Central Midfield

[WorcsWBA]

I think the issue is tactical in how we play, rather than personale. On days like Saturday you need to move the ball a lot quicker and play at a higher tempo. You also need the run of the ball and a bit of luck, which was absent!

I'm not sure having Styles in midfield and an untried in our team LB would have made much difference. Or whatever tweaks have been mentioned here.

On the rare occasions I catch PL football - it's often City or Liverpool v the rest. The rest set up like Derby did, and even world class teams, with wonderfully talented individual players, struggle to break down dogged and we'll organised teams who sit deep. It's a really difficult task.

Which is surely a personnel issue?

Mowatt and Mulumby are not known for their dynamism. Campbell was ponderous going forward and SIJ kept stopping and cutting back inside.

Or a tactical issue? Mason said he was happy with the performance on Saturday, so it seems unlikely that he's going to change very much.

[Duffers]

I think the issue is tactical in how we play, rather than personale. On days like Saturday you need to move the ball a lot quicker and play at a higher tempo. You also need the run of the ball and a bit of luck, which was absent!

I'm not sure having Styles in midfield and an untried in our team LB would have made much difference. Or whatever tweaks have been mentioned here.

On the rare occasions I catch PL football - it's often City or Liverpool v the rest. The rest set up like Derby did, and even world class teams, with wonderfully talented individual players, struggle to break down dogged and we'll organised teams who sit deep. It's a really difficult task.

Which is surely a personnel issue?

Mowatt and Mulumby are not known for their dynamism. Campbell was ponderous going forward and SIJ kept stopping and cutting back inside.

Or a tactical issue? Mason said he was happy with the performance on Saturday, so it seems unlikely that he's going to change very much.

If the tactics are to move the ball very slowly towards the opposition goal I fear we may be in trouble.

[TartanRug]

I think the issue is tactical in how we play, rather than personale. On days like Saturday you need to move the ball a lot quicker and play at a higher tempo. You also need the run of the ball and a bit of luck, which was absent!

I'm not sure having Styles in midfield and an untried in our team LB would have made much difference. Or whatever tweaks have been mentioned here.

On the rare occasions I catch PL football - it's often City or Liverpool v the rest. The rest set up like Derby did, and even world class teams, with wonderfully talented individual players, struggle to break down dogged and we'll organised teams who sit deep. It's a really difficult task.

Interesting take. I think the opposite fwiw though. 

We are getting players into good attacking positions, we have more numbers in the final 2 lateral channels than we have before. We are clocking up plenty of progressive passes and having plenty of shots. 

So tactically things are okay. The issue is the chances to play a final pass or take a shot are falling to players without that natural attacking ability and instinct.

Are many of the shots good chances though? I don't think the vast majority are, IMO we don't create enough clear cut opportunities.

[backsidebaggie]

We have 10 points from 5 games, very good start. We lost a classic 1-0 to an away smash and grab. There’s games like this every season.

I’d change very little right now, certainly not the centre midfield. See how the next 5 go.

[Lurker#3]

Are many of the shots good chances though? I don't think the vast majority are, IMO we don't create enough clear cut opportunities.

Absolutely not, mate.

I think I have said on another Fred (or on this one above) with an extra attacking influence it would likely increase our attacking threat by stopping the opponent from just doubling/tripling up on MJ/Price.

But even if we didnt. A low quality chance that falls to Maja is better than Molumby. So it would help on both counts I think.

[Josh1873]

Worcs - I think Mason was correct to be happy with the performance on Saturday. I thought his post-match interview was spot on.

[CA Baggie]

M&M are a decent pairing at Stoke away, you don't need sitters when playing a team who's intention is to put players behind the ball and defend. The other issue is that temas doubled up on Fellows, which created space, they don't need to do that with Wallace.

I don't believe we have the answers within the squad to play a traditional 442, so then it's a case of where would Price fit? How do we get Maja and Heg into the same 11 without comprising the midfield? What system would work?

