Smithy Gas
Craig Hinton
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 271
|
Post by Smithy Gas on Nov 25, 2020 18:50:21 GMT
It’s not the 90s anymore. Teams don’t play with a big un and a little un upfront, two out and out wingers, a stopper and a passer etc.
We assembled a squad based on a relatively modern way of playing (minus 745 left backs - don’t forget the fella at Weston!) and Sod’s law that all strikers are out injured at once.
I don’t know whether the Manc forums are full with people bemoaning the fact they only roll into a season with 2 strikers but once Aguero gets his obligatory injury and Jesus is out then they are in the exact same position. As far as I am aware nobody is calling their DOF incompetent.
We clearly need to settle down, pick a formation and stick to it. If PT goes for 4231 then we have enough strikers. What we need is everyone confident and firing and the players in the 3 (Salah, Mane, Sterling - modern day little uns) need to chip in. Nicholson almost looked like Billy Bodin the other night until he had a shot!
|
|
|
Shambles.
Nov 25, 2020 19:07:38 GMT
via mobile
Post by o2o2bo2ba on Nov 25, 2020 19:07:38 GMT
It’s not the 90s anymore. Teams don’t play with a big un and a little un upfront, two out and out wingers, a stopper and a passer etc. We assembled a squad based on a relatively modern way of playing (minus 745 left backs - don’t forget the fella at Weston!) and Sod’s law that all strikers are out injured at once. I don’t know whether the Manc forums are full with people bemoaning the fact they only roll into a season with 2 strikers but once Aguero gets his obligatory injury and Jesus is out then they are in the exact same position. As far as I am aware nobody is calling their DOF incompetent. We clearly need to settle down, pick a formation and stick to it. If PT goes for 4231 then we have enough strikers. What we need is everyone confident and firing and the players in the 3 (Salah, Mane, Sterling - modern day little uns) need to chip in. Nicholson almost looked like Billy Bodin the other night until he had a shot! Kind of disagree. I've watched 3rd division football a while and rarely has it ever worked for us when we don't play a 2 recognised strikers up front. We even struggle with the 3 up front (as in 4-3-3) employed by DC and GC before, it's a false perspective. And with BG, he was happy to start with 0 or 1 recognised strikers. We don't have world class midfielders to make up the numbers to support up front like Liverpool or Spain 10 years ago, could. Agree the game moves on, but tell that to some of the 3rd division teams that we play! Madden / Ched Evans done ok, as did the 3 Hull City subs that all scored against us. Sears done ok too....the uncompromising, physical mix of 3rd division hasn't caught up with modern world class players just yet...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2020 19:28:59 GMT
We have quite a few young strikers on the books. So when do they get a chance to play. Obviously not when our 3 main strikers are injured. It is driving me mad. All I want is a manager to play our strongest / best attacking team so that we all know where we are as a team moving forwards. Oztumer is class and does the dirty work for fun. He is one of the only players who considers this part of his job.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2020 19:30:14 GMT
It’s not the 90s anymore. Teams don’t play with a big un and a little un upfront, two out and out wingers, a stopper and a passer etc. We assembled a squad based on a relatively modern way of playing (minus 745 left backs - don’t forget the fella at Weston!) and Sod’s law that all strikers are out injured at once. I don’t know whether the Manc forums are full with people bemoaning the fact they only roll into a season with 2 strikers but once Aguero gets his obligatory injury and Jesus is out then they are in the exact same position. As far as I am aware nobody is calling their DOF incompetent. We clearly need to settle down, pick a formation and stick to it. If PT goes for 4231 then we have enough strikers. What we need is everyone confident and firing and the players in the 3 (Salah, Mane, Sterling - modern day little uns) need to chip in. Nicholson almost looked like Billy Bodin the other night until he had a shot! What if I were to tell you that Daly and Hanlan had started their last four games together before Daly got injured? What are they if not a big un and a little un? And Garner was known for his modern methods of coaching and tactics too and yet even he fell on his sword and reverted to the tried and tested. As o2 said in the previous post there are other examples in our league. League one is not as modern as you think.
|
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Nov 25, 2020 19:34:48 GMT
East Bengal - perhaps the only team named after a region rather than a town/city.
What's more, they're based in West Bengal. East Fife and Raith Rovers
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Shambles.
