A few things to be concerned about (1 Viewer)

Evo1883 · Sep 21, 2014

Where is pressleys plan B , he cant surely think we can play 3-5-2 all season and not be sussed out , very worried about his obsession with this formation .we play very negatively both home and away , although luckily we are scraping the results at home .
no away win since march , very poor because regardless of what people think there is only a maximum of 69 points to take from your home matches , we need to win a good 5-6 away from home to make the playoffs at least .
We are simply playing too much sideways and backwards football , far too slow to get the ball forward to really test and stretch the opposition

Otis · Sep 21, 2014

CraigSBA said:
Where is pressleys plan B , he cant surely think we can play 3-5-2 all season and not be sussed out , very worried about his obsession with this formation .we play very negatively both home and away , although luckily we are scraping the results at home .
no away win since march , very poor because regardless of what people think there is only a maximum of 69 points to take from your home matches , we need to win a good 5-6 away from home to make the playoffs at least .
We are simply playing too much sideways and backwards football , far too slow to get the ball forward to really test and stretch the opposition

Wouldn't say we are 'luckily scraping the results at home.'

We have played 2 at the Ricoh, won both and deserved to win both in my opinion.

Paxman II · Sep 21, 2014

It's a learning curve at the start of the season. The team will gel better as games go on. I think we are not far off that. Possession football and passing around only encourages confidence (keep ball) but as has been said it is the final third and that crucial killer ball or movement that seems to be lacking. Can that come from Jackson and Nouble? I would think so at this level. What we lack is another good man on the ball in midfield to make things happen in my opinion.

KersleyDigs · Sep 21, 2014

We need attacking wide players. Plan B should be 442

Allsop/Burge
Clarke Willis Johnson Pugh
O'brien Thomas Fleck Swanson/Couli
Noble Jackson

I know we conceded a lot last season with a back four, but:
- Christie was a poor defender, Clarke better
- Webster too slow to play in a 4
- Adams also a weak defender
- Moussa was lazy and never tracked back

A back four can still work, just need the correct personel. We desperately lack attacking width. SP signed three wingers in O'brien, Swanson and Coulibaly. He should use them in their natural positions as a plan B

ccfcway · Sep 21, 2014

A couple of posts in, and we need a midfielder and wingers

Id throw in that we need a gk as well

Otis · Sep 21, 2014

ccfcway said:
A couple of posts in, and we need a midfielder and wingers

Id throw in that we need a gk as well

What about another striker a right back too?

Nick · Sep 21, 2014

Every team needs a plan B, what I get frustrated about sometimes is the stubbornness not to change anything even when it is blatantly obvious that nothing that we are currently trying is working.

Rusty Trombone · Sep 21, 2014

We have a team that has been thrown together based on a small budget, we have a combination of players that would be lucky to get a job in football if they weren't here, loans that will leave in Jan, youth team who will naturally have good and bad games, and a couple of decent players for this league.

Pressleys aim should be to try and prevent relegation, that would count as success with our available players, anything else is a bonus.

chiefdave · Sep 21, 2014

The lack of a plan b is worrying for me. When things are going well we're fine but if we're being dominated or chasing the game we don't seem able to turn things around.

We seem to be getting dominated in midfield too often as well. Everyone seems to be having a pop at Thomas, is he just getting games as we have no other options? If Thomas isn't cutting it how long can we keep him in, seems to be several seasons now we've been waiting for him to kick on and it doesn't' seem to be happening.

Nick · Sep 21, 2014

Rusty Trombone said:
We have a team that has been thrown together based on a small budget, we have a combination of players that would be lucky to get a job in football if they weren't here, loans that will leave in Jan, youth team who will naturally have good and bad games, and a couple of decent players for this league.

Pressleys aim should be to try and prevent relegation, that would count as success with our available players, anything else is a bonus.

Out of interest, which ones would be lucky to get a job as a footballer in your opinion?

