The Myth of the Left Wing Back

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

As ever with the AVFTT massive, the agenda driven ‘Negative Nellies’ can’t resist a toxic myth or two. With Fans Favourite 'Dobbie' being Ditched for Critch a small collective of C U Next Tuesdays are always on the look out for any excuse to drag our Tactical Genius [AKA Mini Pep] down, and the Left Wing Back has certainly been a bone of contention worth picking.

We keep reading about Critchley "Persisting with Callum Connolly at LWB" and used as an example of the Manager's ineptitude, so I thought I'd take a look at the FACT vs FICTION and see what all the fuss is about.

So we're 15 Games into the Season and sitting in 8th Place in League 1 with 23 Points an average of 1.53 points per game and a win rate of 40%.

So just how many of those 15 games have feature Callum Connolly in the LWB position ? [I'm assuming that it must be a significant number, given the rumblings from the Armchair Army]...

He has in fact only Played 2 Full 90 Minutes at LWB

Additionally he has played:
45 Minutes (vs Lincoln, where he was switched to CH at Half-Time)
74 Minutes (being replaced vs Wycombe by Owen Dale)
20 Minutes (to Replace Owen Dale vs Reading)
16 Minutes for the tiring Thompson (brought in due to Dale bereavement)at Charlton

[A grand total of 335 minutes or just over 3 and a half games at LWB] - You could hardly call it 'persisting'!!

In fact what has actually happened in reality is that he's been given a reasonable chance and then Critchley has very swiftly moved on. In other words "Nothing to see here"

Of course, with Lyons being absent, the LWB position is one that has presented us with problems. I think most people would probably agree that he is a natural and obvious option, along with the injured Jordan Gabriel. It certainly wasn't a natural fit for Dale (at least on the face of it) and Thompson has had significant question marks hanging over him after a hit and miss season last year. He was a player who seemed to have a calamity a game up his sleeve, which often saw us concede. On balance, our resident 'Jack of All Trades' was hardly an outlandish option and let's face it, he's proven himself extremely able in pretty much every other position he's been asked to play.

So who else has filled the LWB position and how have they fared (or more as to the point how have we fared with each different Option)


Connolly has started 4 Times (for a total of 299 Minutes at LWB) - We've Won 2 and Lost 2 (Average 1.5 Points per Game) - Win Rate 50%
Lyons has started 3 Times (for a total of 270 Minutes at LWB) - We've Drawn all 3 Nil Nil (Average 1 Point per Game) - Win Rate 0%
Dale has started 5 Times (for a total of 421 Minutes ad LWB & RWB) - We've Won 3, Drawn 1 and Lost 1 (Average 2 Points per Game) Win Rate 60%
Thompson has started 3 Times (for a total of 255 Minutes and LWB) - We've Won 1, Drawn 1 and Lost 1 (Average 1.33 Points per Game) Win Rate 33%

Truth be known our results haven't suffered as a result of Callum playing in the LWB position and as usual he's managed to 'do a job' for the Team. The choice to play him in that position has been borne out of a sense of necessity and experimentation and in my view at least, I don't see anything particularly 'out there' about the Manager going with that option. Clearly the idea that Critchley has (in any way) persisted with Connolly in that position having played him there for a 3 and a half games, is nothing short of nonsense and it really shows the 'Critchley Critics' up for exactly what they are (mostly full of piss and wind)... Dale is the one player that he has persisted with more than any other and notably we've had our best run of games whilst he was in situ.... Of course, the goal Away at Oxford may well have cost Dale his place and opened up the door for Thompson.... Can he make the position his own or will Big Cal need to make a return?

 

[20togo]

Good stuff mary. Can i request you do some stats for Ekpiteta for when he's been in and out of the team . Especially pay attention to the goals conceded when in and when not in the team.

Oh and just for reference, here's a post of yours. Pay particular attention to your opening para.

Firstly, Ekpiteta has been pure Biz when played this season… So he’s been far from our best defender… He’s been our worst and cost us! Hopefully we can get him back to form, but it’s questionable whether he suits the 3.

Secondly, Casey has been largely excellent and looks a capable player to me.

Thirdly we have a squad of players and the manager will have to try them out in actual games in order to see what they are capable of… the alternative to that is to never make any progress, beyond where you are.

This is a transitional season … deal with it… If we’re going to hit form (big time) it’s likely to be in the second half of the season…. We might even need to wait until next season to truly be firing on all cylinders…

If we want to get to a point where we have a fully functioning team and squad, then we’re going to have to accept that will involve actually playing the players we bring in sometimes

"Truth be known" to quote you, that opening para is bullshit mary.

 

[Wizaard]

As ever with the AVFTT massive, the agenda driven ‘Negative Nellies’ can’t resist a toxic myth or two. With Fans Favourite 'Dobbie' being Ditched for Critch a small collective of C U Next Tuesdays are always on the look out for any excuse to drag our Tactical Genius [AKA Mini Pep] down, and the Left Wing Back has certainly been a bone of contention worth picking.

We keep reading about Critchley "Persisting with Callum Connolly at LWB" and used as an example of the Manager's ineptitude, so I thought I'd take a look at the FACT vs FICTION and see what all the fuss is about.

So we're 15 Games into the Season and sitting in 8th Place in League 1 with 23 Points an average of 1.53 points per game and a win rate of 40%.