Nov 25, 2020 19:37:23 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2020 19:37:23 GMT
West Ham United.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2020 19:47:25 GMT
Port Vale Aston Villa? Arsenal
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2020 20:29:41 GMT
Arsenal? You mean a region of the body?
|
|
crater
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,444
|
Post by crater on Nov 25, 2020 21:53:00 GMT
South of the river are named after a year
|
|
warehamgas
Predictions League
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,390
|
Post by warehamgas on Nov 25, 2020 23:03:41 GMT
Im surprised at the lack of comment about tonight, inc the main social media outlets.
A pro football team that is unable to pick a striker as it has so few and they are all injured. Add to that, when they are fit they have no competition. Ive never been aware of this scenario before, its not as if we are particularly injury hit, its just that we appear to have more left backs than strikers and I think the same number of keepers. This would be embarrassing for an amateur club. Something has gone very badly wrong here, and you cant point the finger squarly at BG. Do you mean lack of comment from fans or from “the club?” Who’s going to comment from the club? Only person who would talk about the match from the club is the manager and he’s not even been here for a week. So it’s not his fault. From the fans? Well, I’ve read a few threads and loads of stuff about the unbalanced squad so it’s a fairly popular topic on the forums. I can’t comment about other outlets, Facebook, Twitter as I don’t do them. And I suppose it’s topical because we were far better but didn’t get the win and Sam N missed a good chance. If we’d won I suspect it wouldn’t be an issue. I guess it’s very fine margins as it often is. UTG!
|
|
|
Post by emperorsuperbus on Nov 25, 2020 23:15:23 GMT
It’s not the 90s anymore. Teams don’t play with a big un and a little un upfront, two out and out wingers, a stopper and a passer etc. We assembled a squad based on a relatively modern way of playing (minus 745 left backs - don’t forget the fella at Weston!) and Sod’s law that all strikers are out injured at once. I don’t know whether the Manc forums are full with people bemoaning the fact they only roll into a season with 2 strikers but once Aguero gets his obligatory injury and Jesus is out then they are in the exact same position. As far as I am aware nobody is calling their DOF incompetent. We clearly need to settle down, pick a formation and stick to it. If PT goes for 4231 then we have enough strikers. What we need is everyone confident and firing and the players in the 3 (Salah, Mane, Sterling - modern day little uns) need to chip in. Nicholson almost looked like Billy Bodin the other night until he had a shot! Kind of disagree. I've watched 3rd division football a while and rarely has it ever worked for us when we don't play a 2 recognised strikers up front. We even struggle with the 3 up front (as in 4-3-3) employed by DC and GC before, it's a false perspective. And with BG, he was happy to start with 0 or 1 recognised strikers. We don't have world class midfielders to make up the numbers to support up front like Liverpool or Spain 10 years ago, could. Agree the game moves on, but tell that to some of the 3rd division teams that we play! Madden / Ched Evans done ok, as did the 3 Hull City subs that all scored against us. Sears done ok too....the uncompromising, physical mix of 3rd division hasn't caught up with modern world class players just yet... I think that’s a good point, all the sides at the business end of table who have beaten us, often in last two quarters or last quarter of games have four decent strikers in their squads, often used all 4. if you go 4 2 3 1 at any level, you need the 3 behind the 1 very much chip in. within FM20 (I won’t bore you too much with my latest exploits) but I always play 2 up there, with some physicality about them. Any team, regardless what shape or level who can’t hold up the ball up front will have problems transitioning.
|
|
Smithy Gas
Craig Hinton
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 271
|
Post by Smithy Gas on Nov 25, 2020 23:29:01 GMT
It’s not the 90s anymore. Teams don’t play with a big un and a little un upfront, two out and out wingers, a stopper and a passer etc. We assembled a squad based on a relatively modern way of playing (minus 745 left backs - don’t forget the fella at Weston!) and Sod’s law that all strikers are out injured at once. I don’t know whether the Manc forums are full with people bemoaning the fact they only roll into a season with 2 strikers but once Aguero gets his obligatory injury and Jesus is out then they are in the exact same position. As far as I am aware nobody is calling their DOF incompetent. We clearly need to settle down, pick a formation and stick to it. If PT goes for 4231 then we have enough strikers. What we need is everyone confident and firing and the players in the 3 (Salah, Mane, Sterling - modern day little uns) need to chip in. Nicholson almost looked like Billy Bodin the other night until he had a shot! What if I were to tell you that Daly and Hanlan had started their last four games together before Daly got injured? What are they if not a big un and a little un? And Garner was known for his modern methods of coaching and tactics too and yet even he fell on his sword and reverted to the tried and tested. As o2 said in the previous post there are other examples in our league. League one is not as modern as you think. Then I would say it wasn’t strictly true... Daly and Hanlan last played together against Peterborough before Daly was benched and Garner reverted to playing two 10s behind Hanlan. However our best football this year has probably been played with them together up front.
