MATCHWATCH : Brighton & Hove Albion U21 (a)

[YorkshireRoyal99]

He was excellent start of the season. Been a big victim of rarely playing in the league and not playing u23 games etc either. Don’t think he has brilliantly managed tbh

Also it’s his first proper season. He’s done alright considering

It's tough for him though with Smith in front of him. He doesn't get a consistent run of games, but Smith is just the better option. If he can begin to have more of an impact again when he starts and the opportunities he does get from the bench, it's worth considering. I also don't think he is that well suited to how we play either. Many comparisons to Joao in terms of play style I think. He needs the ball into his feet and players around him, you'd think on paper we'd have that, but it doesn't seem to come off in practice.

He was a regular in the side that was struggling to score goals and 10 points off safety, I don't think he's been bad per se, but the difference between him and Smith is incredibly apparent, he's still only 20 so has potential for improvement but I think we need a better 2nd choice striker right now.

Yep, a lot of youngsters just don't have the consistency or perhaps aren't good enough for this level yet. The one that has shown the most consistent level of performance is Abbey who, whilst still flawed, has looked a cut above the rest. Craig and Dorsett do look settled in this side and have shown some good performances, just need to see if they can continue this for the season.

Outside of that? I'm not convinced by the others. Binden has looked decent in patches, Rushesha doesn't get a look in, Abrefa has seemingly gone etc, Camara seems to be following down that path as well (is he injured?) etc. It's the same at every club, in the summer a lot thought we had half a dozen youngsters ready for this, turns out we have 3 at best this season (still a good hit rate really considering our situation).

[Snowflake Royal]

Shit happens. L1 teams get beat by U21s sometimes.

What?! Based on some of the reactions from yesterday, I thought this was the first time it had ever happened in the competition and was the worst result any club in the football league had ever had.

Lulz

[WestYorksRoyal]

Ehibhatiomhan is strong and skillful, but to really get the best out of him you need to play the ball to his feet in threatening areas. So definitely similar to Joao. We don't really play that way, we utilise width and Smith's role involves a lot of running in behind and pressing. Plus he has the chemistry with Knibbs that comes from playing alongside him a lot.

So it's not really a case of Ehibhatiomhan being not good enough. It's that the team isn't set up for him to perform Smith's role and it's impossible to judge him if that's what we expect of him.

It is partly coaching. Selles should be asking the question of how he'd respond if Smith broke a leg, and we should be seeing glimpses of it from the bench and in the cups. I think currently he has no clue. I also wonder if Wareham is more like for like with Smith, even if he is much greener.

[blythspartan]

It's tough for him though with Smith in front of him. He doesn't get a consistent run of games, but Smith is just the better option. If he can begin to have more of an impact again when he starts and the opportunities he does get from the bench, it's worth considering. I also don't think he is that well suited to how we play either. Many comparisons to Joao in terms of play style I think. He needs the ball into his feet and players around him, you'd think on paper we'd have that, but it doesn't seem to come off in practice.

He was a regular in the side that was struggling to score goals and 10 points off safety, I don't think he's been bad per se, but the difference between him and Smith is incredibly apparent, he's still only 20 so has potential for improvement but I think we need a better 2nd choice striker right now.

Yep, a lot of youngsters just don't have the consistency or perhaps aren't good enough for this level yet. The one that has shown the most consistent level of performance is Abbey who, whilst still flawed, has looked a cut above the rest. Craig and Dorsett do look settled in this side and have shown some good performances, just need to see if they can continue this for the season.

Outside of that? I'm not convinced by the others. Binden has looked decent in patches, Rushesha doesn't get a look in, Abrefa has seemingly gone etc, Camara seems to be following down that path as well (is he injured?) etc. It's the same at every club, in the summer a lot thought we had half a dozen youngsters ready for this, turns out we have 3 at best this season (still a good hit rate really considering our situation).

I agree that 3 at best is a good hit rate.

I think my expectations have been too high this season. However, that was fuelled by the early cup games and some positive signs against Cheltenham and Stevenage earlier in the season.