So just how many of those 15 games have feature Callum Connolly in the LWB position ? [I'm assuming that it must be a significant number, given the rumblings from the Armchair Army]...

He has in fact only Played 2 Full 90 Minutes at LWB

Additionally he has played:
45 Minutes (vs Lincoln, where he was switched to CH at Half-Time)
74 Minutes (being replaced vs Wycombe by Owen Dale)
20 Minutes (to Replace Owen Dale vs Reading)
16 Minutes for the tiring Thompson (brought in due to Dale bereavement)at Charlton

[A grand total of 335 minutes or just over 3 and a half games at LWB] - You could hardly call it 'persisting'!!

In fact what has actually happened in reality is that he's been given a reasonable chance and then Critchley has very swiftly moved on. In other words "Nothing to see here"

Of course, with Lyons being absent, the LWB position is one that has presented us with problems. I think most people would probably agree that he is a natural and obvious option, along with the injured Jordan Gabriel. It certainly wasn't a natural fit for Dale (at least on the face of it) and Thompson has had significant question marks hanging over him after a hit and miss season last year. He was a player who seemed to have a calamity a game up his sleeve, which often saw us concede. On balance, our resident 'Jack of All Trades' was hardly an outlandish option and let's face it, he's proven himself extremely able in pretty much every other position he's been asked to play.

So who else has filled the LWB position and how have they fared (or more as to the point how have we fared with each different Option)


Connolly has started 4 Times (for a total of 299 Minutes at LWB) - We've Won 2 and Lost 2 (Average 1.5 Points per Game) - Win Rate 50%
Lyons has started 3 Times (for a total of 270 Minutes at LWB) - We've Drawn all 3 Nil Nil (Average 1 Point per Game) - Win Rate 0%
Dale has started 5 Times (for a total of 421 Minutes ad LWB & RWB) - We've Won 3, Drawn 1 and Lost 1 (Average 2 Points per Game) Win Rate 60%
Thompson has started 3 Times (for a total of 255 Minutes and LWB) - We've Won 1, Drawn 1 and Lost 1 (Average 1.33 Points per Game) Win Rate 33%

Truth be known our results haven't suffered as a result of Callum playing in the LWB position and as usual he's managed to 'do a job' for the Team. The choice to play him in that position has been borne out of a sense of necessity and experimentation and in my view at least, I don't see anything particularly 'out there' about the Manager going with that option. Clearly the idea that Critchley has (in any way) persisted with Connolly in that position having played him there for a 3 and a half games, is nothing short of nonsense and it really shows the 'Critchley Critics' up for exactly what they are (mostly full of piss and wind)... Dale is the one player that he has persisted with more than any other and notably we've had our best run of games whilst he was in situ.... Of course, the goal Away at Oxford may well have cost Dale his place and opened up the door for Thompson.... Can he make the position his own or will Big Cal need to make a return?

You come on here with your facts and statistics.

Madness.

 

[Sven]

Good stuff mary. Can i request you do some stats for Ekpiteta for when he's been in and out of the team . Especially pay attention to the goals conceded when in and when not in the team.

Oh and just for reference, here's a post of yours. Pay particular attention to your opening para.


"Truth be known" to quote you, that opening para is bullshit mary.

Why are you quoting posts from another thread?

 

[A_Tense_Grin]

As ever with the AVFTT massive, the agenda driven ‘Negative Nellies’ can’t resist a toxic myth or two. With Fans Favourite 'Dobbie' being Ditched for Critch a small collective of C U Next Tuesdays are always on the look out for any excuse to drag our Tactical Genius [AKA Mini Pep] down, and the Left Wing Back has certainly been a bone of contention worth picking.

We keep reading about Critchley "Persisting with Callum Connolly at LWB" and used as an example of the Manager's ineptitude, so I thought I'd take a look at the FACT vs FICTION and see what all the fuss is about.

So we're 15 Games into the Season and sitting in 8th Place in League 1 with 23 Points an average of 1.53 points per game and a win rate of 40%.

So just how many of those 15 games have feature Callum Connolly in the LWB position ? [I'm assuming that it must be a significant number, given the rumblings from the Armchair Army]...

He has in fact only Played 2 Full 90 Minutes at LWB

Additionally he has played:
45 Minutes (vs Lincoln, where he was switched to CH at Half-Time)
74 Minutes (being replaced vs Wycombe by Owen Dale)
20 Minutes (to Replace Owen Dale vs Reading)
16 Minutes for the tiring Thompson (brought in due to Dale bereavement)at Charlton

[A grand total of 335 minutes or just over 3 and a half games at LWB] - You could hardly call it 'persisting'!!

In fact what has actually happened in reality is that he's been given a reasonable chance and then Critchley has very swiftly moved on. In other words "Nothing to see here"

Of course, with Lyons being absent, the LWB position is one that has presented us with problems. I think most people would probably agree that he is a natural and obvious option, along with the injured Jordan Gabriel. It certainly wasn't a natural fit for Dale (at least on the face of it) and Thompson has had significant question marks hanging over him after a hit and miss season last year. He was a player who seemed to have a calamity a game up his sleeve, which often saw us concede. On balance, our resident 'Jack of All Trades' was hardly an outlandish option and let's face it, he's proven himself extremely able in pretty much every other position he's been asked to play.