|
|
Smithy Gas
Craig Hinton
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 271
|
Post by Smithy Gas on Nov 25, 2020 23:36:35 GMT
It’s not the 90s anymore. Teams don’t play with a big un and a little un upfront, two out and out wingers, a stopper and a passer etc. We assembled a squad based on a relatively modern way of playing (minus 745 left backs - don’t forget the fella at Weston!) and Sod’s law that all strikers are out injured at once. I don’t know whether the Manc forums are full with people bemoaning the fact they only roll into a season with 2 strikers but once Aguero gets his obligatory injury and Jesus is out then they are in the exact same position. As far as I am aware nobody is calling their DOF incompetent. We clearly need to settle down, pick a formation and stick to it. If PT goes for 4231 then we have enough strikers. What we need is everyone confident and firing and the players in the 3 (Salah, Mane, Sterling - modern day little uns) need to chip in. Nicholson almost looked like Billy Bodin the other night until he had a shot! Kind of disagree. I've watched 3rd division football a while and rarely has it ever worked for us when we don't play a 2 recognised strikers up front. We even struggle with the 3 up front (as in 4-3-3) employed by DC and GC before, it's a false perspective. And with BG, he was happy to start with 0 or 1 recognised strikers. We don't have world class midfielders to make up the numbers to support up front like Liverpool or Spain 10 years ago, could. Agree the game moves on, but tell that to some of the 3rd division teams that we play! Madden / Ched Evans done ok, as did the 3 Hull City subs that all scored against us. Sears done ok too....the uncompromising, physical mix of 3rd division hasn't caught up with modern world class players just yet... Don’t disagree with what you are saying, and not necessarily saying that only having 3 strikers/playing 1 up front is the correct thing to do, but it was clearly a plan. You mention Madden/Evans but they didn’t play together in a two did they? Hull didn’t play 2 up front? Peterborough? Pretty much every team we play against plays a variation of the formations we play and ultimately have one player up top. The difference is most likely they have better players! Don’t get me wrong, I quite enjoyed Taylor and Harrison, Bodin and Monkhouse but even that was about 5 years ago. How many teams play 442? Doesn’t really happen. As wmgas said, the closest we get now is a 352 I would imagine.
|
|
|
Post by Mrs V Smegma on Nov 26, 2020 0:08:20 GMT
I think you very much can pin most of the blame here on Garner although there might be something to be said for the club having a stronger hand than it has done - Swiss 'who manages the manager?' point stands here.
My problem is that for the last 6 months I've been coming on here and reading stuff from people claiming that we had a assembled a 'talented' squad. There seemed real excitement about our recruitment. In the 10 games or so I've watched this looks like the emperors new clothes. I still see people claiming that we have a lot of 'talent'. What talent?
What I see is an unbalanced squad that doesn't compliment itself at all. A side where the midfield is set-up to play a kind of quick move passing game but has little speed, movement or width up front to connect with and no ball playing centre backs to make up ground and support. The 3 component parts of our side (defense, midfield and forwards) look like they have been cobbled together from totally different sides. There's no coherence and that is absolutely Garner's fault because that's the number 1 thing a manager should be focused on in recuitment - ie. how do all of these players create a coherent team?
I think we have signed an army of skilled diddy-men who can look flashy on the ball in space but are bullied off it far too easily and lack the neccesary attributes to create space out of traffic (always crucial in League 1) and dynamic attitude in key areas. They look good and play well in the bits of the pitch where it doesn't matter and make next to no impact where it does. There is no dynamism to any of our players (with the possible exception of Hanlon and Nicholson at times). They want 10 yards of space to play in and 30 seconds to do it and if they don't have it then they can't do it. That is not 'talent'! Talent is being able to win the ball and then do something productive with it. It's being able to find your man or draw a free kick when 2 or 3 opponents are right on you. It's being able to make 10 yards of space when the opposition are sat back. It's making quick, decisive decisions that open up space for others and get you on the front foot. It's constantly being able to find a route to goal. It is not doing a few nice one-twos and flashy flicks 45 yards out from goal.....
Sounds like a team of Kyle Bennetts Irish - lots of buzzing around but zero end product. I've not watched any of this season on IFollow, so can't comment on performances. On paper some of the signings sounded good, and I am genuinely excited that we have Oztumer here - a player I've long wanted to see in the quarters. Not sad that Benny has gone - completely out of his depth which was apparent to me at least about 3 games into his tenure. The contrast between what Coughlan was getting out of the squad and the performances under Benny is stark. I simply couldn't see what people thought Garnerball was and it came across to me as a triumph of hope over reality. We desperately need to find some strikers from somewhere and this is notoriously more difficult mid season. Biggest plus so far is that Benny got us 10 more points than I thought we have so far, so at least Tisdale has a platform to build on to avoid us being relegated. No doubt about it though we are in a relegation dogfight and will be I think for the rest of the season
|
|
irishrover
Global Moderator
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,372
|
Post by irishrover on Nov 26, 2020 0:55:44 GMT
I think you very much can pin most of the blame here on Garner although there might be something to be said for the club having a stronger hand than it has done - Swiss 'who manages the manager?' point stands here.
My problem is that for the last 6 months I've been coming on here and reading stuff from people claiming that we had a assembled a 'talented' squad. There seemed real excitement about our recruitment. In the 10 games or so I've watched this looks like the emperors new clothes. I still see people claiming that we have a lot of 'talent'. What talent?
What I see is an unbalanced squad that doesn't compliment itself at all. A side where the midfield is set-up to play a kind of quick move passing game but has little speed, movement or width up front to connect with and no ball playing centre backs to make up ground and support. The 3 component parts of our side (defense, midfield and forwards) look like they have been cobbled together from totally different sides. There's no coherence and that is absolutely Garner's fault because that's the number 1 thing a manager should be focused on in recuitment - ie. how do all of these players create a coherent team?
I think we have signed an army of skilled diddy-men who can look flashy on the ball in space but are bullied off it far too easily and lack the neccesary attributes to create space out of traffic (always crucial in League 1) and dynamic attitude in key areas. They look good and play well in the bits of the pitch where it doesn't matter and make next to no impact where it does. There is no dynamism to any of our players (with the possible exception of Hanlon and Nicholson at times). They want 10 yards of space to play in and 30 seconds to do it and if they don't have it then they can't do it. That is not 'talent'! Talent is being able to win the ball and then do something productive with it. It's being able to find your man or draw a free kick when 2 or 3 opponents are right on you. It's being able to make 10 yards of space when the opposition are sat back. It's making quick, decisive decisions that open up space for others and get you on the front foot. It's constantly being able to find a route to goal. It is not doing a few nice one-twos and flashy flicks 45 yards out from goal.....
Sounds like a team of Kyle Bennetts Irish - lots of buzzing around but zero end product. I've not watched any of this season on IFollow, so can't comment on performances. On paper some of the signings sounded good, and I am genuinely excited that we have Oztumer here - a player I've long wanted to see in the quarters. Not sad that Benny has gone - completely out of his depth which was apparent to me at least about 3 games into his tenure. The contrast between what Coughlan was getting out of the squad and the performances under Benny is stark. I simply couldn't see what people thought Garnerball was and it came across to me as a triumph of hope over reality. We desperately need to find some strikers from somewhere and this is notoriously more difficult mid season. Biggest plus so far is that Benny got us 10 more points than I thought we have so far, so at least Tisdale has a platform to build on to avoid us being relegated. No doubt about it though we are in a relegation dogfight and will be I think for the rest of the season Yes - this!
I see that the discussion on this thread has now become based on formation. I've always found formation to be an incredibly overrated factor. It can help to establish a pattern of play but teams rarely win or lose over the long-run based on putting some magical unbeatable formation. They win and lose by developing a pattern of play that is dynamic and maximises the chances that you can create for your attacking players while minimising space for the opponents to attack at the back. Formation is a fairly minor part of that. It's really about having players who can link well together, have a concept of the pace and direction they want to play that will cause the maximum impact in the game and are capable of making quick decisive choices in the bits of the pitch where it matters which involves being able to create space for others when under pressure - not just when you have been given 10 yards of space to work in. If you have that basic cohesion and dynamism in your squad then you should be able to play multiple different types of formation where appropriate and still be successful. But if you don't then it doesn't really matter what you do because there are these people called the opposition who will easily shut you down. That's our problem right now. It's far more basic than what the formation is.