It’s taken Selles a long time to find a settled team, which is a good mixture of youngsters and experienced pros. Without doubt had Smith not got injured and Selles had not made some big mistakes we’d have been sat comfortably in mid table now.

I am finding it difficult to know how to feel about us atm as I don’t think we have hit rock bottom yet. I hope I am wrong, but I can’t see us competing in the EFL next season, unless Dai sells us.

[Whore Jackie]

Absolute toothless display, like many after the first 10 mins I thought it was just a matter of time. But those ten mins must have gone to the players heads and they were clearly just treating it as a training match thinking it would be a given we would eventually score. We didn't, we got sloppy and complacent and were punished.

Bindon was head and shoulders above anyone else for us, making key interceptions. Azeez morphed back into his infuriating self. No-one else is worthy of a mention.

Also something I noticed is how the style of play completely changed last night, obviously down to no Smith and Knibbs. But since we have turned the corner we have become a long ball team, play long to Smith then pick up the pieces in the final third - which has resulted in majority of our goals and chances in recent weeks. It is not pretty, but has proved effective. Just found it interesting we completely binned that approach off last night.

Thought Wing had a decent game. He can certainly ping a pass and looked back to his bustling best after the break since Exeter. Otherwise agreed, though Savage really disappointed me. Hard to believe he's played for United. He's so safe with his passing, the game just completely passed him by. Completely overshadowed by Wing and Craig.

First-time visitor to the Amex. Decent pies and the Harvey's was better than you get at most grounds. Surprised at how small the end stands are.

Oh and the Lino jokes got really, really boring.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Ehibhatiomhan is strong and skillful, but to really get the best out of him you need to play the ball to his feet in threatening areas. So definitely similar to Joao. We don't really play that way, we utilise width and Smith's role involves a lot of running in behind and pressing. Plus he has the chemistry with Knibbs that comes from playing alongside him a lot.

So it's not really a case of Ehibhatiomhan being not good enough. It's that the team isn't set up for him to perform Smith's role and it's impossible to judge him if that's what we expect of him.

It is partly coaching. Selles should be asking the question of how he'd respond if Smith broke a leg, and we should be seeing glimpses of it from the bench and in the cups. I think currently he has no clue. I also wonder if Wareham is more like for like with Smith, even if he is much greener.

Based on that, if he doesn't suit our style and we can't get the best out of him, I'd rather we just sold him and stuck a % of next sale on there and potentially a buy-back option.

Agree we can't expect him to perform in Smith's role, but if we can't find a place for him in the team, not really sure it's worth keeping hold of him. The reason you would keep hold is because of our situation and finding a replacement better suited to our style might be hard to come by.

[Snowflake Royal]

Ehibhatiomhan is strong and skillful, but to really get the best out of him you need to play the ball to his feet in threatening areas. So definitely similar to Joao. We don't really play that way, we utilise width and Smith's role involves a lot of running in behind and pressing. Plus he has the chemistry with Knibbs that comes from playing alongside him a lot.

So it's not really a case of Ehibhatiomhan being not good enough. It's that the team isn't set up for him to perform Smith's role and it's impossible to judge him if that's what we expect of him.

It is partly coaching. Selles should be asking the question of how he'd respond if Smith broke a leg, and we should be seeing glimpses of it from the bench and in the cups. I think currently he has no clue. I also wonder if Wareham is more like for like with Smith, even if he is much greener.

Based on that, if he doesn't suit our style and we can't get the best out of him, I'd rather we just sold him and stuck a % of next sale on there and potentially a buy-back option.

Agree we can't expect him to perform in Smith's role, but if we can't find a place for him in the team, not really sure it's worth keeping hold of him. The reason you would keep hold is because of our situation and finding a replacement better suited to our style might be hard to come by.

Or, given we have no alternative, we could do the blindingly obvious and adapt our style to get the best out of him when we use him.

[Clyde1998]

I think it was one of those game where if we’d got a goal, we would’ve won by three or four. Had Wing scored that one-on-one early in the game, we’d’ve probably had an easy night.

We had basically all the territory and multiple chances to score; we simply lacked the cutting edge.