So who else has filled the LWB position and how have they fared (or more as to the point how have we fared with each different Option)


Connolly has started 4 Times (for a total of 299 Minutes at LWB) - We've Won 2 and Lost 2 (Average 1.5 Points per Game) - Win Rate 50%
Lyons has started 3 Times (for a total of 270 Minutes at LWB) - We've Drawn all 3 Nil Nil (Average 1 Point per Game) - Win Rate 0%
Dale has started 5 Times (for a total of 421 Minutes ad LWB & RWB) - We've Won 3, Drawn 1 and Lost 1 (Average 2 Points per Game) Win Rate 60%
Thompson has started 3 Times (for a total of 255 Minutes and LWB) - We've Won 1, Drawn 1 and Lost 1 (Average 1.33 Points per Game) Win Rate 33%

Truth be known our results haven't suffered as a result of Callum playing in the LWB position and as usual he's managed to 'do a job' for the Team. The choice to play him in that position has been borne out of a sense of necessity and experimentation and in my view at least, I don't see anything particularly 'out there' about the Manager going with that option. Clearly the idea that Critchley has (in any way) persisted with Connolly in that position having played him there for a 3 and a half games, is nothing short of nonsense and it really shows the 'Critchley Critics' up for exactly what they are (mostly full of piss and wind)... Dale is the one player that he has persisted with more than any other and notably we've had our best run of games whilst he was in situ.... Of course, the goal Away at Oxford may well have cost Dale his place and opened up the door for Thompson.... Can he make the position his own or will Big Cal need to make a return?

Why was he given a chance in the first place? Shall will give Ekpiteta a chance as a target man?

Lyons isn’t a left wing back and Gabriel certainly isn’t either. Critchley has made some fans not know their left and right.

 

[Phil_bfc deux]

As ever with the AVFTT massive, the agenda driven ‘Negative Nellies’ can’t resist a toxic myth or two. With Fans Favourite 'Dobbie' being Ditched for Critch a small collective of C U Next Tuesdays are always on the look out for any excuse to drag our Tactical Genius [AKA Mini Pep] down, and the Left Wing Back has certainly been a bone of contention worth picking.

We keep reading about Critchley "Persisting with Callum Connolly at LWB" and used as an example of the Manager's ineptitude, so I thought I'd take a look at the FACT vs FICTION and see what all the fuss is about.

So we're 15 Games into the Season and sitting in 8th Place in League 1 with 23 Points an average of 1.53 points per game and a win rate of 40%.

So just how many of those 15 games have feature Callum Connolly in the LWB position ? [I'm assuming that it must be a significant number, given the rumblings from the Armchair Army]...

He has in fact only Played 2 Full 90 Minutes at LWB

Additionally he has played:
45 Minutes (vs Lincoln, where he was switched to CH at Half-Time)
74 Minutes (being replaced vs Wycombe by Owen Dale)
20 Minutes (to Replace Owen Dale vs Reading)
16 Minutes for the tiring Thompson (brought in due to Dale bereavement)at Charlton

[A grand total of 335 minutes or just over 3 and a half games at LWB] - You could hardly call it 'persisting'!!

In fact what has actually happened in reality is that he's been given a reasonable chance and then Critchley has very swiftly moved on. In other words "Nothing to see here"

Of course, with Lyons being absent, the LWB position is one that has presented us with problems. I think most people would probably agree that he is a natural and obvious option, along with the injured Jordan Gabriel. It certainly wasn't a natural fit for Dale (at least on the face of it) and Thompson has had significant question marks hanging over him after a hit and miss season last year. He was a player who seemed to have a calamity a game up his sleeve, which often saw us concede. On balance, our resident 'Jack of All Trades' was hardly an outlandish option and let's face it, he's proven himself extremely able in pretty much every other position he's been asked to play.

So who else has filled the LWB position and how have they fared (or more as to the point how have we fared with each different Option)


Connolly has started 4 Times (for a total of 299 Minutes at LWB) - We've Won 2 and Lost 2 (Average 1.5 Points per Game) - Win Rate 50%
Lyons has started 3 Times (for a total of 270 Minutes at LWB) - We've Drawn all 3 Nil Nil (Average 1 Point per Game) - Win Rate 0%
Dale has started 5 Times (for a total of 421 Minutes ad LWB & RWB) - We've Won 3, Drawn 1 and Lost 1 (Average 2 Points per Game) Win Rate 60%
Thompson has started 3 Times (for a total of 255 Minutes and LWB) - We've Won 1, Drawn 1 and Lost 1 (Average 1.33 Points per Game) Win Rate 33%

Truth be known our results haven't suffered as a result of Callum playing in the LWB position and as usual he's managed to 'do a job' for the Team. The choice to play him in that position has been borne out of a sense of necessity and experimentation and in my view at least, I don't see anything particularly 'out there' about the Manager going with that option. Clearly the idea that Critchley has (in any way) persisted with Connolly in that position having played him there for a 3 and a half games, is nothing short of nonsense and it really shows the 'Critchley Critics' up for exactly what they are (mostly full of piss and wind)... Dale is the one player that he has persisted with more than any other and notably we've had our best run of games whilst he was in situ.... Of course, the goal Away at Oxford may well have cost Dale his place and opened up the door for Thompson.... Can he make the position his own or will Big Cal need to make a return?

