2 bad decisions by Flynn cost us the win

[CJK]

I'm torn as to what cost us three points today, at one nil up and Paynter getting sent through one on one to make it two nil I tend to think it was not putting that chance away. On the other hand, Copps going off totally changed the midfield battle and Lundstram was a total passenger for the second half, ten minutes of which was due to injury. Additionally we didn't adjust to Pompey simply throwing another guy up front, it wasn't ground breaking tactics yet we didn't do anything to counter it and sure enough nobody was surprised when the goal arrived.

Big chance missed to open up a real gap, its a shame but we're still well placed.

[The Red Baron]

I have to concur with m'learned friend Filo.

I had no problem with bringing Furman on, because at that time we needed another body in midfield.  I would have brought Paynter off then and given the back four more protection, getting Coppinger to play a more advanced role. If Coppinger was injured, then it needed a double change- Furman and Hume coming on.

Paynter and Brown don't really complement each other, but if you are going to play both then you need to get balls consistently into the box. We scored on one of the few occasions in the first half when we DID get a ball into the box.

Oh- and the overdue replacement of Lundstram- who I thought struggled before he got injured- was down to the physio saying he needed to come off. I thought the same at Milton Keynes- the game passes Flynn by and he is unable (or unwilling) to alter it. I wasn't Saunders' greatest fan, but if he saw something wasn't working, he was willing to change it.

[The Red Baron]

I'm torn as to what cost us three points today, at one nil up and Paynter getting sent through one on one to make it two nil I tend to think it was not putting that chance away. On the other hand, Copps going off totally changed the midfield battle and Lundstram was a total passenger for the second half, ten minutes of which was due to injury. Additionally we didn't adjust to Pompey simply throwing another guy up front, it wasn't ground breaking tactics yet we didn't do anything to counter it and sure enough nobody was surprised when the goal arrived.

Big chance missed to open up a real gap, its a shame but we're still well placed.

Paynter took the shot on too early. He should have tried to send the goalkeeper one way or the other. That said, I didn't have a great deal of confidence he would score and I don't think he did either!

Lundstram did struggle for much of the game. You have to remember he's a young lad and he will have some days when he doesn't perform. He was the obvious one to make way for Furman, but I thought at that time we needed another body in midfield. Sounds a bit negative, but we needed to weather the storm.

[wilts rover]

I have to concur with m'learned friend Filo.

I had no problem with bringing Furman on, because at that time we needed another body in midfield.  I would have brought Paynter off then and given the back four more protection, getting Coppinger to play a more advanced role. If Coppinger was injured, then it needed a double change- Furman and Hume coming on.

Paynter and Brown don't really complement each other, but if you are going to play both then you need to get balls consistently into the box. We scored on one of the few occasions in the first half when we DID get a ball into the box.

Oh- and the overdue replacement of Lundstram- who I thought struggled before he got injured- was down to the physio saying he needed to come off. I thought the same at Milton Keynes- the game passes Flynn by and he is unable (or unwilling) to alter it. I wasn't Saunders' greatest fan, but if he saw something wasn't working, he was willing to change it.

Add Crawley to that also TRB. Flynn seems to set out with one plan and is unable/unwilling to change it during the match, however obvious it is that it is not working. I wasn't there today nor was I at Bury, but it is a worrying sign that four of our poorest performances of the season have come under BF.

[LincolnDonny]

Surely with more pressure ON GOAL in the 1st half instead of messing about on the wings we could and should have been 4-0 up and THEN shut up shop.
After all it was a great chance to get our goal difference better, against a team no better than a Blue Square South team!

[CJK]

Not getting at Lundstram, I appreciate that he's young and its all part of the learning curve, just pointing out that he wasn't as involved in the second half as he had been in the first.

I'm really disappointed that Flynn didn't act when they threw another body up front, for the next ten minutes they piled the pressure on and the goal eventually came. It was so simple yet we didn't stick another man in there and try to counter it. Like you say TRB, he seems unwilling to change the starting formation if things aren't going our way. Personally I would have gone with a permutation of 5-3-2, moving Spurr into one of the three centre halves and bringing Husband back into a wingback position. It would have given us that extra bit of cover without being too negative and nicely set up to break away when they were pushed forward. Its all opinions.