Brighton’s only chances (I can remember) came through two free-kicks and a defensive error leading to three shots in quick succession. They were much more organised defensively than anyone we played in the group stage, including Arsenal’s U21s.

The penalties were poor. From Vickers’ effort being saved (don’t think that one was too bad), it was obvious we’d lose. Azeez looked like he was about to blast over before he took it, but proceeded to blast three yards wide instead.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Ehibhatiomhan is strong and skillful, but to really get the best out of him you need to play the ball to his feet in threatening areas. So definitely similar to Joao. We don't really play that way, we utilise width and Smith's role involves a lot of running in behind and pressing. Plus he has the chemistry with Knibbs that comes from playing alongside him a lot.

So it's not really a case of Ehibhatiomhan being not good enough. It's that the team isn't set up for him to perform Smith's role and it's impossible to judge him if that's what we expect of him.

It is partly coaching. Selles should be asking the question of how he'd respond if Smith broke a leg, and we should be seeing glimpses of it from the bench and in the cups. I think currently he has no clue. I also wonder if Wareham is more like for like with Smith, even if he is much greener.

Based on that, if he doesn't suit our style and we can't get the best out of him, I'd rather we just sold him and stuck a % of next sale on there and potentially a buy-back option.

Agree we can't expect him to perform in Smith's role, but if we can't find a place for him in the team, not really sure it's worth keeping hold of him. The reason you would keep hold is because of our situation and finding a replacement better suited to our style might be hard to come by.

Or, given we have no alternative, we could do the blindingly obvious and adapt our style to get the best out of him when we use him.

That depends what effect that has on the rest of the team. If changing our style to meet Ehib's skillset means the likes of Knibbs and Azeez can't thrive for example, I'd rather not bother.

At the moment as well, I don't really want us experimenting further when we know our current best XI and are getting results. If we were comfortably in mid-table, it might be worth it, but after all the issues we have, I'd rather we just stick to the team and system that's getting us results.

[WestYorksRoyal]

Based on that, if he doesn't suit our style and we can't get the best out of him, I'd rather we just sold him and stuck a % of next sale on there and potentially a buy-back option.

Agree we can't expect him to perform in Smith's role, but if we can't find a place for him in the team, not really sure it's worth keeping hold of him. The reason you would keep hold is because of our situation and finding a replacement better suited to our style might be hard to come by.

Or, given we have no alternative, we could do the blindingly obvious and adapt our style to get the best out of him when we use him.

That depends what effect that has on the rest of the team. If changing our style to meet Ehib's skillset means the likes of Knibbs and Azeez can't thrive for example, I'd rather not bother.

At the moment as well, I don't really want us experimenting further when we know our current best XI and are getting results. If we were comfortably in mid-table, it might be worth it, but after all the issues we have, I'd rather we just stick to the team and system that's getting us results.

I think you miss the point. Obviously we would not choose to change our style which has brought improved results. But it doesn't work without Smith. So what is our plan if something happens to him? Surely we need more options available?

If Smith stays fit it's a problem for another season, but that's a bit of a risk to be taking.

[Snowflake Royal]

Or, given we have no alternative, we could do the blindingly obvious and adapt our style to get the best out of him when we use him.

That depends what effect that has on the rest of the team. If changing our style to meet Ehib's skillset means the likes of Knibbs and Azeez can't thrive for example, I'd rather not bother.

At the moment as well, I don't really want us experimenting further when we know our current best XI and are getting results. If we were comfortably in mid-table, it might be worth it, but after all the issues we have, I'd rather we just stick to the team and system that's getting us results.

I think you miss the point. Obviously we would not choose to change our style which has brought improved results. But it doesn't work without Smith. So what is our plan if something happens to him? Surely we need more options available?

If Smith stays fit it's a problem for another season, but that's a bit of a risk to be taking.

Yeah, no Smith already equals damaging Azeez and Knibbs performance.

YR seems to fear any change sometimes. Particularly if it involves giving Academy players a chance.

Didn’t want Craig to get picked iirc.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

Or, given we have no alternative, we could do the blindingly obvious and adapt our style to get the best out of him when we use him.

