parsonjohn1985
Striker
So the team didn't look open under Mowbray, especially the more the season went on?
I'm a Mowbray fan, but most fans would concede that. I'd find it difficult to take anyone seriously who wouldn't concede it.
Then we didn't actively look to improve that?
Being more compact and structured under Beale and then negative under Dodds which resulted in us losing any sort of forward penetration we had.
What you seem to be saying is it can only be the amount of goals conceded that determines if you are defensively sound or not, without looking at how that's achieved and the set up and balance of the team as a whole - and of course that cannot differ or be changed or effected over the course of the season.
After 22 games on 19th December (Beale first game 23rd iirc) we had scored 32 goals. Mowbray left 5th December (we'd scored 3 inbetween) and we only scored 20 more goals over the remaining 24 games.
We'd conceded 24 goals on 16th December (22 games) and finished conceding 54, meaning 30 more goals were conceded over those 24 games.
Simply looking at that shows there was a drop off all round, but noticeably more in attacking impetus - suppose we didn't try to tighten up then?
There was problems in defence as well as attack and certainly in central midfield which left us vulnerable.
We didn't concede many goals and we're defensively pretty good. The issue was teams ran straight through our midfield directly at our centre backs. That was what beale talked about preventing. It wasn't anything to do with the centre backs, who were superb most of the season, it was to do with the protection in front of them.