[The Red Baron]

Very similar to Crawley in the way we surrended the initiative totally in the second half. At Bury we did at least put in a decent shift in the second half and with better finishing might have taken something from the game.

I'll stick my neck on the block and say that whatever happens in the next eight game I don't think Flynn should be manager next season.

[The Red Baron]

Surely with more pressure ON GOAL in the 1st half instead of messing about on the wings we could and should have been 4-0 up and THEN shut up shop.
After all it was a great chance to get our goal difference better, against a team no better than a Blue Square South team!

I wouldn't say we messed about on the wings because they double-teamed us in the first half, which meant that we couldn't get any overlapping runs going. Though with the two strikers we played we needed earlier balls into the box. Instead our build up was laboured.

These are the sort of things a manager needs to be able to change when he sees Plan A isn't working.

[hoolahoop]

Surely with more pressure ON GOAL in the 1st half instead of messing about on the wings we could and should have been 4-0 up and THEN shut up shop.
After all it was a great chance to get our goal difference better, against a team no better than a Blue Square South team!

That about sums it up , we were fannying around all over the pitch and got what we deserved a point. Did we actually think that we could hold onto a 1-0 lead at home against a struggling team ? If so it's time to be more professional, decisive and more especially incisive NOW. We've been caught out like this so often that it's now getting ridiculous.

[River Don]

I just don't understand why he changed Copps after 60 odd minutes? A caller on Radio Sheffield reckoned he was feeling a slight injury?

I don't know about that. We thought he just wanted to give Furman a run?

Anyway it completely upset the balance of the side and Portsmouth started to take control of midfield. It wasn't until Hume came on that we stabilised it.

Poor decision.

[River Don]

The writing was on the wall from around 50 minutes or so, they were showing some fight & we couldn't string 2 passes together nor match their workrate. Hume should have been brough on far earlier to take the game back to them, but we ambled along, made the wrong subs at wrong times, & paid the penalty. Yet another opportunity to put pressure on sides below us blown, we really are our own worst enemies.

Good analysis.

[Bristol Red Rover]

I can only think Copps was suffering in some way, otherwise Furman on for Lundstram even before Lundstram was injured was the right move.

Given what I hear of Furman, he is not a swap for attacking midfielder Copps - Bennett or Hume would be the ones.

I hope someone asks Flynn about that Copps substitution in an interview.

[The Red Baron]

Good old Radio Deedar managed to avoid asking any pertinant questions and allowed Flynn to spin it as a point gained "because we didn't play well." Yes, we didn't, but you have to ask what was the manager doing to address it then! 

[River Don]

Good old Radio Deedar managed to avoid asking any pertinant questions and allowed Flynn to spin it as a point gained "because we didn't play well." Yes, we didn't, but you have to ask what was the manager doing to address it then! 

I thought we played ok and looked pretty comfortable for about an hour.

[MachoMadness]

Have to say I'm starting to agree with the view that Flynn doesn't really 'do' tactics. He's obviously a good man manager and good for team spirit, which explains why he's done so well developing youth players, but he doesn't seem to have that knack of making the right change like Deano used to.

[donnievic]

I'm torn as to what cost us three points today, at one nil up and Paynter getting sent through one on one to make it two nil I tend to think it was not putting that chance away. On the other hand, Copps going off totally changed the midfield battle and Lundstram was a total passenger for the second half, ten minutes of which was due to injury. Additionally we didn't adjust to Pompey simply throwing another guy up front, it wasn't ground breaking tactics yet we didn't do anything to counter it and sure enough nobody was surprised when the goal arrived.

Big chance missed to open up a real gap, its a shame but we're still well placed.

agree with what you say apart from it was still 0-0 when the keeper saved paynters 1 on 1

[The Red Baron]

Good old Radio Deedar managed to avoid asking any pertinant questions and allowed Flynn to spin it as a point gained "because we didn't play well." Yes, we didn't, but you have to ask what was the manager doing to address it then! 

I thought we played ok and looked pretty comfortable for about an hour.

We were comfortable enough for about 50 minutes, but I wouldn't say we played well, even in the first half when Pompey barely had a sniff. Our play was too slow, laboured and predictable. It is no coincidence that our best chance (other than the goal) came when for once the ball was played out quickly from the back, putting Paynter through on goal. Most of the time it was a case of passing the ball round between defenders, then a ball back to Woods to launch forward.

I understand why Brown and Paynter were selected- they both played in a winning team last week and Hume is not 100% fit- but we missed someone to come short and drag defenders out of position. Lundstram didn't have the best of games (understandable for a young lad) even before his injury which left him a virtual passenger. If the bloke on Deedar had been doing his job properly he might have asked Flynn why he didn't change things earlier rather than waiting till we conceded an equaliser.

[Filo]

Good old Radio Deedar managed to avoid asking any pertinant questions and allowed Flynn to spin it as a point gained "because we didn't play well." Yes, we didn't, but you have to ask what was the manager doing to address it then! 

I thought we played ok and looked pretty comfortable for about an hour.

We were comfortable enough for about 50 minutes, but I wouldn't say we played well, even in the first half when Pompey barely had a sniff. Our play was too slow, laboured and predictable. It is no coincidence that our best chance (other than the goal) came when for once the ball was played out quickly from the back, putting Paynter through on goal. Most of the time it was a case of passing the ball round between defenders, then a ball back to Woods to launch forward.

I understand why Brown and Paynter were selected- they both played in a winning team last week and Hume is not 100% fit- but we missed someone to come short and drag defenders out of position. Lundstram didn't have the best of games (understandable for a young lad) even before his injury which left him a virtual passenger. If the bloke on Deedar had been doing his job properly he might have asked Flynn why he didn't change things earlier rather than waiting till we conceded an equaliser.

I`ve got to agree with that, every man and his dog could see an equaliser coming, I can probably understand the Copps change, but shortly after that Lundstram got injured and we carried him for a good 15 minutes, precisely the time the midfield were getting over run, a double change of Wilson for Lundstram and Hume for Paynter would have been the best course of action, given the options available

[walter the red]

Good shout Filo, totally agree I cannot see how Paynter and Brown are a good combination also the timing of Copps substitution was wrong making me worried about Flynn's tactical moves.Hope we can bounce back (again ) and become the team all others fear .

[hoolahoop]

Good old Radio Deedar managed to avoid asking any pertinant questions and allowed Flynn to spin it as a point gained "because we didn't play well." Yes, we didn't, but you have to ask what was the manager doing to address it then! 

I thought we played ok and looked pretty comfortable for about an hour.

We were comfortable enough for about 50 minutes, but I wouldn't say we played well, even in the first half when Pompey barely had a sniff. Our play was too slow, laboured and predictable. It is no coincidence that our best chance (other than the goal) came when for once the ball was played out quickly from the back, putting Paynter through on goal. Most of the time it was a case of passing the ball round between defenders, then a ball back to Woods to launch forward.

I understand why Brown and Paynter were selected- they both played in a winning team last week and Hume is not 100% fit- but we missed someone to come short and drag defenders out of position. Lundstram didn't have the best of games (understandable for a young lad) even before his injury which left him a virtual passenger. If the bloke on Deedar had been doing his job properly he might have asked Flynn why he didn't change things earlier rather than waiting till we conceded an equaliser.

I spoke to Hume after the match he implied that he was disappointed not to get more game time yesterday and was hoping for more time against the SKitsons. They don't sound like the words of an unfit player! Poor management and tactics yesterday imo, they were there for the taking and we have lost a great opportunity against a really poor team. Flynn is definitely to blame and I find it strange that he was the first man to leave the stadium after the game ; presumably he knew it was his fault rather than the players and got out quickly rather than to kick arse in the post match period.
Sort it please BF......

[The Red Baron]

I based the "Hume not 100%" on the story that he's carrying a back injury (apparently the reason why he was subbed at MK). Have to say I'd prefer to see him starting with either Brown or Paynter because it gives us better balance up front.

[hoolahoop]

I based the "Hume not 100%" on the story that he's carrying a back injury (apparently the reason why he was subbed at MK). Have to say I'd prefer to see him starting with either Brown or Paynter because it gives us better balance up front.

Exactly and he hustles the opposition like no other player we have available.Brown and Paynter working together isn't the best pairing and I'm surprised that BF ran with that.
I found it unbelievable in the 2nd half that we appeared to choose to defend so deep and protect a 1-0 lead against a very poor team right from the off virtually.....we were the team at home and at the top of the Division. Winners don't go for that sort of play given the above circumstances. 