That depends what effect that has on the rest of the team. If changing our style to meet Ehib's skillset means the likes of Knibbs and Azeez can't thrive for example, I'd rather not bother.

At the moment as well, I don't really want us experimenting further when we know our current best XI and are getting results. If we were comfortably in mid-table, it might be worth it, but after all the issues we have, I'd rather we just stick to the team and system that's getting us results.

I think you miss the point. Obviously we would not choose to change our style which has brought improved results. But it doesn't work without Smith. So what is our plan if something happens to him? Surely we need more options available?

If Smith stays fit it's a problem for another season, but that's a bit of a risk to be taking.

Ah ok yes fair enough, apologies, didn't read it correctly and was assuming Smith would stay fit.

Obviously yes, try and change if Smith isn't available, although again, if it's a detriment to the rest of the team then it's going to be a problem. It depends if the other players can adapt around Ehib to be honest.

If we are looking at other alternatives, I'm not adverse to trying someone else like Wareham, particularly if it means the rest of the team can thrive around him.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

That depends what effect that has on the rest of the team. If changing our style to meet Ehib's skillset means the likes of Knibbs and Azeez can't thrive for example, I'd rather not bother.

At the moment as well, I don't really want us experimenting further when we know our current best XI and are getting results. If we were comfortably in mid-table, it might be worth it, but after all the issues we have, I'd rather we just stick to the team and system that's getting us results.

I think you miss the point. Obviously we would not choose to change our style which has brought improved results. But it doesn't work without Smith. So what is our plan if something happens to him? Surely we need more options available?

If Smith stays fit it's a problem for another season, but that's a bit of a risk to be taking.

Yeah, no Smith already equals damaging Azeez and Knibbs performance.

YR seems to fear any change sometimes. Particularly if it involves giving Academy players a chance.

Didn’t want Craig to get picked iirc.

There is no "fear" to change. The fear would be changing to accommodate one player where the rest of the team suffers.

Not actually sure what Craig has to do with it, it was more about if he was ready for the first team football. Done well at the moment, but it could all change in 3 months time if he goes the route of Binden et al with some inconsistences. Also stated on several occasions that the club should be built around the academy, but that doesn't mean throw every academy player in for the sake of it. As we have found out this season, it won't work.

[Vision]

Or, given we have no alternative, we could do the blindingly obvious and adapt our style to get the best out of him when we use him.

That depends what effect that has on the rest of the team. If changing our style to meet Ehib's skillset means the likes of Knibbs and Azeez can't thrive for example, I'd rather not bother.

At the moment as well, I don't really want us experimenting further when we know our current best XI and are getting results. If we were comfortably in mid-table, it might be worth it, but after all the issues we have, I'd rather we just stick to the team and system that's getting us results.

I think you miss the point. Obviously we would not choose to change our style which has brought improved results. But it doesn't work without Smith. So what is our plan if something happens to him? Surely we need more options available?

If Smith stays fit it's a problem for another season, but that's a bit of a risk to be taking.

Wasn't that exactly what happened last night though? You've got people on here complaining because we changed our style from the recent League games which is what we should be doing without Smith's physicality and Knibb's energy.

It's sacrilege to say it on here but It seems to me that with the line up we selected we'd have been better off playing the 4-2-2-2 which everyone seems to hate but which actually brought us success in the cup competitions earlier in the season.

My main gripe like Ian is that those successes were mainly with Vickers dovetailing alongside Kelvin E so why we don't play Vickers more centrally with a bit more freedom makes little sense to me unless we're trying to get him proficient in an area of the first team that is up for grabs. If that is the reason it doesn't appear to be working at the moment.

[Snowflake Royal]

That depends what effect that has on the rest of the team. If changing our style to meet Ehib's skillset means the likes of Knibbs and Azeez can't thrive for example, I'd rather not bother.

At the moment as well, I don't really want us experimenting further when we know our current best XI and are getting results. If we were comfortably in mid-table, it might be worth it, but after all the issues we have, I'd rather we just stick to the team and system that's getting us results.

