Certain Relegation/Championship - 2020/2021

There are a few positive things about being relegated this season.....

Win more games
Chance of winning the league
Better chance for our youff players to get a game
Thrashing Loo town twice
A whole new match day experience for our younger fans
More goals

There are probably loads more, but getting relegated ain't the end of the world.

Yes yes, we'd get stick from glory hunting friends who support a big six club, but they don't understand, they just don't UNDERSTAND!

 

Dire standard of football, too many mid week games, possibly a change of ownership, ****** play offs etc. Your post isn’t selling it to me! Being relegated could be devastating.

 

Seem to remember this forum being a nicer place to frequent in the championship.

 

Always makes me laugh when people like you attempt to put a positive spin on things, NEVER WORKS

You are missing out on

100 million plus ever year.
Watching world class players.
More attention in the media.radio
More live games
Free streaming
MOTD
Beating the top 6
Signing players for huge figures
Best league in the world
VAR
Trips to the Amex
Big attendances
Less mid week games.

I could go on all night.

 

Fewer

 

From a selfish point of view it would be great, easy to get good seated tickets, better chance of winning/dominating, a couple of derby games and some decent away games. From a club perspective it would be devastating financially and we'd probably fall in the trap many ex PL teams do and flop hard in the first season and having to spend a few years rebuilding. I imagine ticket prices for home games which are already at the 40 quid mark wouldn't decrease that much, especially when thousands of season ticket holders will disappear until we get promoted again. It would also be pretty **** having to get used to very little coverage on match day.

Promotion season was more enjoyable than any PL season so far but there's no guarantee we'd get that again for a while.

 

But it was Sheffield United at home!! The opposition makes a world of difference.

We’re we really that terrified of what they would do to us?

Use the system at Spurs, and I’d say that’s totally acceptable, but at home to a newly promoted side is ridiculous.

We need wins from the position we are in now and we’ve got to take advantage of weaker opponents when the fixture comes along.

We did not attack them at all. Both teams were happy to play out a 0-0. They were pleased because they got something away from home, and apparently we were pleased because we got a clean sheet.

The chances we got were handed to us. We did very little to engineer them. Like their best chance was totally down to us. They put in a low cross. Prodl slices it to Cathcart who slices over Foster and only a brilliant piece of improvised goalkeeping saved the day.

Actually, had that Cathcart attempt gone in, I’d expect fans would still be saying it’s the right system but we were unlucky.

You make your own luck and playing in a timid defensive way in this type of game, you deserve nothing more than a 0-0 draw.

 

Agree. We need to win 10 or so games at least to stay up from the remaining 30. Home games against the newly promoted sides are the best opportunity. To seemingly focus on not conceding at home to SU, who we hope will be one of our relegation rivals, was disapppointing.

 

I'm not doing them a disservice at all. If we cannot go to try and take the game to the likes of Sheffield United at home, then who can we do it against?

You have to pick and choose when to use a formation like we used on Saturday. It was totally the wrong match to do it in.

The system is good at nullifying a superior team to yours. Are you suggesting Sheffield United are superior to us? When you play teams that are your equal or weaker, then you have to go after them a bit more. You cannot be this ultra-defensive.

As I say, use it at Spurs, and even in the home game against Chelsea, but we really should be confident we can take the game to our opponent and cause them problems in most of our home games.

That was probably Sheffield United's easiest game of the season. I admit they could have lost it, but they made three uncharacteristic mistakes, which gave us the chances. That's down to them, and we cannot expect our future opponents to be so generous.

Let's be honest, had they tracked that hopeful punt up field by Cleverley, like they should have, or tracked Dawson's run into the box, like they should have, we'd have had only one chance in the entire game. They were extraordinary lapses in concentration from our opponent, of which we all know, rarely happen at Premier League level, and you can never expect or count on that type of thing happening in every game, because it wont.

We did nothing to force the issue, and the fact we got three very good scoring opportunities, was purely down to luck. Sheffield United handed those on a plate, so you should not cling to those chances as proof the system works.

We are a side that needs to create many chances, all the stats back that up. So why use a system that dramatically reduces our creativity? As I say, playing this system, the best we can realistically hope for is a 0-0 or 0-1 defeat. If we are perfect, and take the one chance that comes our way and make no mistakes at the back, then a 1-0 win is possible, but you're playing against the odds. Over an entire season it won't do you any favours in the long run.

 

At the moment they clearly are a superior team to us, the table doesn't lie. At best they're equal. They have the joint second-best defensive record in the league so far this season., while our defence is terrible.

Also, they like to play on the counter attack, so us being more adventurous in a 4-4-2 could have just played in to their hands in the same way that the approach did at home to Brighton (who played 5-3-2 and beat us 3-0).

I suspect their 2-0 win away at Everton was easier.

They are not "uncharacteristic mistakes"; they also conceded from an even more horrendous mistake vs Liverpool.