[benaldo]

I agree with most of you. I don't think Flynn does tactics. I"m sure he's a nice bloke and can scout good young players, but I don't think he does matchdays any better than my breakfast leftovers sitting in front of me would.

I thought Furman was good, but Paynter should have come off and Coppinger should have been pushed up front. And why Hume didn't start is a mystery. Coppinger, for all his talents, is not a central midfielder so why Furman didn't start there is also a question that needs asking. Coppinger is a winger or a forward.

All a bit silly really.

[hoolahoop]

I agree with most of you. I don't think Flynn does tactics. I"m sure he's a nice bloke and can scout good young players, but I don't think he does matchdays any better than my breakfast leftovers sitting in front of me would.

I thought Furman was good, but Paynter should have come off and Coppinger should have been pushed up front. And why Hume didn't start is a mystery. Coppinger, for all his talents, is not a central midfielder so why Furman didn't start there is also a question that needs asking. Coppinger is a winger or a forward.

All a bit silly really.

True and totally naive tactics judging by the comments on here that we could do without on our run-in. Sounds from another post that Hume is getting pain killing injections for his back.........it didn't show when he played  though. He can be real class at times and a defenders nightmare. He is the key.

[Bristol Red Rover]

I think Flynns strengths are his man management, positivity and ability to reflect on the games. I really like his general approach with the style of play he encourages - when it comes together. He consistently refers to grinding out results and wearing down the opposition, something I can see as being our main tactic and personally think is a sound approach if the fitness of our side is as good as it has been (slight concern there I have with having lost Mal Purchase).

In Flynns post Pompey interview, he says we tried to raise the tempo in the game with one/two touch passing, and says how this failed to be effective because we weren't in the final third of the pitch. So we get a bit of an idea about him seeing whats needed for half time team talks.

Very disappointed with the interviewers not directly asking about the Copps substitution. This would give us a bit of an insight into his "on the fly" skills during the game, something I have a question mark against. Often we have very simple sub tactics - dealing with injuries and resting players that need resting, defending a lead (I hate this one), and adding fresh legs into the attack. Yesterday was different with what seems like a desire to give Furman a good amount of time, but the Copps sub mystifies me, totally counter to what it seems from the outside as to what was needed.

<added>
In the interview, he noted how much our passing was not going forwards. Thats been the case all along, not as pathological as it was with SOD, but surely a problem. Possession is good, but we have the ability to cut through sides. I saw it at Bournemouth where we let them get back, didn't scare them as much as we could. Their attacks were usually much more slick in that way, as are most sides. Just how good could we be if that were addressed?! 

[River Don]

You know that Jose Mourinho? He says football is won and lost in midfield.

You know what we did? Conceded midfield.

[RoversAlias]

You know that Jose Mourinho? He says football is won and lost in midfield.

You know what we did? Conceded midfield.

I think anyone who has been watching this football club for the past 4-6 years will say that the game is definitely won and lost in midfield. I have always believed that and it shows so often with this particular club.

[Sammy Chung was King]

What i don't understand,is why did Furman not start the game?,we've been needing this type of midfielder since Keegan's injury,surely he's got to start the next game,i agree with what a lot have been saying about the Paynter/Brown combo,it doesn't work as well as one of them with Hume,for me when fit Brown should start with Hume,that's the manager's job to make the tough decisions,Paynter has scored a few recently,but if it's for the good of the team,make the change,yes we are still top,but i can't believe Brian really thinks it's a point gained,what it is,is another lost opportunity to pull away,i know we are overachieving compared to where i thought we'd be(tenth),but now we are there let's stay there.

Coppinger in central midfield doesn't work,unless you've got Furman at the side of him,we badly need to build some points up before we get to the last month,i fully expect it to go to the last game,but i'm hoping we start giving ourselves a bit of a cushion,we've got seven points so far this month,we need at least four points from the next to against Scunny and Coventry,which i think we are more than capable of doing,it will suit us being away,because that pitch really isn't doing us any favours,no disrespect to the ground staff,it seems most pitches are the same this season,We are not going to have any fingernails left when this season finishes,COME ON ROVERS!!!