Lyons isn't the natural choice at all neither is Gabriel as they are both right footed

To me it should be Thompson, Husband or CJ playing on the left

 

[Dark_Side_of_the_Lune]

I’ll just ask you to tweak your numbers. At Charlton, Connolly didn’t come on at LWB. Thompson left the field but CJ switched over to the left. And we immediately conceded two goals with a huge hole at the back of our LHside.

 

[Chunkylad]

As ever with the AVFTT massive, the agenda driven ‘Negative Nellies’ can’t resist a toxic myth or two. With Fans Favourite 'Dobbie' being Ditched for Critch a small collective of C U Next Tuesdays are always on the look out for any excuse to drag our Tactical Genius [AKA Mini Pep] down, and the Left Wing Back has certainly been a bone of contention worth picking.

We keep reading about Critchley "Persisting with Callum Connolly at LWB" and used as an example of the Manager's ineptitude, so I thought I'd take a look at the FACT vs FICTION and see what all the fuss is about.

So we're 15 Games into the Season and sitting in 8th Place in League 1 with 23 Points an average of 1.53 points per game and a win rate of 40%.

So just how many of those 15 games have feature Callum Connolly in the LWB position ? [I'm assuming that it must be a significant number, given the rumblings from the Armchair Army]...

He has in fact only Played 2 Full 90 Minutes at LWB

Additionally he has played:
45 Minutes (vs Lincoln, where he was switched to CH at Half-Time)
74 Minutes (being replaced vs Wycombe by Owen Dale)
20 Minutes (to Replace Owen Dale vs Reading)
16 Minutes for the tiring Thompson (brought in due to Dale bereavement)at Charlton

[A grand total of 335 minutes or just over 3 and a half games at LWB] - You could hardly call it 'persisting'!!

In fact what has actually happened in reality is that he's been given a reasonable chance and then Critchley has very swiftly moved on. In other words "Nothing to see here"

Of course, with Lyons being absent, the LWB position is one that has presented us with problems. I think most people would probably agree that he is a natural and obvious option, along with the injured Jordan Gabriel. It certainly wasn't a natural fit for Dale (at least on the face of it) and Thompson has had significant question marks hanging over him after a hit and miss season last year. He was a player who seemed to have a calamity a game up his sleeve, which often saw us concede. On balance, our resident 'Jack of All Trades' was hardly an outlandish option and let's face it, he's proven himself extremely able in pretty much every other position he's been asked to play.

So who else has filled the LWB position and how have they fared (or more as to the point how have we fared with each different Option)


Connolly has started 4 Times (for a total of 299 Minutes at LWB) - We've Won 2 and Lost 2 (Average 1.5 Points per Game) - Win Rate 50%
Lyons has started 3 Times (for a total of 270 Minutes at LWB) - We've Drawn all 3 Nil Nil (Average 1 Point per Game) - Win Rate 0%
Dale has started 5 Times (for a total of 421 Minutes ad LWB & RWB) - We've Won 3, Drawn 1 and Lost 1 (Average 2 Points per Game) Win Rate 60%
Thompson has started 3 Times (for a total of 255 Minutes and LWB) - We've Won 1, Drawn 1 and Lost 1 (Average 1.33 Points per Game) Win Rate 33%

Truth be known our results haven't suffered as a result of Callum playing in the LWB position and as usual he's managed to 'do a job' for the Team. The choice to play him in that position has been borne out of a sense of necessity and experimentation and in my view at least, I don't see anything particularly 'out there' about the Manager going with that option. Clearly the idea that Critchley has (in any way) persisted with Connolly in that position having played him there for a 3 and a half games, is nothing short of nonsense and it really shows the 'Critchley Critics' up for exactly what they are (mostly full of piss and wind)... Dale is the one player that he has persisted with more than any other and notably we've had our best run of games whilst he was in situ.... Of course, the goal Away at Oxford may well have cost Dale his place and opened up the door for Thompson.... Can he make the position his own or will Big Cal need to make a return?

Stop it. You cannot use facts and stats to prove that the glass half smashed on the floor crew are wrong.

A manager with a win rate of 40% this season is only here because he has photos of the owner otherwise with a top 6 wage budget we’d be sixth not eighth.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Lyons isn't the natural choice at all neither is Gabriel as they are both right footed

To me it should be Thompson, Husband or CJ playing on the left

Lyons has played on the Left Hand Side and therefore is the natural choice as our manager (like so many other Managers) likes to go with the inverted option. It’s also served him very well so far.

Gabriel I would say less so, but as we have seen already, there are games when we switch to standard

Wing Backs and / or play with one inverted one stsndard.

I’ll just ask you to tweak your numbers. At Charlton, Connolly didn’t come on at LWB. Thompson left the field but CJ switched over to the left. And we immediately conceded two goals with a huge hole at the back of our LHside.

I wouldn’t get too hung up about the side of play. I did actually qualify it in my first post, but removed part of the sentence as it was a bit convoluted… (for LWB you should just read ‘Other Wing Back’ as CJ has put his mark on the position and they do switch during game and in terms of starting set up)

 

[A_Tense_Grin]

Not sure what these stats are meant to prove. Everyone knows playing Connolly at left wing back was just stupid but it’s only part of the problem. The whole formation is shit.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Why was he given a chance in the first place? Shall will give Ekpiteta a chance as a target man?