Furthermore, look at the two goals they conceded vs Chelsea, both involved mistakes as bad, if not worse, as the ones against us.
At 1:10, Chelsea's first goal, Henderson spills a catch and Sheff Utd defenders fail to react to the loose ball.
At 4:05, Chelsea's second goal, two Sheff Utd CBs tackle each other for the same header, and instead of clearing it end up heading it backwards to put Abraham clean through on goal.

As I pointed out above, they clearly weren't extraordinary. In addition, they certainly happen in pretty much every game with us and our defence - whether it be Doucoure scoring an o.g. or gifting a penalty, Foster brainlessly charging off his line, Janmaat o.g., Cathcart passing the ball straight to their striker, Deeney getting himself needlessly sent-off while we're on top in a match, Cathcart almost scoring another o.g. vs Sheffield, repeatedly allowing wide players to run unmarked in behind our full-backs etc. etc. etc.

Football matches do often come down to who makes the fewest mistakes, in fact, Jose Mourinho's mantra was: “the team that makes the fewest mistakes most often wins”. More of an issue is that we have been making loads, and have been punished basically every time by opponents for them, while we've been failing to capitalise on those of our opponents. There will inevitably be mistakes in football - if there weren't, the only goals would be 30-yard worldies.

Our lack of goalscoring is generally more due to our inability to take our chances, than being over-reliant on opposition mistakes. The stats on us having by far the lowest shot to goal conversion rate in the league underlines this.

The benefit of having gone 5-3-2, was at the very least it meant we had more defenders to cover for any of the regular mistakes our players make, thus reducing the chance they may be costly.

 

But why did he use this system in the most winnable game since he took over? Why didn't he do something like this at City or Wolves? Certainly should have used it at Wolves, especially after an 8-0 thrashing. It would have made far more sense to play a defensive formation in games where we would likely be under pressure. If he wanted to experiment beforehand, he could have played it in the Swansea cup tie.

To me it makes absolutely no sense to have played it against Sheffield United at home, the weakest opposition he's played against so far.

It tells me his judgement of the situation is not good and he's making bad choices.

 

I'm glad you've pointed out that Sheffield are prone to defensive slip ups. It shows that they've been fortunate to have such a good defensive record. This makes it even clearer that we should have attacked them more and been on the front foot. We should have taken advantage of their characteristic mistakes and burst their bubble.

...and actually their win at Everton was lucky. Even their manager admitted it was their worst performance of the season and they got away with it.

They are still a Championship club in transition, and I completely refute they are superior to us.

They were there for the taking, but we were too gutless to do it.

When you play an ultra-defensive formation, it only works if you keep a clean sheet and pinch a goal. You're constantly walking a tightrope with it though. If you go a goal down, then it's game over. You do not have the ability to chase the game. You are pretty much certain to lose.

 

Every team in the league is superior to us at the moment if you go by the league table
It just doesn't feel right to be celebrating a 0-0 draw at home to SU. It feels more like a missed opportunity. Yes it's great that we didn't concede but 0-0 draws at home to the remaining teams in the bottom 8 won't be enough to stay up. A defensive set up at home to SU may give the defence some confidence but won't be helping our strikers who are lacking confidence and need more support to make things happen at the other end.

 

Swansea were the weakest opponent. It would have made even less sense to try it in that match.

To me it seems clear that he tried to make us defensively solid in the PL using his preferred 4-4-2 formation in the first matches, then saw that our defenders are just so terrible that it won't work, and so switching to 5-3-2 was necessary for more stability. To me this showed good judgement.

 

How does it show that they've been fortunate to have such a good defensive record?! It could, more likely, mean that in general they have excellent defensive organisation and defend well as a unit; thus, the only way they do typically concede is from the few occasions they make individual mistakes, rather than from their players typically or their system. That they've only conceded 7 goals, while we've conceded 20, shows that they're less prone to defensive slip ups, and are likely better able to cover them when they do happen.

It really does not make it clearer we should have attacked them more - if so we could have just ended up in a repeat of the Brighton match (and being even more likely to concede first).

As it was, as you correctly say "We should have taken advantage of their characteristic mistakes and burst their bubble." - but this should have happened according to the exact game plan which we had. As I said before, our problem was not in our setup, but that we failed to take the chances we had.

You point out: "When you play an ultra-defensive formation, it only works if you keep a clean sheet and pinch a goal." - therefore, our approach did work; what was missing was that we failed to pinch the goal when we had the opportunities.

A key difference between us and our opponents is that we make more mistakes than them, and unlike them we fail to punish our opponents when we do make them (as shown by our shot conversion stats).

 

That's your opinion, which is fine. I totally disagree with it though.

 

We are in trouble and need to improve but..

Liverpool are currently 8 points clear at the top, but most people would say they are not guaranteed to win the league.

We are only 4 points from safety, so by the same logic are not guaranteed to be relegated.

 

I see your viewpoint, and in the next few weeks/months you may end up right, but I think for now the judgement was sort of correct, it was clear that after the City and Wolves games that the team, for one reason or another aren't (or can't be bothered) able to play expansive attacking football without getting slaughtered at the back. I'll give QSF the benefit of the doubt considering he's managed to do in 26 days what Gracia couldn't do since February.

