|
Post by madgas on Nov 25, 2015 13:36:31 GMT
451 is pretty much what JW played. I know it was meant to be 4231 but as he never set out to press teams we ended up as a 451. Didn't exactly work out either. For me the system isn't the problem, it's the personnel. We found a bit of form when Lines was dropped for Mansell and MM played alongside Lockyer. Not really sure why MM was dropped tbh as he hardly did much wrong on Saturday. I also have no idea why Leadbitter hasn't started. James Clarke did well when we played 3 CBs but to me he isn't a full back. Taylor and Harrison from the off is needed too on Saturday. In my opinion- just because it didn't work under Ward doesn't mean it doesn't work. Feck all worked under Ward by the end. We have completely different players now and far more 'wing forwards' than that squad. I slightly worry about the team without mansell- it lacks composed leadership without him. I really think we need Sinclair higher up. He's shackled by lines' lack of aggression. I like Lines, and think a goal might be the medicine his performances need. But Curreently Something's missing in the middle and unless we sign another person to complement Sinclair we need to put another body in the middle. Two many long shots are allowed at our goal. I can't really remember: Chesham (accept penalty) Notts county Newport. (How they scored four) Stevenage Really "cutting us open" yet we only have a point from those matches.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Nov 25, 2015 13:58:08 GMT
451 is pretty much what JW played. I know it was meant to be 4231 but as he never set out to press teams we ended up as a 451. Didn't exactly work out either. For me the system isn't the problem, it's the personnel. We found a bit of form when Lines was dropped for Mansell and MM played alongside Lockyer. Not really sure why MM was dropped tbh as he hardly did much wrong on Saturday. I also have no idea why Leadbitter hasn't started. James Clarke did well when we played 3 CBs but to me he isn't a full back. Taylor and Harrison from the off is needed too on Saturday. In my opinion- just because it didn't work under Ward doesn't mean it doesn't work. Feck all worked under Ward by the end. We have completely different players now and far more 'wing forwards' than that squad. I slightly worry about the team without mansell- it lacks composed leadership without him. I really think we need Sinclair higher up. He's shackled by lines' lack of aggression. I like Lines, and think a goal might be the medicine his performances need. But Curreently Something's missing in the middle and unless we sign another person to complement Sinclair we need to put another body in the middle. Two many long shots are allowed at our goal. I can't really remember: Chesham (accept penalty) Notts county Newport. (How they scored four) Stevenage Really "cutting us open" yet we only have a point from those matches. Also to say it didn't work under ward isn't strictly true. We were mid table playing 4-5-1 and it was only when Harrold came back and we switched to 4-4-2 that we fell like a stone.
|
|
|
Post by BishopstonBRFC on Nov 25, 2015 17:49:36 GMT
Don't get me wrong, I actually like 4231/451 but it only works if you press the opposition. If you play with the kind of intensity that we are currently then it quickly becomes a defensive formation and we struggle to create any chances.
Many teams use it to very good effect these days .
|
|
|
Post by dinsdale on Nov 25, 2015 19:20:11 GMT
The main thing is we need to stick with a set of tactics that suit our players and have a settled time. DC in my mind is creating this inconsistency issue with the every games a project bollocks. Too many changes to shape, tactics and players.
|
|
|
Post by peterpirate on Nov 25, 2015 19:38:06 GMT
No need to change anything away from home. We have one of the best away records in the country and, although we lost on the weekend, we completely outplayed the opposition and on another day would have won by 5 clear goals. At home we definitely do need to experiment however. I totally agree . I can't believe we're still playing 4-4-2 with two little blokes up front at home when it's clearly not working. Carlisle and Barnet aside its been men against boys. I wouldn't say that at all we haven't been outplayed but anyone at home just haven't taken our chances
|
|
|
Post by stapletongas on Nov 25, 2015 19:51:46 GMT
Good debate
My opinion is that you pick the strongest combination of system and players at your disposal and stick to it. Even if you drop a few points doing it but you believe your opinion is right, you stay true to that belief and give the system and those players games and keep working on shape and pattern of play on the training ground. Consistency builds consistency so to speak. I would say this is the target any coach would be ultimately trying to achieve and is your priority. Plan a.