Lyons isn’t a left wing back and Gabriel certainly isn’t either. Critchley has made some fans not know their left and right.

As explained, the options at the time were limited and Connolly had previously shown himself very capable in a number of different positions. Essentially he was filling in for Lyons.

See answer to Phil…

 

[voyeur]

There is a left wing back problem though. We haven't really got one! Which is why Connolly played there on the left for a while. And we seem to get in a pickle trying to play with wing backs, cos we don't get great defending or attacking. CJ needs a defender behind him, and so does Thompson.

It's time to smash the system.

 

[A_Tense_Grin]

As explained, the options at the time were limited and Connolly had previously shown himself very capable in a number of different positions. Essentially he was filling in for Lyons.

See answer to Phil…

Connolly at left wing back, just funny. Lyons isn’t a left wing back. We shouldn’t be copying some Irish outfit just because he played there.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Not sure what these stats are meant to prove. Everyone knows playing Connolly at left wing back was just stupid but it’s only part of the problem. The whole formation is shit.

The stats don’t prove anything, but they do show the following.

a) That Connolly has played very few games in the WB position (country ti popular myth)

b) That the Team have fared comparatively well when he has

And

c) That Dale has been the only player that Critchley has ‘persisted with’ for the other WB position, so far.

 

[20togo]

Why are you quoting posts from another thread?

simple really. He wants to use stats to have a go at fans regarding their views on Connolly but he offers his own views on Ekpiteta when stats would show he's talking nonsense.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

There is a left wing back problem though. We haven't really got one! Which is why Connolly played there on the left for a while. And we seem to get in a pickle trying to play with wing backs, cos we don't get great defending or attacking. CJ needs a defender behind him, and so does Thompson.

It's time to smash the system.

Neither Thompson or CJ needs a defender behind them and both are more than capable of operating in the WB role. Thompson has only played in a small number of games so far (the least of them all).

The system itself does work better when Norburn is playing and also (dare I say it) we are likely to concede less goals as a result of Casey being replaced by Eki. When out of possession we look to form a 4 at the back.

There’s no need to smash the system… The players are just starting to become fully competent within it.

 

[voyeur]

Neither Thompson or CJ needs a defender behind them and both are more than capable of operating in the WB role. Thompson has only played in a small number of games so far (the least of them all).

The system itself does work better when Norburn is playing and also (dare I say it) we are likely to concede less goals as a result of Casey being replaced by Eki. When out of possession we look to form a 4 at the back.

There’s no need to smash the system… The players are just starting to become fully competent within it.

I disagree.

I suspect tonight Critch will shoehorn Marv into a back three. Maybe not. Will be interesting to see what he does and how it goes. We'll play back 4 football eventually, I reckon.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I disagree.

Very good

 

[voyeur]

Very good

I'd that a patronising very good, or some other form?

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I'd that a patronising very good, or some other form?

I’m just being polite and acknowledging what you said without taking the discussion beyond its necessary course. I wouldn’t read any more into it than that

 

[voyeur]

I’m just being polite and acknowledging what you said without taking the discussion beyond its necessary course. I wouldn’t read any more into it than that

Ok cool. Just be careful, it's easy to give the wrong impression on a forum. Don't let people think you're talking down to them unless that's the intention.

Oh, and CJ and Thompson bloody do need defenders behind them! Weird to think otherwise IMO.

 

[1966_and_all_that]

Why was he given a chance in the first place? Shall will give Ekpiteta a chance as a target man?

Lyons isn’t a left wing back and Gabriel certainly isn’t either. Critchley has made some fans not know their left and right.

I'd give Marv a go up front. He's a big lad and he's shown he can score goals. Plus, it's less about moving the play on with good passes - which has been his achiles heel this season.

 

[voyeur]

I'd give Marv a go up front. He's a big lad and he's shown he can score goals. Plus, it's less about moving the play on with good passes - which has been his achiles heel this season.

I'd give ATG a go up front. Get some shithousery back into our forward line.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

Ok cool. Just be careful, it's easy to give the wrong impression on a forum. Don't let people think you're talking down to them unless that's the intention.

Oh, and CJ and Thompson bloody do need defenders behind them! Weird to think otherwise IMO.

No problem… I think a lot comes down to preconception and how people choose to narrate my posts, but i’ll tread more carefully…

In that case, I’m weird.

As I’ve already said the intention is that we slip into a 4 when out of possession. So one of the two WB woukd become a LB /RB and the three shift across. Alternatively Norburn has slotted in.

This is just one feature of the complete ‘system’ which takes time to work on (as we discussed the other day).

What system would you employ and why ?

 

[straightatthewall]

You've convinced me.

I hope we see CC at the seaside tonight.

 

[Junior_BentsPlatformShoes]

I think I agree with Phil with Thompson/Husband/ Lyons playing on the left, Husband the more reliable of the three getting forward and back. Gabriel is a right wingback all day long and likes to cut in or cross from there - can't say I remember much of him ever playing on the left.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I'd give Marv a go up front. He's a big lad and he's shown he can score goals. Plus, it's less about moving the play on with good passes - which has been his achiles heel this season.

Funnily enough, he has already played up front during his career.

 

[A_Tense_Grin]

Neither Thompson or CJ needs a defender behind them and both are more than capable of operating in the WB role. Thompson has only played in a small number of games so far (the least of them all).