We'll now no doubt go lose to Spurs 6-0 playing ultra defensive football.

 

You can't have it both ways. You made a good point, even with clips showing all their errors, in an attempt to win over the statement I made that they made uncharacteristic mistakes in our game.

However, if they are prone to these mistakes, and as you've demonstrated, quite a lot of them, then they've been lucky to have got away with it so often. That's clear.

This is why we should have forced the issue and taken the game to them.

You say "therefore, our approach did work; what was missing was that we failed to pinch the goal when we had the opportunities." That's a total contradiction. Our approach didn't work because we did not score the winning goal. You can only say it worked had we won. It didn't work because we only drew the game.

What you have to look at is percentages. Playing this way, does it create more chances to score? NO. When you play a newly promoted team at home, is it a good idea to attack them, or sit back and try to nullify them? Clearly Flores, and yourself by the looks of it, thinks the best policy is to sit back and defend at all costs. I have the opposite view.

We have to be brave if we're going to get out of this mess. We have to take risks in order to win. Playing like we did at home to one of the weaker sides in the league, will only play into their hands. They'll be delighted to come away with a 0-0, because that was their game plan. We played right into their hands. It was a poor piece of management from Flores to not understand this.

Like I said, why not play this at City or Wolves? It would have made far more sense. He's done everything the wrong way around.

 

Of course we're not guaranteed to be relegated. But the gap to safety is less important than the knowledge we'll need almost certainly 32-35 more points to survive this season. We're not just chasing one specific team. And although we have 30 games on paper to do it in, recent history tells us we should treat anything we get from the big boys as a bonus that cannot be counted on. So the pressure is on to get at least 32pts from 20 games, which is 1.6pts per game against the non-top 6 clubs. It's still just about manageable but if it creeps above 2pts/game I think we'll be done.

 

They clearly do make mistakes. Therefore the ones against us weren't uncharacteristic.

However, what was uncharacteristic was that we, unlike Chelsea, did not punish them for those mistakes.

It is not a case of trying to "have it both ways" - just because Sheffield Utd still make some mistakes, does not mean that they don't still have a good defence which makes fewer mistakes than other teams in the league. All teams make mistakes (as demonstrated by Mourinho's mantra). Sheffield Utd make below average. We make way above average.

Nothing in what I've shown or said suggests that Sheffield Utd have "been lucky to have got away with it so often" - they could have conceded from every mistake they've made (except vs us), at a similar ratio to the amount of goals we've conceded relative to our mistakes. Because they make fewer mistakes that means less goals conceded by them overall. They were lucky vs. us, not vs. Chelsea (but Chelsea have Abraham, while we have Gray and Welbeck).

We took the game to Brighton and look what happened. Our approach vs Sheffield Utd was clearly more preferable as although in both matches our strikers couldn't hit a barn door with a banjo, at least we didn't concede. We clearly didn't play right in to Sheffield Utd's hands, as unlike in our match vs Brighton, they had basically zero goalscoring opportunities, while we had 3.

As for your point about City or Wolves, my guess would be that he tried to make us solid in his preferred 4-4-2 vs them, in the same system that worked for him with us before, but learned from those two games that with our current defenders it is asking for trouble at the back.

 

We never took the game to Brighton. Did you even go to the game?

We were so under-prepared it was an accident waiting to happen. I saw all the frailties against Real Sociedad in the friendly the Saturday before. We were nowhere near ready for the Brighton game and that defeat did not surprise me one bit. It wouldn't have made any difference whatever formation we used in that game. The players were just not ready for the season.

Gracia should have been fired on the spot after that, IMO. To work all pre-season and have his team so under-prepared for the first game of the season was insane.

 

Now this I do agree with you on. Absolutely he should have been fired for not having the team ready.

 

I watched the match on TV as I wasn't in the UK.

We attacked them more than they did us.

We had 11 shots on goal to their 5, as well as having 5 corners to their 2; i.e. over double their shots and corners.

Their goals were generally on the counter. We started well but their first goal came from basically their first attack.

 

It certainly was credible cos it happened...

 

We will be relegated. Sad, but it will happen.
The players we have have reached their peak, no new blood coming in from our academy (do we really have one?). No new signings worth a place in the starting line up.
Many fans on here are now resigned to Watford being back in the Championship next season.
We can only hope for the best that we don't go with the lowset points total or most goals scored against.
It will have a great effect on Watford both on and off the pitch.

 

Yes....I think the ultra-defensive approach we'll employ for the rest of the season will probably yield the nine 0-0 draws we need to get to 12 points, thus smashing Derby's measly 11 point total.

 

I agree that you do make your own luck, but we should have won that 2-0. With competent finishing, we would have won. QSF did not play for a draw at all.

 

No matter how **** our form is, losing 0-3 at home to Brighton will only ever be a freak result.

 

Why should it be for the 'rest of the season' hb1?

 

We cannot play fast and loose. We do not have the quality of players to be able to attack and defend.
Damage limitation is the order of the day. Boring, but it may save embarrassment.