Godiva · Sep 21, 2014

CraigSBA said:
Where is pressleys plan B , he cant surely think we can play 3-5-2 all season and not be sussed out , very worried about his obsession with this formation .we play very negatively both home and away , although luckily we are scraping the results at home .
no away win since march , very poor because regardless of what people think there is only a maximum of 69 points to take from your home matches , we need to win a good 5-6 away from home to make the playoffs at least .
We are simply playing too much sideways and backwards football , far too slow to get the ball forward to really test and stretch the opposition

The formation and style of play is a strategy. The whole club is set up to play like this.
It takes time to implement and refine and it takes time to get the right players in the right positions.

SP has chosen this strategy. He won't change it but keep at it till it works. He just signed a four year extension so he - and the club - is serious about sticking to the plan.

There is no plan B. It's about us playing the best way we can and not getting confused by different formations.
Sure, the opposition will take notice and try to find ways to work around our system, but let them do the changes and we can stay comfortable in doing what we are used to.
We will lose some games but eventually it will be fewer losses and more wins.

You don't change a strategy every few weeks or months - you stick to it and only make moderate adjustments to optimize.

Evo1883 · Sep 21, 2014

I dont understand the "budget " argument , im sorry but the biggest spenders in league 1 were crawley at 700k , most teams infact nearly all teams get players on frees and loans , with a stadium like the ricoh and the size of the club in general terms compared to the majority , we should have the pick of the better free players , we still have around the 5th highest wage budget in this league.
its abouthow the manager uses his recources , you could argue that yeovil and rotherham were promoted on a shoestring budget .
And if pressley wanted this formation and strategy , why is he playing obrien , swanson , pugh , haynes , clarke , outside of their natural positions , and why didnt he recruit to fit the formation

Godiva · Sep 21, 2014

CraigSBA said:
I dont understand the "budget " argument , im sorry but the biggest spenders in league 1 were crawley at 700k , most teams infact nearly all teams get players on frees and loans , with a stadium like the ricoh and the size of the club in general terms compared to the majority , we should have the pick of the better free players , we still have around the 5th highest wage budget in this league

Maybe it would be different if the deal to go back home had been signed before most of the new players were drafted?
We will probably increase player budget in January.

chiefdave · Sep 21, 2014

Godiva said:
There is no plan B.

I get having the whole club setup to play one system but its ridiculous to stick with it whether it's working or not. People are not saying the whole thing should be abandoned, the point is in games where its not working we are basically giving up on the game as we're incapable of changing things around.

It shouldn't be beyond the capacity of professional footballers to revert to 442 for the last 30 mins of a game if its needed without completely forgetting how to play the formation they started the game with.

Evo1883 · Sep 21, 2014

To me the 5-3-2 setup should be adopted to protect results , not to get them.
we should be more positive for the first hour of a match , with emphasis based on getting ahead , attacking relentlessly and scoring goals , no reason why we couldnt adopt 5-3-2 to see the games out as its overall pretty solid

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Sep 21, 2014

CraigSBA said:
To me the 5-3-2 setup should be adopted to protect results , not to get them.
we should be more positive for the first hour of a match , with emphasis based on getting ahead , attacking relentlessly and scoring goals , no reason why we couldnt adopt 5-3-2 to see the games out as its overall pretty solid

Swindon and Bristol are both scoring lots of goals playing the 532, problem is none of our midfielders are scoring and our wing backs aren't attacking enough apart from maybe Haynes who clearly isn't going to play every game.

Godiva · Sep 21, 2014

chiefdave said:
I get having the whole club setup to play one system but its ridiculous to stick with it whether it's working or not. People are not saying the whole thing should be abandoned, the point is in games where its not working we are basically giving up on the game as we're incapable of changing things around.

When the play is not working it's mostly down to the players - either ours or the oppositions. That's where the quality of the bench is important.
And the manager may also instruct players to change certain aspects during the match.

chiefdave said:
It shouldn't be beyond the capacity of professional footballers to revert to 442 for the last 30 mins of a game if its needed without completely forgetting how to play the formation they started the game with.

No, but if we are not used to play 4-4-2, then playing it for 30 min won't improve anything.
But it's not really true to say (as I did) SP doesn't have a plan B or doesn't change formation. Only he does it in a clever way through his final substitution when he either replace a forward with a CB or CM - or a CB for a forward. The other players stays in their position (maybe two players swap positions).

I think it's clever and though we may lose a few games, we will get better going forward.