While I think that is your first priority, I don't think it is fool proof. I believe sometimes the players you have at your disposal given availability, form, fitness, injuries etc may simply not be good enough collectively to take the attitude of letting the oppo worry about us rather than vice versa in every game. Do you keep the same players and system, but tweak that system and how certain players play their roles to counter the opposition? Plan b, not far off plan a.
So if you don't find yourself in that position, what do you do to find ways to pick up points and succeed?
Do you keep the same system but change certain players on the basis that those players will naturally play positions differently and in the way you need for the opposition? I think this is plan c.
Do you change the system and/or players, is wholesale changes game to game? Plan d, e, f etc?
As a park football lay person, I would love a conversation with a pro coach open to discussing this kind of stuff with someone like me.
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 25, 2015 20:17:53 GMT
Not sure we even beat Carlisle comfortably as our first goal came on the break when they changed tactics to go for the win, although at least having them on the back foot at the start stopped them taking the lead. How many games since the start of last season have we started slowly and finished strongly, it's bizarre we can't start on top particularly at the Mem.
I agree re McChrystal bar one mistake he's hardly put a foot wrong but Parkes makes mistake after mistake and keeps his place. Likewise Leadbitter never seems to get much of a chance neither does Harrison, didn't the latter destroy Cambridge in his last game before his international games? Meanwhile the ever disappointing Easter plays week in, week out.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Nov 25, 2015 20:39:05 GMT
I totally agree . I can't believe we're still playing 4-4-2 with two little blokes up front at home when it's clearly not working. Carlisle and Barnet aside its been men against boys. I wouldn't say that at all we haven't been outplayed but anyone at home just haven't taken our chances Thing is these sides have been coming to the mem and saying alright pass it about , show us how good you are at going sideways and backwards and then bang they'll score. That's what I mean by Men against boys. Ok we're quite pretty on the eye in our build up but the others tend to be bigger more physical and more clinical.
|
|
|
Post by Hugo the Elder on Nov 25, 2015 20:55:52 GMT
The main thing is we need to stick with a set of tactics that suit our players and have a settled time. DC in my mind is creating this inconsistency issue with the every games a project bollocks. Too many changes to shape, tactics and players. Nail on the head. We are so busy matching everyone else we forget to have our own game plan.
|
|
|
Post by WeAreTheGas on Nov 25, 2015 21:34:30 GMT
Worth a try. I do like having more in midfield and dominating that area of the pitch - theoretically, anyway.
______________Nicholls Leadbitter_Lockyer_McChrystal_Brown _____________Mansell __________Sinclair__Lines ____Bodin______Taylor_____Harrison/PCH
|
|
|
Post by tommym9 on Nov 25, 2015 21:40:47 GMT
Worth a try. I do like having more in midfield and dominating that area of the pitch - theoretically, anyway. ______________Nicholls Leadbitter_Lockyer_McChrystal_Brown _____________Mansell __________Sinclair__Lines ____Bodin______Taylor_____Harrison/PCH I quite like the look of that!
|
|
|
Post by Topper Gas on Nov 25, 2015 22:28:59 GMT
The main thing is we need to stick with a set of tactics that suit our players and have a settled time. DC in my mind is creating this inconsistency issue with the every games a project bollocks. Too many changes to shape, tactics and players. Nail on the head. We are so busy matching everyone else we forget to have our own game plan. Perhaps if we stopped worrying about how good are opponents are we might actually start a game on the front foot? With two decent wingers, a striker on form, a decent midfield why do we need to pick a team to stop the likes of Stevenage rather than let them worry about stopping us from scoring??
|
|