For home games, Johnson has to switch wings to allow either Sammy the Seal or Grant to play left. We need two box-to-box midfielders and a Price/Bany in front o those playing off the forward. Maybe Collyer and Styles could be the 2? Certainly more 4123 with the wingers being picked for their offensive skills. Or Price is one of the box-to-box midfielders, certainly not going to be Bany.

We also need to consider the FBs, particularly RB. Again a CB/RB like Campbell is fine for those tough away days, less so against a packed defence. Not sure if Gilchrist is really the answer either as he's not the most forward thinking fullback. If we could make a RWB then 3 at the back would suit us, we'd still get 3 in the middle and then be able to have 2 up top.

As for the post match interview - I would hope he was protecting the players a little to the media and not telling them all that they played well enough to win the game etc. Our opportunities seem to be by playing the %s and hope for a bit of luck with the bounce of the ball, than any pattern of play. That's why we didn't really create a proper presentable chance whereby anyone could say "should have done better". Having said that we had enough of he ball to think something would have gone our way!

For the hard of thinking (Josh), I'm not saying we don't have a pattern of play, I'm saying that it didn't work in creating chances. The few we did have came from getting balls in etc. as opposed to incisive play. And the inverted wingers, or playing on the wrong side as it used to be known, doesn't work against a packed defence. the full backs are happy to show you inside because that's where the midfield cover and centre backs are, they don't want you going outside them and getting behind them.

[Duffers]

M&M are a decent pairing at Stoke away, you don't need  sitters when playing  a team who's intention is to put players behind the ball and defend.  The other issue is that temas doubled up on Fellows, which created space, they don't need to do that with Wallace.

I don't believe we have the answers within the squad to play a traditional 442, so then it's a case of where would Price fit?  How do we get Maja and Heg into the same 11 without comprising the midfield? What system would work?

For home games, Johnson has to switch wings to allow either Sammy the Seal or Grant to play left. We need two box-to-box midfielders and a Price/Bany in front o those playing off the forward.  Maybe Collyer and Styles could be the 2? Certainly more 4123 with the wingers being picked for their offensive skills.  Or Price is one of the box-to-box midfielders, certainly not going to be Bany.

We also need to consider the FBs, particularly RB.  Again a CB/RB like Campbell is fine for those tough away days, less so against a packed defence.  Not sure if Gilchrist is really the answer either as he's not the most forward thinking fullback.  If we could make a RWB then 3 at the back would suit us, we'd still get 3 in the middle and then be able to have 2 up top.

As for the post match interview - I would hope he was protecting the players a little to the media and not telling them all that they played well enough to win the game etc.  Our opportunities seem to be by playing the %s and hope for a bit of luck with the bounce of the ball, than any pattern of play.  That's why we didn't really create a proper presentable chance whereby anyone could say "should have done better".  Having said that we had enough of he ball to think something would have gone our way! 

For the hard of thinking (Josh), I'm not saying we don't have a pattern of play, I'm saying that it didn't work in creating chances.  The few we did have came from getting balls in etc. as opposed to incisive play.  And the inverted wingers, or playing on the wrong side as it used to be known, doesn't work against a packed defence.  the full backs are happy to show you inside because that's where the midfield cover and centre backs are, they don't want you going outside them and getting behind them.

Excellent post. Not sure why it's considered some massive overreaction to think we weren't that good on Sat.

[MancBaggie]

M&M are a decent pairing at Stoke away, you don't need  sitters when playing  a team who's intention is to put players behind the ball and defend.  The other issue is that temas doubled up on Fellows, which created space, they don't need to do that with Wallace.

I don't believe we have the answers within the squad to play a traditional 442, so then it's a case of where would Price fit?  How do we get Maja and Heg into the same 11 without comprising the midfield? What system would work?

