I have never.... (1 Viewer)

Forums New posts
Greggs

Greggs

Well-Known Member
Seen Liam Kelly carry the ball forward....
 
Greggs

Greggs

Well-Known Member
Seen a forward walk like a Mafia Zoolander (JCH)
 
BlueElephant

BlueElephant

Well-Known Member
I recall him at one point trying to play a long positive ball forward and kicked it out for a throw in :) pure class
 
oucho

oucho

Well-Known Member
Said "oooh that was nice to eat and also surprisingly good value" after ordering food at the Ricoh
 
D

Deleted member 2477

Guest
It wouldnt be the same would it if despite a win and being in the play off spot some fans have to find a player or the manager to criticise. Its like listening to the idiots on the phone in.

Just waiting now for sky blue ruffian to pop up again when we lose to slag off Robins. Strange hes never around when we win
 
Esoterica

Esoterica

Well-Known Member
Greggs said:
Seen Liam Kelly carry the ball forward....
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
oucho said:
Said "oooh that was nice to eat and also surprisingly good value" after ordering food at the Ricoh
Click to expand...
When we first opened, the Chicken Balti pies were alright.

Anyway, I've never seen us lose at Wembley, and never seen us win in Nailsworth.
 
oucho

oucho

Well-Known Member
Terry_dactyl said:
I’m gonna have to stop you right there. I had a great hot dog at the Accrington game.
Click to expand...

I'm from Lincoln pal, we have the best sausages in the country so ain't no defrosted 5% meat LOLfest from a processing factory getting a thumbs up from Oucho

Esoterica said:
giphy.gif
Click to expand...

OK you get a like for that....
 
Evo1883

Evo1883

Well-Known Member
Kelly has had a decent first season here , robins knows what his game is and robins is the man who sets the team out .
I don’t mind playing 2 holding players , but the problem today was the gap between midfield and upfront wasn’t it ? That’s not Kelly’s fault because robins should have identified that early on and adopted a 4231 and dropped mcnulty into an attacking midfield role , but didn’t .

Robins is the one playing negative football and tactics which is bizarre because he does this more Against weaker sides than he does against the better sides .
We look good when we knock it about and get forward quick , not when we sit 8 men behind the ball and lump it forward .

Kelly isn’t the problem
 
Otis

Otis

Well-Known Member
Evo1883 said:
Kelly has had a decent first season here , robins knows what his game is and robins is the man who sets the team out .
I don’t mind playing 2 holding players , but the problem today was the gap between midfield and upfront wasn’t it ? That’s not Kelly’s fault because robins should have identified that early on and adopted a 4231 and dropped mcnulty into an attacking midfield role , but didn’t .

Robins is the one playing negative football and tactics which is bizarre because he does this more Against weaker sides than he does against the better sides .
We look good when we knock it about and get forward quick , not when we sit 8 men behind the ball and lump it forward .

Kelly isn’t the problem
Click to expand...
But in a way he is. When he was missing and Bayliss came in, in the middle of the park we were a lot more creative and Bayliss was making direct runs at the opposition defence and making space for others.

It was like a breath of fresh air. The minute Kelly has come back, we have gone back towards hardly creating anything again.

Bayliss didn't have a good game yesterday, but once again he was getting into dangerous positions and found himself either in, or just around the box with the ball. I know he wasn't playing in the central role, but his instinct takes him forwards. Kelly's instinct or instruction is to not go forwards and to pass sideways instead.

There was an incident in the first half where we had a good attack building and Grimmer had the ball on the wing and Kelly stood about 6 or 7 yards in-field and about 6 or 7 yards back, in space and with space ahead of him and Grimmer was waiting for Kelly to run into the space, so he could have played him into the penalty box and then Kelly would have been running at the defence at pace, but Kelly didn't move and just held his ground and wanted the ball passed backwards to feet, which Grimmer did, so it was a backwards pass, the moment was gone and we lost the momentum.

The fact that Kelly and Doyle are in together is part of the problem and as Doyle is the captain and gees up those around him and is all energy and no stop running and battling (Kelly has a tendency to fade from games at times in the second halves of matches), then you would have to come tomorrow conclusion that if one has to be dropped then it has to be Kelly.

It might well be Robins telling Kelly to stay deep, but that doesn't alter the fact that when Bayliss is played in the middle he doesn't stay deep and drives forwards.
 
Evo1883

Evo1883

Well-Known Member
Otis said:
But in a way he is. When he was missing and Bayliss came in, in the middle of the park we were a lot more creative and Bayliss was making direct runs at the opposition defence and making space for others.

It was like a breath of fresh air. The minute Kelly has come back, we have gone back towards hardly creating anything again.

Bayliss didn't have a good game yesterday, but once again he was getting into dangerous positions and found himself either in, or just around the box with the ball. I know he wasn't playing in the central role, but his instinct takes him forwards. Kelly's instinct or instruction is to not go forwards and to pass sideways instead.

