| Woolfenden 20:56 - Aug 23 with 2533 views | Grumpy_Old_Man |
If ever there was an example of why Woolfenden should be in the team, today was it.
Repeated hesitation and playing the ball out, today looked a mistake waiting to happen.
We need his reading of the game, vision for delivery and calmness at the back.
Do not let him go, play him!! |  | | |  |
| Woolfenden on 09:22 - Aug 24 with 424 views | Pinewoodblue |
| Woolfenden on 08:42 - Aug 24 by management |
Thinking along similar lines, I would like to see 3-5-2 formation. Granted asks a lot of Young at RWB, allows Davis to roam forward, extra body in CM and provides support for Hirst. Players like Clarke & Philogene would be bench options as this formation would require more astute defensive players out wide. Players like Akpom and Szomidics can act as the supporting striker, then it's a case of can Ogbene, Mcateer, Johnson provided cover defensively as well as going forward(good chance these three would be subs). |
Southdmpton expecting to lose Brereton Diaz to another Chdmpionship side. Tracks bsck well. |  |
| |
| Woolfenden on 10:25 - Aug 24 with 358 views | management |
| Woolfenden on 09:02 - Aug 24 by redrickstuhaart |
A complete change of formation to an old fashioned approach which requires flying wingbacks and footballng centre backs? |
Not necessarily, Young could act similar to how Harry Clarke acted as a more restrained wing back, Wolfienden is the footballing CB as per this thread and allows support for Hirst via either/or Akpom, Szomidics, Chaplin.The general consensus is that presently the two wide players are not offering anything offensively or defensively presently. | | | |
| Woolfenden on 10:30 - Aug 24 with 346 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Woolfenden on 10:25 - Aug 24 by management |
Not necessarily, Young could act similar to how Harry Clarke acted as a more restrained wing back, Wolfienden is the footballing CB as per this thread and allows support for Hirst via either/or Akpom, Szomidics, Chaplin.The general consensus is that presently the two wide players are not offering anything offensively or defensively presently. |
If you have 3 cbs, the wing backs really do need to press on. Both sides. We dont have those players or cover for them bar Davies.
Furthermore, even back under Burley, our 5 3 2 featured two footballing cbs who played as wide midfielders when we were pressing (with the defence shuffling across to make a 4). I wouldnt trust either Greaves or O Shea to do a Mcgreal or Venus role. | | | |
| Woolfenden on 10:40 - Aug 24 with 332 views | management |
| Woolfenden on 10:30 - Aug 24 by redrickstuhaart |
If you have 3 cbs, the wing backs really do need to press on. Both sides. We dont have those players or cover for them bar Davies.
Furthermore, even back under Burley, our 5 3 2 featured two footballing cbs who played as wide midfielders when we were pressing (with the defence shuffling across to make a 4). I wouldnt trust either Greaves or O Shea to do a Mcgreal or Venus role. |
Take it that wish to persist with 4-2-3-1 which I fully understand as that is the shape they are coached in every week, the issue from my perspective is the two wide players are lacking confidence or understanding the role, technically good players(maybe individuals not team players), would you persist with these players as your widemen. It just in my opinion puts a lot of pressure on the two CM as they don't get the defensive support ie Burns would track back previously. | | | |
| Woolfenden on 10:42 - Aug 24 with 330 views | pointofblue |
| Woolfenden on 07:59 - Aug 24 by The_Flashing_Smile |
"They were all over us"?!?!? What game were you watching?!? |
Until they took the lead they were on top. How many crossed went into our box basically unchallenged before the penalty decision. Then they went into the low block and held on thanks to a mix of powderpuff attack play and the inability to hit a cow's arse with a banjo. | |
| |
| Woolfenden on 10:47 - Aug 24 with 312 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Woolfenden on 10:42 - Aug 24 by pointofblue |
Until they took the lead they were on top. How many crossed went into our box basically unchallenged before the penalty decision. Then they went into the low block and held on thanks to a mix of powderpuff attack play and the inability to hit a cow's arse with a banjo. |
Indeed. They were firmly on top until the goal. Half a dozen dangerous balls across. More than we managed all game. | | | |
| Woolfenden on 10:48 - Aug 24 with 312 views | pointofblue |
| Woolfenden on 10:40 - Aug 24 by management |
Take it that wish to persist with 4-2-3-1 which I fully understand as that is the shape they are coached in every week, the issue from my perspective is the two wide players are lacking confidence or understanding the role, technically good players(maybe individuals not team players), would you persist with these players as your widemen. It just in my opinion puts a lot of pressure on the two CM as they don't get the defensive support ie Burns would track back previously. |
This is where I am at the moment. Clarke and Philogene may benefit from coming on against tiring defenders and running at them with fresh legs - keeping it tight for the first hour or so, then taking advantage as the opposition tires. They should be better than this, they have the ability to have starring roles but, at the moment, they're not. And we don't have the options to replace them. | |
| |
| Woolfenden on 10:52 - Aug 24 with 302 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Woolfenden on 10:48 - Aug 24 by pointofblue |
This is where I am at the moment. Clarke and Philogene may benefit from coming on against tiring defenders and running at them with fresh legs - keeping it tight for the first hour or so, then taking advantage as the opposition tires. They should be better than this, they have the ability to have starring roles but, at the moment, they're not. And we don't have the options to replace them. |
Ogbene is far closer to Burns than the others. That speed and strength down the right might well open up diagonal balls, push a full back backwards and leave more room the other side.
At the moment we dont have that threat in behind on either flank which makes it easy to defend in solid banks. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Woolfenden on 10:54 - Aug 24 with 294 views | management |
| Woolfenden on 10:48 - Aug 24 by pointofblue |
This is where I am at the moment. Clarke and Philogene may benefit from coming on against tiring defenders and running at them with fresh legs - keeping it tight for the first hour or so, then taking advantage as the opposition tires. They should be better than this, they have the ability to have starring roles but, at the moment, they're not. And we don't have the options to replace them. |
Agreed, for example vs Southampton felt Town were much more in control in the second half when Ogbene was very wide on the right stretching the play and of course it helped he tracked back defensively and has the benefit of a more physical presence. Just leaves who so we start as the two wider players in a 4-2-3-1? | | | |
| Woolfenden on 10:59 - Aug 24 with 277 views | pointofblue |
| Woolfenden on 10:54 - Aug 24 by management |
Agreed, for example vs Southampton felt Town were much more in control in the second half when Ogbene was very wide on the right stretching the play and of course it helped he tracked back defensively and has the benefit of a more physical presence. Just leaves who so we start as the two wider players in a 4-2-3-1? |
As much as I have railed against the idea of Szmodics on the left his best performances for us were probably in that position early last season - cutting in and leaving space for Davis. I thought he'd take the step up in the ten position but he hasn't; it doesn't seem to suit him. Though what is Akpom's favoured position? Where do we want him to play? It's all well and good to bring in someone who is versatile enough to play across the front four but then complain about a lack of connections when they keep being swapped around. | |
| |
| Woolfenden on 10:59 - Aug 24 with 275 views | baxterbasics |
Soft peno given away aside, our defenders were not the problem yesterday. Attackers not creating or taking chances was. That should be number one problem troubling KMs inbox. |  |
| |
| Woolfenden on 11:04 - Aug 24 with 244 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Woolfenden on 10:59 - Aug 24 by baxterbasics |
Soft peno given away aside, our defenders were not the problem yesterday. Attackers not creating or taking chances was. That should be number one problem troubling KMs inbox. |
The point being that defenders who can join the midfield, create more options, more angles and open space. | | | |
| Woolfenden on 11:05 - Aug 24 with 242 views | management |
| Woolfenden on 10:59 - Aug 24 by pointofblue |
As much as I have railed against the idea of Szmodics on the left his best performances for us were probably in that position early last season - cutting in and leaving space for Davis. I thought he'd take the step up in the ten position but he hasn't; it doesn't seem to suit him. Though what is Akpom's favoured position? Where do we want him to play? It's all well and good to bring in someone who is versatile enough to play across the front four but then complain about a lack of connections when they keep being swapped around. |
Have to agree again, Szomidics and Ogbene seem personally to be the best in the wider roles, even as I type this have reservations but agree 100% re Szomidics best performances have been in that role. The advantage with these two is that they are more persistent in movement offensively & defensively. Will see what the rest of the transfer window brings. | | | |
| Woolfenden on 11:34 - Aug 24 with 205 views | Nutkins_Return |
Just clearly isn't the problem we have. We've just got new players further up the pitch that we are still working on patterns of play and relationships.
Least of our worries is the CB areas where we are strong. | |
| |
| Woolfenden on 12:24 - Aug 24 with 168 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Woolfenden on 10:42 - Aug 24 by pointofblue |
Until they took the lead they were on top. How many crossed went into our box basically unchallenged before the penalty decision. Then they went into the low block and held on thanks to a mix of powderpuff attack play and the inability to hit a cow's arse with a banjo. |
I disagree that they were on top, but regardless, that's not what you said. You said they were all over us. They put a few crosses into our box. That's not the same as being "all over us". |  |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Woolfenden on 12:27 - Aug 24 with 153 views | pointofblue |
| Woolfenden on 12:24 - Aug 24 by The_Flashing_Smile |
I disagree that they were on top, but regardless, that's not what you said. You said they were all over us. They put a few crosses into our box. That's not the same as being "all over us". |
Ok, fair point on semantics, over the top was an exaggeration. But I felt they were on top, as perhaps a home team should be early on, and we looked pretty suspect defensively whilst they were. | |
| |
| Woolfenden on 12:32 - Aug 24 with 131 views | The_Flashing_Smile |
| Woolfenden on 12:27 - Aug 24 by pointofblue |
Ok, fair point on semantics, over the top was an exaggeration. But I felt they were on top, as perhaps a home team should be early on, and we looked pretty suspect defensively whilst they were. |
I thought it was fairly even, with us having the lion's share of possession and them putting some dangerous balls into our box, which we expected as they're a big team. Nothing more than that. The pen was a huge slice of luck/cheating/dumb refereeing that enabled them to change tactics and shut the game down. The pen being their only shot on target says it all. | |
| Trust the process. Trust Phil. |
| |
| Woolfenden on 12:34 - Aug 24 with 115 views | pointofblue |
| Woolfenden on 12:32 - Aug 24 by The_Flashing_Smile |
I thought it was fairly even, with us having the lion's share of possession and them putting some dangerous balls into our box, which we expected as they're a big team. Nothing more than that. The pen was a huge slice of luck/cheating/dumb refereeing that enabled them to change tactics and shut the game down. The pen being their only shot on target says it all. |
I appreciate your view. My argument is I'm not sure we looked overly solid at the back whilst they were attacking and the key reason they did very little after the goal is they didn't look to. Would have been interesting to see what they would have done had we turned it around with time to spare. If only we had. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