Godiva · Sep 21, 2014

CraigSBA said:
To me the 5-3-2 setup should be adopted to protect results , not to get them.
we should be more positive for the first hour of a match , with emphasis based on getting ahead , attacking relentlessly and scoring goals , no reason why we couldnt adopt 5-3-2 to see the games out as its overall pretty solid

5-3-2 is a very flexible system depending only on how you play the WB's. It can be very protective with 5 in defense, or controlling with 5 in midfield or even super attacking with 4 in front. So a lot is down to the those two playing on the wings and how good they are at what they are asked to do.

TheParsonsHose · Sep 21, 2014

Godiva said:
The formation and style of play is a strategy. The whole club is set up to play like this.
It takes time to implement and refine and it takes time to get the right players in the right positions.

SP has chosen this strategy. He won't change it but keep at it till it works. He just signed a four year extension so he - and the club - is serious about sticking to the plan.

There is no plan B. It's about us playing the best way we can and not getting confused by different formations.
Sure, the opposition will take notice and try to find ways to work around our system, but let them do the changes and we can stay comfortable in doing what we are used to.
We will lose some games but eventually it will be fewer losses and more wins.

You don't change a strategy every few weeks or months - you stick to it and only make moderate adjustments to optimize.

Well said. I do think there will come a time when perhaps we may rethink the strategy but for now that's what it is and like you said this is long term.

wingy · Sep 21, 2014

CCFC said:
Swindon and Bristol are both scoring lots of goals playing the 532, problem is none of our midfielders are scoring and our wing backs aren't attacking enough apart from maybe Haynes who clearly isn't going to play every game.

It worked V Gills ,yet there was no Service to Haynes V Yeovil,Is It to Instruction?

Rusty Trombone · Sep 21, 2014

Nick said:
Out of interest, which ones would be lucky to get a job as a footballer in your opinion?

Tudgay, Daniels, Pugh. Possibly also Thomas although the fact that recent managers must all rate him, and Liverpool saw something in him, means that I'm willing to fight my thoughts and be prepared to accept that managers know more than me.

stupot07 · Sep 21, 2014

wingy said:
It worked V Gills ,yet there was no Service to Haynes V Yeovil,Is It to Instruction?

I thought Yeovil set up to stop that outlet, by pushing the fullback wide, where Gillingham's back four were a lot narrower.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

wingy · Sep 21, 2014

stupot07 said:
I thought Yeovil set up to stop that outlet, by pushing the fullback wide, where Gillingham's back four were a lot narrower.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

you may be right Stu ,just recall my brother constantly saying why won't they spread It to Haynes ,seemed total reluctance to push It out there.

Terry Gibson's perm · Sep 21, 2014

Clarke offers nothing at right wing back and Haynes looked tired in the last home game, if Webster is to slow as part of a four then pay him off then and bring somebody in who can. Apart from the front two and the odd Reda goal there are no goals in this team and we have a dodgy looking keeper.

wingy · Sep 21, 2014

Personally midfield is where I see us needing to Strengthen ,especially If we're going to carry on with the current system ,we have two wide players who either don't fit or are good enough to break In ,tis early days though.

ccfcway · Sep 21, 2014

Rusty Trombone said:
Tudgay, Daniels, Pugh. Possibly also Thomas although the fact that recent managers must all rate him, and Liverpool saw something in him, means that I'm willing to fight my thoughts and be prepared to accept that managers know more than me.

TBF, Liverpool were interested in Adam Barton

Rusty Trombone · Sep 21, 2014

ccfcway said:
TBF, Liverpool were interested in Adam Barton

That was before he had a triple leg break though.

ccfcway · Sep 21, 2014

Rusty Trombone said:
That was before he had a triple leg break though.

hmm. Might be wrong, but didnt Ross Barkley also have a triple leg break at some point ? Pretty sure Liverpool would be interested in him now if he was up for sale

stupot07 · Sep 21, 2014

Rusty Trombone said:
That was before he had a triple leg break though.

Or more likely a just paper talk that's turned into an urban myth.

Stories about their interest - Feb 2011
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...tons-Adam-Barton-numerous-scouting-trips.html

Bartons injury was feb 2012

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2106800/Adam-Barton-injured-rest-season.html

Liverpool had 2 transfer windows to sign Barton if they wanted him - summer 2011 and January 2012. They didn't, I can only conclude the leg break had nothing to do with them not signing him.