There was an incident in the first half where we had a good attack building and Grimmer had the ball on the wing and Kelly stood about 6 or 7 yards in-field and about 6 or 7 yards back, in space and with space ahead of him and Grimmer was waiting for Kelly to run into the space, so he could have played him into the penalty box and then Kelly would have been running at the defence at pace, but Kelly didn't move and just held his ground and wanted the ball passed backwards to feet, which Grimmer did, so it was a backwards pass, the moment was gone and we lost the momentum.

The fact that Kelly and Doyle are in together is part of the problem and as Doyle is the captain and gees up those around him and is all energy and no stop running and battling (Kelly has a tendency to fade from games at times in the second halves of matches), then you would have to come tomorrow conclusion that if one has to be dropped then it has to be Kelly.

It might well be Robins telling Kelly to stay deep, but that doesn't alter the fact that when Bayliss is played in the middle he doesn't stay deep and drives forwards.
Click to expand...


I agree but it also depends on the system robins sets out , early on we adopted 4411 , we’ve played 433 a lot and 442 , I would like to see bayliss play central but behind the front men if possible .
 
Rob S

Rob S

Well-Known Member
Yeah. I totally didn’t see him bring the ball forward into the box and place a perfect pass onto Sparky’s head yesterday. (Which he unfortunately headed down too much so it bounced over the bar).
 
clint van damme

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
Evo1883 said:
Kelly has had a decent first season here , robins knows what his game is and robins is the man who sets the team out .
I don’t mind playing 2 holding players , but the problem today was the gap between midfield and upfront wasn’t it ? That’s not Kelly’s fault because robins should have identified that early on and adopted a 4231 and dropped mcnulty into an attacking midfield role , but didn’t .

Robins is the one playing negative football and tactics which is bizarre because he does this more Against weaker sides than he does against the better sides .
We look good when we knock it about and get forward quick , not when we sit 8 men behind the ball and lump it forward .

Kelly isn’t the problem
Click to expand...

the two holding works really well against the better teams, particularly away. We shouldn't be doing it at home against the bottom club.
Having said that, I'm sticking to the mantra that it's all about putting 3 points on the board at this stage, scrappy 1-0 wins will do us.
 
E

Earlsdon-Loyal-Blue

Well-Known Member
The whole debate about two holding centre midfielders has similarities to the criticisms of England.

Playing two holding in the middle is great for when you're playing a team that's comfortable on the ball and you need to congest the middle of the park and break up play.

When you're playing a crap team that are sitting back like Forest Green (or Malta in England's case) it takes away a man from the attack that you're going to need to unlock the defence and make space, hence the ball then takes so long to move from defence to attack, as there's little space and little options, which is one of my biggest critisms of our national team and it's a drawback of playing 4-2-3-1 or whatever you want to argue we play.

When we're playing a team that's sitting back and happy for us to dominate possession we can afford to sacrifice a holding midfielder and stick Bayliss or someone who's more forward looking in there. Doyle can take the sitting role on himself when the opposition is sitting back...

Pusb
 
Esoterica

Esoterica

Well-Known Member
Earlsdon-Loyal-Blue said:
The whole debate about two holding centre midfielders has similarities to the criticisms of England.

Playing two holding in the middle is great for when you're playing a team that's comfortable on the ball and you need to congest the middle of the park and break up play.

When you're playing a crap team that are sitting back like Forest Green (or Malta in England's case) it takes away a man from the attack that you're going to need to unlock the defence and make space, hence the ball then takes so long to move from defence to attack, as there's little space and little options, which is one of my biggest critisms of our national team and it's a drawback of playing 4-2-3-1 or whatever you want to argue we play.

When we're playing a team that's sitting back and happy for us to dominate possession we can afford to sacrifice a holding midfielder and stick Bayliss or someone who's more forward looking in there. Doyle can take the sitting role on himself when the opposition is sitting back...

Pusb
Click to expand...
It's frustrated me since the Newport game. If he wants to play Kelly and Doyle in the same side for the experience they bring then fine, but tweak the formation so that Kelly plays higher up the pitch. We battered Mansfield for 15 minutes like that - this season no-one will have hit them harder than we did from the off, on their own patch. By pushing Kelly up, Doyle gets an easy 10-15 yard pass forward or the wide players can pass inside instead of waiting on a telegraphed overlap from the fullbacks or a risky 45 degree pass into the strikers feet. It limits the options so much that often we end up taking the safe option of rolling it back to a defender who then panics and launches it. I find it incredible that he can watch that 15 minutes at Mansfield and then think, Barnet at home? You know what? I'll go back to 2 flat DMs.
We miss the lynch pin from our attacks, there's no hub in our attacking wheel. A striker then has to drop too deep to offer something through the middle which leaves us short up top or they get pulled wide to support a winger with no central midfield options. The end result is the same - 1 isolated striker with a strike partner out of position, no options arriving from central midfield and a toothless attack.
 
robbiekeane

robbiekeane

Well-Known Member
Esoterica said:
I find it incredible that he can watch that 15 minutes at Mansfield and then think, Barnet at home? You know what? I'll go back to 2 flat DMs.
Click to expand...
Would be great if the reporters would actually ask these problems but they are all spineless idiots
 
Captain Dart

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top