on the pitch and this showed towards the end as we managed to create more chances. And eventually the chances and then goals came.

Overall

I think Jewell again started with the wrong formation here with regards to the personnel selected, we again lined up with only 3 genuine attacking players in starting line up and one of these (JET) was not played in an attacking position. I think in order to get the crowds back to Portman Road and bring back the excitement we need at least 4 attacking players to play, including 2 genuine wide players so that we have spare men and out balls when we receive it, this will lead to us looking less solid but it should allow us to, or at least try to anyway, outscore the opposition.

Individual players

The good - Jason Scotland will take the plaudits with his goal and assist, and the return and impact of Bullard can not be underestimated but to me Keith Andrews was the MoM, he played in a few different roles and had to adapt his game, destroyed well, used the ball well and came up with the goal.

The bad - Grant Leadbitter seems like he is being shoehorned into the side at the moment, he was struggling in his role on the left hand side and twice showed Snodgrass inside to line up a cross. He may have the captains armband but his place in the team must be severely under threat from the arrival of Bullard.

Up next

Blackpool (a) - this will be a very tough game against a side that aren't afraid of attacking. We will need to ensure we remain solid in this game and I would be tempted to play a 4141 formation, the wide players would be Murphy and JET but with extensive defensive repsonibilities and a midfield 3 of Andrews, Bowyer and Bullard which should allow us to suitably destroy and break up their attacks. We will be playing negatively and trying to hit them on the break for the game, or using some of Bullard's quality set pieces to try and nick a goal. Prediction 1-1.




5 comments:

  1. Not sure youre quite right on the formation after the sending off.

    Kennedy remained in the left-sided role he had taken up late in the first half and the removal of JET just meant that we had a more orthodox right midfielder. With Bullard in the middle, it gave more of a balance to the side.

    Evidently, Andrews pushed on and Bullard was closer to the defence, since the requirement for a defensive midfielder was presumably lessened by Leeds being down to 10 men.

    In the last 15 minutes, Leeds broke against our attacks and managed to outnumber us on a couple of occasions. But for some poor final passes/last-ditch tackles, we could have conceded again. They were the type of easy break aways that Norwich, Southampton and Peterborough undid us with. The fact it was happening against a team with 10 men who were happy to defend for a win/draw with only one up front, says much about the setup of the team.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Cheers for the comment Alistair, this is all just my opinion so happy for a debate to ensue.

    I do sit in North Stand Lower so sometimes struggle to pick up exactly what is happening at all times and do have to try and fill in gaps when I get home, so you may well be correct regarding Kennedy but seemed to me Murphy was helping out there more on left side, maybe Bullard and Kennedy where sharing DM duties with Bullard right sided and Kennedy left sided?

    i think the chances were only created at the end because Gradel was one v one against Edwards a few times, but to be expected when game is streatched with 10 or 11 men.

    I think the squad is now good enough to compete in this division and time for Jewell to release shackles at home, make teams think about us rather than us about them

    ReplyDelete
  3. I dont know that we were really expecting anyone to play defensive midfield when against 10 men. Although Bullard was certainly the deepest of them all.

    Its just a bit concerning to see players run through our team. Leeds were certainly focussing on stopping our team from playing/scoring, but that didnt stop them being a threat on the break. They arent all that good either.

    ReplyDelete
  4. "I think in order to get the crowds back to Portman Road ... we need at least 4 attacking players ... this will lead to us looking less solid"

    LESS solid? I'm not really sure that's likely to lead to a rise up the table, which is what we need to get the fans back.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think the problem is we are more worried about not losing than we are winning at home and we need to be a bit more gung ho than we are. The last time we were good at home was that half season under Magilton with a front 4 of Clarke-Lee-Counago-Walters and we were battering teams. We have the personnel to set up with attacking players and make the opposition think about us rather than us worrying about them. People want to see excitement, not draws!

    ReplyDelete