For home games, Johnson has to switch wings to allow either Sammy the Seal or Grant to play left. We need two box-to-box midfielders and a Price/Bany in front o those playing off the forward.  Maybe Collyer and Styles could be the 2? Certainly more 4123 with the wingers being picked for their offensive skills.  Or Price is one of the box-to-box midfielders, certainly not going to be Bany.

We also need to consider the FBs, particularly RB.  Again a CB/RB like Campbell is fine for those tough away days, less so against a packed defence.  Not sure if Gilchrist is really the answer either as he's not the most forward thinking fullback.  If we could make a RWB then 3 at the back would suit us, we'd still get 3 in the middle and then be able to have 2 up top.

As for the post match interview - I would hope he was protecting the players a little to the media and not telling them all that they played well enough to win the game etc.  Our opportunities seem to be by playing the %s and hope for a bit of luck with the bounce of the ball, than any pattern of play.  That's why we didn't really create a proper presentable chance whereby anyone could say "should have done better".  Having said that we had enough of he ball to think something would have gone our way! 

For the hard of thinking (Josh), I'm not saying we don't have a pattern of play, I'm saying that it didn't work in creating chances.  The few we did have came from getting balls in etc. as opposed to incisive play.  And the inverted wingers, or playing on the wrong side as it used to be known, doesn't work against a packed defence.  the full backs are happy to show you inside because that's where the midfield cover and centre backs are, they don't want you going outside them and getting behind them.

You've nailed it.

[Josh1873]

Hard of thinking aimed at me, then goes on to say we our tactics didn't create chances. Wow

Cheers for personal attack, though. Very petty.

---

[Not sure why it's considered some massive overreaction to think we weren't that good on Sat.
[/quote]

Because we've been excellent this early season and have generally played well. We've lost one game, in unfortunate circumstances after dominating for large periods of the 90 minutes, and all of sudden people want to see changes to the way we play, they want the line-up altering, they're calling Heggebø a poor signing, they're reacting to a poor result by being blind to how we played, and they're refusing to accept teams will take points off us, because they dare to do anything but roll over and let us have easy chances.

If this was the latest in a string of poor results, and we were playing badly for a period of time, then those who are moaning about the line up, players, and being critical of Mason, would have a point. But the fact is we've lost one match. ONE!

I have seen nothing worrying in the first 5 games to suggest we should change what we're doing. There has been a definite knee-jerk reaction by some on here to Saturday's result - at best, at worst it has been a bit of a meltdown. It's there in black and white across multiple threads.

I accept everyone is entitled to an opinion and view, but I'm really lost at how anyone who watched Saturday could think we played poorly. Unless it's me with the issue, of course. But I don't think it is, for once! I genuinely believe we played well v Derby and did enough to earn 3 points, but for some wasteful finishing and bad luck. I'm certainly not going to call for changes, however slight they may be, off the back of that and the previous 4 games.

---

The call for some of the changes is a little underwhelming. People are talking about our bench as if we've got a prime Jason Koumas sat there, twiddling his thumbs! We do not have a creative option to come in and drastically change the way we play. 

Do people genuinely believe putting Collyer, ILJ, Diakite, Gilchrist or whatever other option we have, in the lineup instead of Campbell, Mowatt, Molumby, Wallace, Heggebø etc etc is going to suddenly change the team from being solid, compact, hard to beat, but creates a low number of chances, to a free flowing team that will create chance, after chance, after chance, without losing the excellent organisation we've seen?  

The only suggestion I've seen that I can reasonably see changing how we play/goal conversion has been to include Maja, but there's obviously something not quite right with him, given the lack of minutes, so I'm not sure how viable that is.

We have limited resources, and have decreased the value of our playing squad to comply with PSR, we have to accept we're going to be a 6th-12th positioned team that will win some, lose some, draw some. We have limited players, and limited options due to how we've had to build the squad. The style we play and how we play in matches will suffer accordingly. We simply can't have it all. I mean this as respectfully as possible, but I'm not sure what some people expect