The system itself does work better when Norburn is playing and also (dare I say it) we are likely to concede less goals as a result of Casey being replaced by Eki. When out of possession we look to form a 4 at the back.

There’s no need to smash the system… The players are just starting to become fully competent within it.

If shipping three goals at home to Derby and four to Peterborough represents full competence, then I look forward to the rest of the season.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

You've convinced me.

I hope we see CC at the seaside tonight.

I’m not trying to convince anyone that he should be our LWB. Moreso that in the circumstances (Lyons bereavement) it wasn’t outlandish to opt for CC.

In those early stages (from Critchley’s perspective) I imagine it will have also been important to see us employing a solid 4 out of possession.

Other players (Thommo bring the prime example) can be prone to lapses in concentration. I think he looks to CC as a ‘Mr Reliable’ character to that extent, which he has been for the most part…. Although he’s struggled s little bit this season TBF.

 

[Schalke_FY4]

I think this whole lwb, 3-5-2 formation thing is Critchleys way of doing what Rocky Balboa did in Rocky II.

He's effectively gone from south paw to orthodox for 14 games to bamboozle the opposition and then when the timing is right, he'll switch to 4 at the back and unleash a barage of metaphorical punches onto the opposition in the second half of the season winning 22 games straight and getting us promoted as champions by 1 point.

 

[straightatthewall]

I’m not trying to convince anyone that he should be our LWB. Moreso that in the circumstances (Lyons bereavement) it wasn’t outlandish to opt for CC.

In those early stages (from Critchley’s perspective) I imagine it will have also been important to see us employing a solid 4 out of possession.

Other players (Thommo bring the prime example) can be prone to lapses in concentration. I think he looks to CC as a ‘Mr Reliable’ character to that extent, which he has been for the most part…. Although he’s struggled s little bit this season TBF.

I don't care whether you were trying or not. You HAVE convinced me.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

If shipping three goals at home to Derby and four to Peterborough represents full competence, then I look forward to the rest of the season.

Derby was a while ago now and Peterborough we were without our Lynchpin Midfielder and down to 10 men for 45 mins.

I think this whole lwb, 3-5-2 formation thing is Critchleys way of doing what Rocky Balboa did in Rocky II.

He's effectively gone from south paw to orthodox for 14 games to bamboozle the opposition and then when the timing is right, he'll switch to 4 at the back and unleash a barage of metaphorical punches onto the opposition in the second half of the season winning 22 games straight and getting us promoted as champions by 1 point.

He’s probably got something like that in his locker TBF, so you couldn’t rule it out.

Personally I think the 352 is here to stay, but I think we’ll need to shuffle the pack in January.

 

[fcblackpool]

Lyons has played on the Left Hand Side and therefore is the natural choice as our manager (like so many other Managers) likes to go with the inverted option. It’s also served him very well so far.

Gabriel I would say less so, but as we have seen already, there are games when we switch to standard

Wing Backs and / or play with one inverted one stsndard.


I wouldn’t get too hung up about the side of play. I did actually qualify it in my first post, but removed part of the sentence as it was a bit convoluted… (for LWB you should just read ‘Other Wing Back’ as CJ has put his mark on the position and they do switch during game and in terms of starting set up)

David Eyres once played in goal v Tranmere- doesn't make him a 'natural' choice in nets.

 

[Middxile]

Lyons would be an excellent RWB, if CJ was on the left.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

David Eyres once played in goal v Tranmere- doesn't make him a 'natural' choice in nets.

No…

But Lyons has regularly played on the Left, he’s excellent going forward and cutting in and scoring is a feature of his game.

As far as the system Critchley is looking to play is concerned, Lyons is the most natural fit.

 

[A_Tense_Grin]

Derby was a while ago now and Peterborough we were without our Lynchpin Midfielder and down to 10 men for 45 mins.


He’s probably got something like that in his locker TBF, so you couldn’t rule it out.

Personally I think the 352 is here to stay, but I think we’ll need to shuffle the pack in January.

We were getting battered even with 11 men.

If 3-5-2 is here to stay then it will be a mid-table finish. If you are happy with that, then fine.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

We were getting battered even with 11 men.

If 3-5-2 is here to stay then it will be a mid-table finish. If you are happy with that, then fine.

That’s not true at all… They were almost certainly prone to the press as they were overly confident in possession at the back.

Second half would have inevitably seen us up the ante with Lavery and Dembele and we would have created enough chances to win (even at 1-0 down). The early sending off fucked us.

 

[A_Tense_Grin]

That’s not true at all… They were almost certainly prone to the press as they were overly confident in possession at the back.

Second half would have inevitably seen us up the ante with Lavery and Dembele and we would have created enough chances to win (even at 1-0 down). The early sending off fucked us.

They scored from the free kick so it would have been 2-0 even with 11 men on the pitch. You have some crazy outlooks.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

They scored from the free kick so it would have been 2-0 even with 11 men on the pitch. You have some crazy outlooks.

I’m talking about the whole ‘incident’ in the round… Ultimately it was a defensive error (lack of experience / pace) from Casey (he’s had a few similar incidents this season).

However, even at 2-0 down with 11 men I’d have still fancied us. We scored 2 with 10 men.

They didn’t ‘batter’ us by any means. They had a decent first half and kept possession well, but we exposed them with the press on a few occasions.

It’s only by playing the better teams like Peterborough that we really get the opportunity to see where we’ve come. I really don’t think we’re far off at all…

 

[A_Tense_Grin]

I’m talking about the whole ‘incident’ in the round… Ultimately it was a defensive error (lack of experience / pace) from Casey (he’s had a few similar incidents this season).

However, even at 2-0 down with 11 men I’d have still fancied us. We scored 2 with 10 men.

They didn’t ‘batter’ us by any means. They had a decent first half and kept possession well, but we exposed them with the press on a few occasions.

It’s only by playing the better teams like Peterborough that we really get the opportunity to see where we’ve come. I really don’t think we’re far off at all…

I don't think I have ever being less confident. For the first time ever playing Fleetwood, I am genuinely worried due to our shit tactics. I just hope Fleetwood are that bad, it will mask over the issues for at least another week.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I don't think I have ever being less confident. For the first time ever playing Fleetwood, I am genuinely worried due to our shit tactics. I just hope Fleetwood are that bad, it will mask over the issues for at least another week.

I can’t help you address your personal state of mind. Fleetwood are at home and have seen an uptick in form and to that extent they pose a risk.

I am confident we can beat them comfortably.

 

[Junior_BentsPlatformShoes]

They've scored 12 and let in 22, so on paper it looks very winnable. I've gone for a 1-1 draw though, probably because it's Wednesday, the weather is shite and I can't be arsed today.

 

[voyeur]

As I’ve already said the intention is that we slip into a 4 when out of possession. So one of the two WB woukd become a LB /RB and the three shift across. Alternatively Norburn has slotted in.

This is just one feature of the complete ‘system’ which takes time to work on (as we discussed the other day).

What system would you employ and why ?

I'd employ a system that didn't take at least half the season to learn, probably.

While we fiddle about, Pompey move 12 points clear of us after 15 games. And have conceded 9 fewer goals.

And we are gradually conceding more, after conceding none in our first four matches. 12 conceded in our last six. We are defensively deteriorating.

I would build a solid back 4, no gaps behind the wing backs, no CBs shifting left and right to compensate. The 6 in front of them can be adjusted to suit the circumstances, between games and during games. You can even switch to three at the back occasionally if circumstances allow. But doing it all the time is doing us no favours and it's not improving.

 

[A_Tense_Grin]

I'd employ a system that didn't take at least half the season to learn, probably.

While we fiddle about, Pompey move 12 points clear of us after 15 games. And have conceded 9 fewer goals.

And we are gradually conceding more, after conceding none in our first four matches. 12 conceded in our last six. We are defensively deteriorating.

I would build a solid back 4, no gaps behind the wing backs, no CBs shifting left and right to compensate. The 6 in front of them can be adjusted to suit the circumstances, between games and during games. You can even switch to three at the back occasionally if circumstances allow. But doing it all the time is doing us no favours and it's not improving.

Yep, over complicated bollocks

 

[voyeur]

What system would you employ and why ?

Also. One of the mantras repeated often by Critch disciples is that we improved during his first full season and became the best team in the division. And that it will happen again.

What they don't tend to mention is that he scrapped his preferred system ten games in. And played with a simple system that the players understood and were comfortable with.

The longer he leaves it, the bigger the gap to close down becomes. We need to target top two, not top six.

 

[BFC_BFC_BFC]

I'd employ a system that didn't take at least half the season to learn, probably.

While we fiddle about, Pompey move 12 points clear of us after 15 games. And have conceded 9 fewer goals.

And we are gradually conceding more, after conceding none in our first four matches. 12 conceded in our last six. We are defensively deteriorating.

I would build a solid back 4, no gaps behind the wing backs, no CBs shifting left and right to compensate. The 6 in front of them can be adjusted to suit the circumstances, between games and during games. You can even switch to three at the back occasionally if circumstances allow. But doing it all the time is doing us no favours and it's not improving.

I think that's a valid point, although I think I differ from you in how I look at it. I think we have a long term objective as to how we intend to play football and I think that is best addressed straight away, in League 1, rather than putting it off and essentially just making do. If we go down the route of compromising the system, then ultimately we'll never make the transition.

If it was a case of Cricthley coming in half way through a season, with the objective to survive, then I would agree that employing a simple system that fits the players and 'get's the job done' would be the way forward. As it is, I think (as fans) we need to be more focused on the longer term vision and making sure we have the very best chance of survival when we do get promoted.

We have conceded in a few games and that needs to be addressed. On balance, I think the system does expose a couple of issues, based on the Grimmy discussions we've had recently. Firstly, I think Grimmy's limitations as a keeper (not commanding his area) are probably exposed in the system and secondly, we've started to see a pattern of mistakes emerge from Casey. (conclusion, the system works bets with a commanding keeper and /or a commanding Central Defender) I would also say that I think Grimshaw has probably just not been at his usual best from a shot-stopping perspective in recent weeks and I'm not sure that is necessarily related to the system.

OK... Getting on to the new system..

The intention seems to be to try and dominate possession, so is that something we could do so easily whilst playing 4 at the back?

We could go with a 4231, which retains 5 in the Middle of the park, but we also know that Rhodes works better (in fact works at all) with a Strike Partner to bounce off. 442 potentially yields the Midfield advantage to the opposition and we'd be back to the former 'concede possession and hit them on the break' kind of style that we employed to decent effect in the Championship... (not exactly great football for the longer term though).. 433? Are we back to potential issues with Rhodes?