|
|
|
Post by Mrs V Smegma on Nov 26, 2020 1:26:51 GMT
Yes - completely agree Irish. For me I think it is about being on the front foot and taking the game to the opposition. At this level if you are in their faces and imposing your pattern of play on them then they will make mistakes. I particularly dislike a pattern of play that surrenders possession and then relies on quick breaks forward - only works in my opinion if you have players with lightning pace, and someone like Jamie Vardy who is an expert at running in behind a defence. Having said that I am an old dinosaur with a preference for 4 - 4 - 2 but agree with you that formation is not so important in its own right but adopting a formation that gets the best out of the players you have is. Football to me is a simple game, and in my opinion teams do best when they have a clear pattern of play and everyone knows their role in it. What I saw over the past year was that Coughlan was successful because he simplified things in this way and Benny was unsuccessful because he complicated things in a way that might have worked on a laptop rather than in reality.
|
|
warehamgas
Predictions League
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,390
|
Post by warehamgas on Nov 26, 2020 16:17:05 GMT
Yes - completely agree Irish. For me I think it is about being on the front foot and taking the game to the opposition. At this level if you are in their faces and imposing your pattern of play on them then they will make mistakes. I particularly dislike a pattern of play that surrenders possession and then relies on quick breaks forward - only works in my opinion if you have players with lightning pace, and someone like Jamie Vardy who is an expert at running in behind a defence. Having said that I am an old dinosaur with a preference for 4 - 4 - 2 but agree with you that formation is not so important in its own right but adopting a formation that gets the best out of the players you have is. Football to me is a simple game, and in my opinion teams do best when they have a clear pattern of play and everyone knows their role in it. What I saw over the past year was that Coughlan was successful because he simplified things in this way and Benny was unsuccessful because he complicated things in a way that might have worked on a laptop rather than in reality. Yes, formation isn’t the most important aspect. Whatever you do use the formation to suit your players. Like you I’m a dinosaur and I’d go for 442 all the time and I’m not convinced that most League 1 teams don’t play that way, even if they say they don’t. When you’ve got the ball it’s at least 424, or should be. When you haven’t got the ball it can become more 541 or 451. GC did keep it simple and made it easy to play if not easy on the eye. BG, I think come the end I could see what he was trying to do but on the evidence of his last 3 home matches he was struggling to get the players to do it. He was not helped by losing Sam N at the start and not playing, a perhaps unfit, Oztumer. Whatever, it didn’t work. And whatever system you play you need fast, dynamic players who can attack when you’ve got the ball and defend when you haven’t, and by defending I don’t mean rushing back into the penalty box just to stand around. Its why Oztumer can be good for us, with Sam N, they are the best players at running with the ball and committing the opposition to make a mistake. They play with pace and when they have the ball things look most likely to happen. UTG!
|
|
|
Post by emperorsuperbus on Nov 27, 2020 14:16:27 GMT
Yes - completely agree Irish. For me I think it is about being on the front foot and taking the game to the opposition. At this level if you are in their faces and imposing your pattern of play on them then they will make mistakes. I particularly dislike a pattern of play that surrenders possession and then relies on quick breaks forward - only works in my opinion if you have players with lightning pace, and someone like Jamie Vardy who is an expert at running in behind a defence. Having said that I am an old dinosaur with a preference for 4 - 4 - 2 but agree with you that formation is not so important in its own right but adopting a formation that gets the best out of the players you have is. Football to me is a simple game, and in my opinion teams do best when they have a clear pattern of play and everyone knows their role in it. What I saw over the past year was that Coughlan was successful because he simplified things in this way and Benny was unsuccessful because he complicated things in a way that might have worked on a laptop rather than in reality. Yes, formation isn’t the most important aspect. Whatever you do use the formation to suit your players. Like you I’m a dinosaur and I’d go for 442 all the time and I’m not convinced that most League 1 teams don’t play that way, even if they say they don’t. When you’ve got the ball it’s at least 424, or should be. When you haven’t got the ball it can become more 541 or 451. GC did keep it simple and made it easy to play if not easy on the eye. BG, I think come the end I could see what he was trying to do but on the evidence of his last 3 home matches he was struggling to get the players to do it. He was not helped by losing Sam N at the start and not playing, a perhaps unfit, Oztumer. Whatever, it didn’t work. And whatever system you play you need fast, dynamic players who can attack when you’ve got the ball and defend when you haven’t, and by defending I don’t mean rushing back into the penalty box just to stand around. Its why Oztumer can be good for us, with Sam N, they are the best players at running with the ball and committing the opposition to make a mistake. They play with pace and when they have the ball things look most likely to happen. UTG! Man City have been damn close to being in a 4 4 2 times this season simply as you said get most out of the players available.
|
|