I think you miss the point. Obviously we would not choose to change our style which has brought improved results. But it doesn't work without Smith. So what is our plan if something happens to him? Surely we need more options available?

If Smith stays fit it's a problem for another season, but that's a bit of a risk to be taking.

Wasn't that exactly what happened last night though? You've got people on here complaining because we changed our style from the recent League games which is what we should be doing without Smith's physicality and Knibb's energy.

It's sacrilege to say it on here but It seems to me that with the line up we selected we'd have been better off playing the 4-2-2-2 which everyone seems to hate but which actually brought us success in the cup competitions earlier in the season.

My main gripe like Ian is that those successes were mainly with Vickers dovetailing alongside Kelvin E so why we don't play Vickers more centrally with a bit more freedom makes little sense to me unless we're trying to get him proficient in an area of the first team that is up for grabs. If that is the reason it doesn't appear to be working at the moment.

Can we go with adapting things without going back to 4-2-2-2

I'm not even sure it's a shape thing for Kelv. We spend out time under pressure in the League and then breaking hard and fast. Fair enough.

Against U21s we're obviously going to dominate. So putting all the focus on quick direct wing play just seems to show no understanding of match context. Reframe to be possession driven and pass around the edges of their box, progressing to the final third a bit slower, put Vickers in for one of the three midfielders, and you have a different scenario which is better suited to Kelv.

We seemed to get to about 30 minutes and just stop trying because we hadn't already scored. It was weird.

[WestYorksRoyal]

That depends what effect that has on the rest of the team. If changing our style to meet Ehib's skillset means the likes of Knibbs and Azeez can't thrive for example, I'd rather not bother.

At the moment as well, I don't really want us experimenting further when we know our current best XI and are getting results. If we were comfortably in mid-table, it might be worth it, but after all the issues we have, I'd rather we just stick to the team and system that's getting us results.

I think you miss the point. Obviously we would not choose to change our style which has brought improved results. But it doesn't work without Smith. So what is our plan if something happens to him? Surely we need more options available?

If Smith stays fit it's a problem for another season, but that's a bit of a risk to be taking.

Wasn't that exactly what happened last night though? You've got people on here complaining because we changed our style from the recent League games which is what we should be doing without Smith's physicality and Knibb's energy.

It's sacrilege to say it on here but It seems to me that with the line up we selected we'd have been better off playing the 4-2-2-2 which everyone seems to hate but which actually brought us success in the cup competitions earlier in the season.

My main gripe like Ian is that those successes were mainly with Vickers dovetailing alongside Kelvin E so why we don't play Vickers more centrally with a bit more freedom makes little sense to me unless we're trying to get him proficient in an area of the first team that is up for grabs. If that is the reason it doesn't appear to be working at the moment.

We were asking too much of our full backs with 4222 and were constantly overrun if teams beat our press. I'd like to see 352 as plan B, with Knibbs and Azeez dovetailing off Ehibhatiomhan as 2nd striker and no.10. Perhaps 3421 is more a accurate description. Then Vickers and Elliott much more suited off the bench. Would involve bringing NGW in from the cold, or Carson.

[Clyde1998]

Shit happens. L1 teams get beat by U21s sometimes.

What?! Based on some of the reactions from yesterday, I thought this was the first time it had ever happened in the competition and was the worst result any club in the football league had ever had.

Last night was the 74th time a League One side has 'lost' to an academy side in this competition (19th time on penalties); technically penalties are only considered a tie-breaker for the purposes of progression, not a match result (so we actually drew last night). We became the 39th League One side to 'lose' to an academy team in this competition (five, including ourselves, haven't lost in ninety minutes).

So, 34 League One sides have lost a total of 55 matches against academy sides in ninety minutes. Thirteen have lost on penalties on nineteen occasions.

Our U21s beat Bristol Rovers 3-2 in this competition back in 2016. The worst losses for a League One side against an academy side are: Peterborough 1-6 Norwich U21s (2016-17); Plymouth 0-5 Chelsea U21s (2018-19); Exeter 0-5 Arsenal U21s (2023-24).