Personally I think the 3 at the back option is worth the wait, but I think we will need to shuffle the pack and see a few incomings / outgoings before we get there and that's not great in the short term.

 

[zico_bamber]

Someone has way too much time on their hands It doesn't really prove much other than we happen to have won more with him in that position. Andy Lyons could have played a blinder in those three matches but we happen to have lost, probably due to problems elsewhere. What is undoubtable is, regardless of where he plays on the pitch, he seems to be out of form and has cost us a few goals of late. Hope he finds his touch as he's always been a committed player for us.

 

[td53]

Also. One of the mantras repeated often by Critch disciples is that we improved during his first full season and became the best team in the division. And that it will happen again.

What they don't tend to mention is that he scrapped his preferred system ten games in. And played with a simple system that the players understood and were comfortable with.

The longer he leaves it, the bigger the gap to close down becomes. We need to target top two, not top six.

Basically, he made Gary the focal point and it was all good thereafter. Await our saviour's return.

(I only typed this out for the bants tbf)

 

[td53]

I think that's a valid point, although I think I differ from you in how I look at it. I think we have a long term objective as to how we intend to play football and I think that is best addressed straight away, in League 1, rather than putting it off and essentially just making do. If we go down the route of compromising the system, then ultimately we'll never make the transition.

If it was a case of Cricthley coming in half way through a season, with the objective to survive, then I would agree that employing a simple system that fits the players and 'get's the job done' would be the way forward. As it is, I think (as fans) we need to be more focused on the longer term vision and making sure we have the very best chance of survival when we do get promoted.

We have conceded in a few games and that needs to be addressed. On balance, I think the system does expose a couple of issues, based on the Grimmy discussions we've had recently. Firstly, I think Grimmy's limitations as a keeper (not commanding his area) are probably exposed in the system and secondly, we've started to see a pattern of mistakes emerge from Casey. I would also say that I think Grimshaw has probably just not been at his usual best from a shot-stopping perspective in recent weeks and I'm not sure that is necessarily related to the system.

OK... Getting on to the new system..

The intention seems to be to try and dominate possession, so is that something we could do so easily whilst playing 4 at the back?

We could go with a 4231, which retains 5 in the Middle of the park, but we also know that Rhodes works better (in fact works at all) with a Strike Partner to bounce off. 442 potentially yields the Midfield advantage to the opposition and we'd be back to the former 'concede possession and hit them on the break' kind of style that we employed to decent effect in the Championship... (not exactly great football for the longer term though).. 433? Are we back to potential issues with Rhodes?

Personally I think the 3 at the back option is worth the wait, but I think we will need to shuffle the pack and see a few incomings / outgoings before we get there and that's not great in the short term.

I agree - it's clearly an attempt to address the valid criticism that he produced a very good counter punching team but one that struggled more often than not when the opposition didn't come at us.

I don't think it's so much about system as the struggle between how you work that system.

I think if anything, he's possibly (and this is pure conjecture based on the way we sometimes seem very passive) got a bit of mismatch between the training and intent - i.e. we obviously work a lot on shape and retaining possession but perhaps a bit at tbe cost of the more aggressive patterns of play we may need to adopt to make the system work.

I've been very critical of Critch at times - but I think it's fair to acknowledge that he is trying to put technical players on the pitch to do technical things - but I wonder to what extent he's fighting himself about how far to commit to that. As much as he got stuck for not including Dembele, I don't think Critch 1.0 would ever have played Dembele in the free role he did the game before.

There's an evolution in his thinking but I wonder, a bit like the performance of the team if that evolution is stuttering a bit at times.

My default opinion is 'get into em'' but I also do enjoy watching well drilled industrial football. I feel a bit like we fall between two stools sometimes. We're still a bit prone to sit back as if we've got that 2020-22 ability to soak it up and just compete/scrap and then explode - but sometimes we also stroke it about really well and look as if we could dominate if only we'd release one or two players to make space.

I'm not quite sure at times if we're trying to score or trying not to concede so to speak. It's frustrating because there's bursts of play where we look really confident in our identity as an attacking side.

I am though, (as to be fair, I also was with Appleton's 433) in favour of sticking to what we do and getting better at it. I think the difference this time is what he's trying to do is the result of a reflection on his past spell, league 1 in general etc - whereas I think first time round, it was a slightly naive attempt to apply the 'Liverpool method' to players who didn't have the capacity.

For me, it comes down largely to how he resolves the midfield trio - and largely in that whether he can give Dembele (and by extension Carey) the job of 'hurt opposition' as their key role - and can he live with the consequence that it will make us more vulnerable as a result of making us more potent.

I also wonder if Rhodes/Kouassi up front has quite the tireless energy his teams had previously. That's another variable vs the first time round. Rhodes is a special finisher and his all round play is excellent - but that manic energy of Jerry was a key factor in how we got up and Rhodes is 33, Kouassi isn't a relentless runner and Lavs breaks after 60 mins of running about. I'm not sure how much that impacts on his thinking.

 

[voyeur]

Basically, he made Gary the focal point and it was all good thereafter. Await our saviour's return.

(I only typed this out for the bants tbf)

I think it's Son of Gaz that we are waiting for.

The update.