Sorry I know that wasn't particularly the line you were going down, just fed up of that story as an excuse for him have no impact here in over 2 years.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - so please excuse any spelling or grammar errors

robbieray · Sep 21, 2014

Rusty Trombone said:
That was before he had a triple leg break though.

He has 3 legs?

Rusty Trombone · Sep 21, 2014

robbieray said:
He has 3 legs?

Insert Dion Dublin joke here.

LJC_CCFC · Sep 21, 2014

What's this?! Murmurings about the formation! SACRILEGE. This isn't allowed on SBT as the formation we play has no bearing on performances and results...

The Prefect · Sep 22, 2014

A few years ago I sat with the the first team of a Championship club as they were being taught the theory of the three centre halves system. It's a very difficult system and goes against the positional sense of players that are familiar with the 4-4-2 formation.

When you look at top clubs and international teams they don't use this system but have a fluid back three. In the World Cup Argentina used the system when they had the ball and were attacking. During attacks Javier Mascherano dropped and made a back three. When defending he eased forward to the tip of the diamond in the holding role that Claude Makélélé played so well in front of a back four.

I'm not a fan of the system because it can be undone by teams that can counter attack the space left behind the wing backs with pace. Leicester did it very well against Man Utd yesterday. To make the system work you need very mobile wing backs and equally mobile centre halves. I don't watch Coventry City enough to know all the details but from what I've seen over the last two seasons we seem to be lacking centre halves with mobility. You also need a good holding midfielder that can pass five yards to the more creative players to move things forward.

I admire SP for going with this system especially as early indications are that we need more mobile centre halves and a more steely holding midfielder. It's a risk when your team has a soft centre. A few games into the season and opposition managers have caught up with our system (helped by us being on TV). We're looking as though we can't buy a result away from home and that might impact home form also.

I don't share the confidence that things will get better although I do agree that the players will be more familiar with the system. Whether that leads to better results remains to be seen.

fernandopartridge · Sep 22, 2014

The Prefect said:
A few years ago I sat with the the first team of a Championship club as they were being taught the theory of the three centre halves system. It's a very difficult system and goes against the positional sense of players that are familiar with the 4-4-2 formation.

When you look at top clubs and international teams they don't use this system but have a fluid back three. In the World Cup Argentina used the system when they had the ball and were attacking. During attacks Javier Mascherano dropped and made a back three. When defending he eased forward to the tip of the diamond in the holding role that Claude Makélélé played so well in front of a back four.

I'm not a fan of the system because it can be undone by teams that can counter attack the space left behind the wing backs with pace. Leicester did it very well against Man Utd yesterday. To make the system work you need very mobile wing backs and equally mobile centre halves. I don't watch Coventry City enough to know all the details but from what I've seen over the last two seasons we seem to be lacking centre halves with mobility. You also need a good holding midfielder that can pass five yards to the more creative players to move things forward.

I admire SP for going with this system especially as early indications are that we need more mobile centre halves and a more steely holding midfielder. It's a risk when your team has a soft centre. A few games into the season and opposition managers have caught up with our system (helped by us being on TV). We're looking as though we can't buy a result away from home and that might impact home form also.

I don't share the confidence that things will get better although I do agree that the players will be more familiar with the system. Whether that leads to better results remains to be seen.

You sound quite reasoned until the knee jerk "We've been found out" paragraph.

We'd have won at Scunthorpe will 11 men. We weren't great at Rochdale but were narrowly beaten by a penalty. We're not conceding lots of chances in games which is progress from last season.

In attack we've got a bit more work to do yes but a more solid base to build on.

The Prefect · Sep 22, 2014

fernandopartridge said:
You sound quite reasoned until the knee jerk "We've been found out" paragraph.

We'd have won at Scunthorpe will 11 men. We weren't great at Rochdale but were narrowly beaten by a penalty. We're not conceding lots of chances in games which is progress from last season.

In attack we've got a bit more work to do yes but a more solid base to build on.

Where did I use the words, We've been found out"?

A few things to be concerned about (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency