fernandopartridge
Well-Known Member
Haha, yes I've mentioned it once or twice
The "Highlights" (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter Nick
- Start date
Johhny Blue
Well-Known Member
With just one extra chance taken in each home game we would be in 6th and 6 points behind Luton
Do the results disagree? Hasn't Chaplin started 10 of our 11 wins? We hit form when he joined so I'd be surprised if the results were better without him.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Never thought of it that way.
SkyBlue_Bear83
Well-Known Member
When you are basically undroppable it’s no surprise he has started in most of our victories.
ccfcricoh
Well-Known Member
I think that Chaplin needs to be dropped for a game but based on what others have just said about results had a quick look at form with and without him...
8 games not started (first 6 when not signed and then Pompy ineligible and he didn't start against Luton, effectively only dropped once!)
22 games has started
We've picked up 5 points out of 24 without him (21%) and 34 points out of 66 with him starting (52%)
Quite interesting how much of a difference there is...
8 games not started (first 6 when not signed and then Pompy ineligible and he didn't start against Luton, effectively only dropped once!)
22 games has started
We've picked up 5 points out of 24 without him (21%) and 34 points out of 66 with him starting (52%)
Quite interesting how much of a difference there is...
Of course there are other factors such as Sterling's form, bringing Shipley back, Burge's return etc. However, it does confirm that the results do not show we are better without Chaplin (even if we might be). Apparently we have only won one game without Sterling, Bayliss and Thomas all playing which was Oxford away.
Nick
Administrator
Here are some stats as well (obviously might not be 100% accurate) . Have a look at the formations played for each game.
This is what I mean by Robins trying to shoehorn things in at detriment to the team through stubborness. It would be interesting to see how many of those Chaplin was closer up front to another player (and who) and the system played.
It certainly looks that playing a lone striker doesn't work.
This is what I mean by Robins trying to shoehorn things in at detriment to the team through stubborness. It would be interesting to see how many of those Chaplin was closer up front to another player (and who) and the system played.
It certainly looks that playing a lone striker doesn't work.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Agree. Should be two.
steve82
Well-Known Member
We’ve spoke before about us both not being fans of the 4231 as the lead mans too isolated which I advocated but what other formation can we play with current players putting 2 up top together with no natural left winger.
A return to 442 puts Shipley back at left wing, that will keep everyone happy on here and Hiwula is heavily exposed as a left winger defensively which was displayed during that unbeaten run.
I’m not seeing it as stubbornness currently and see why he’s returned to the 4231 it just suits the majority of the side better, unfortunately for our desired choice.
The current way we’re creating enough chances a game at the minute, it’s just getting the balance right and taking opportunities when they come. I’d stick with it unless that natural left winger arrives.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The truth is there's very little difference between the 4-4-2, 4-2-3-1 and the 4-4-1-1. Attacking formations can be redundant anyway as players naturally pick up certain positions. For example, when Bright played on the left against Wimbledon, he spent a lot of time playing centrally. Do we really think Thomas plays any different in a 4-2-3-1 to a 4-4-2? The only difference I see is Chaplin noticeably starts deeper in the 4-2-3-1 but he tends to drop deep in the 4-4-2 anyway.
Maybe I'm not tactically nuanced enough to notice the differences.
Maybe I'm not tactically nuanced enough to notice the differences.
Nick
Administrator
The difference usually is the strikers and how one is pretty much a central midfielder.
If Thomas gets the ball on the right and runs down the wing, we have 1 in the box against their defence.
steve82
Well-Known Member
That’s for me where the attacking players need to be braver and get in and around the box quicker or be looking for the cut back, back post... etc.
Too often players are guilty of watching on instead of being part of or a option being in a position for the final phases of a attack.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk