There was much to cheer about after this weekend’s result against West Brom, arguably the most sophisticated team in the Championship.
Many were expecting a defeat and that the manner of that would see us comprehensively outplayed and outclassed.
In the event, neither happened and we got the moral high ground as one of their goals was ‘a la Thierry’, and the other was scored by someone who was arguably lucky to be on the field of a nasty altercation with the one and only Savgal.
Perhaps more importantly, by holding our own against a team widely expected to return to the Premiership, we may well have set down some markers for the future. Starting with establishing Pride Park as a place where teams can expect to go away with little, the last six games have seen four wins and a draw at Pride Park.
Footballers like to think that every time they trot out on their home ground, they are going to have something to celebrate afterwards. And from time immemorial, it has been a prerequisite for every successful team that they are hard to beat at home.
Liverpool’s ascendancy in the Shankly and Paisley years was built on the myths blowing around Anfield and teams were reminded forcibly before stepping on the turf by the imposing sign: “This is Anfield” – now an iconic photo.
Some teams were therefore beaten before they even started – while others, notably the Crazy Gang of Wimbledon saw this sign as a provocation. Their response? Every team member spat on it on their way out. It was their way of declaring that they would not be intimidated.
Millwall’s Cold Blow Lane was far less exalted than Anfield but no less intimidating and was the scene for an incredible record-breaking 59 games without losing, beaten by Liverpool’s 63 and latterly by Chelsea’s record of 86 games without losing at home – ended ironically by Liverpool.
No-one disputes that Chelsea’s success is built on solid defence. They very nearly unhinged last year’s Champions winner, Barcelona, by their tactics of deep defence.
Creating a mentality whereby you automatically expect to win or draw at home takes time. Compared to PJ’s team of butter footballers who melted at the first sign of adversity, Clough’s team are in my opinion far more resilient and I think this is where we are beginning to see shoots of progress.
Of course, the away record is appalling, but the defensive display against Swansea nearly produced a result.
Which is why I don’t understand some of those people who complain that we should have played gung-ho football. There is a time for defending, and a time to play.
I believe Clough is nothing if not pragmatic and if there is a need to dig deep, and defend, then he will do so. In Italy, defending is seen as essential and as Clarence Seedorf – a Champions Cup winner with three different clubs - once stated: “the truth is defences win you tough tournaments.” And Clough’s own father always built from the back with quality defenders.
My view is – ok, so we lost by the odd goal against Swansea but this is learning curve time, learning how to play together as a team, defending as a team and fighting back as a team.
We need different strategies for different games. We cannot expect to sweep aside teams every game. The line between success and failure in games is so fine and often rests on a hapless official who then has to make a lightening decision based on a blurred vision of events.
So I welcome Clough trying out different things – we don’t want to put ourselves into a false position as we did with the BD regime when there were no foundations and no alternative strategies. Inevitably, faced with superior opponents we caved in and the consequences are only just beginning to dissipate.
Incidentally on a different topic, there seem to be many posters who complain that Hulse is lazy and not doing enough.
There is an interesting statistic on the Football League website. According to this, he has given away 40 fouls, the third highest in the Championship. So he must be doing something even if it’s only giving away free kicks!