Well done to the head coach today

20togo

Well-known member
Or play with 2 natural full backs for more defensive security (Turton and Husband) and have the 2 wide players with Madine in the middle, a defensive mid to break up play and give the centre halves some protection and he other 2 midfielders one, Robson doing the creating and the other Asan attacking midfielder getting in the box to feed of Madine and the 2 wide men.
That's better. We've been getting caught on the counter attack because of our full/wing backs getting forward. Thus allowing crosses to come into the box and then poor marking by our central defenders.
Yes, pull CJ and Yates in closer to Madine. And get the full backs down the flanks.
Yet it was you who quoted the Ipswich goals! And you want our full backs to get down the flanks. We need to get the defence tightened first. I made the point a few times over the last couple of weeks wthat whilst we are leaking soft goals I'd rather play with full backs whose primary job is to defend rather than wing backs who are gonna get caught out and leave us exposed at the back. Sort out the defence and stop conceding soft goals and then you can focus on players getting forward.
 

hertfordseasider

Well-known member
That's better. We've been getting caught on the counter attack because of our full/wing backs getting forward. Thus allowing crosses to come into the box and then poor marking by our central defenders.

Yet it was you who quoted the Ipswich goals! And you want our full backs to get down the flanks. We need to get the defence tightened first. I made the point a few times over the last couple of weeks wthat whilst we are leaking soft goals I'd rather play with full backs whose primary job is to defend rather than wing backs who are gonna get caught out and leave us exposed at the back. Sort out the defence and stop conceding soft goals and then you can focus on players getting forward.

I think it’s a luxury and actually a little too over adventurous to play both wing backs and wide men, either play one or the other. If we play wing backs we need 3 in central defence and 2 up front, one playing off Madine. Playing wing backs and wide attackers completely opens us up at the back.

I did think we were woeful against Ipswich because the team selection was wrong, yesterday’s was far more balanced and we looked good.
 

20togo

Well-known member
I think it’s a luxury and actually a little too over adventurous to play both wing backs and wide men, either play one or the other. If we play wing backs we need 3 in central defence and 2 up front, one playing off Madine. Playing wing backs and wide attackers completely opens us up at the back.

I did think we were woeful against Ipswich because the team selection was wrong, yesterday’s was far more balanced and we looked good.
Yes, I agree. But it seems Critchley doesn't want to go down that route.
 

Insider

Well-known member
We get back to my unsolvable question, full backs.
I have for a long time believed that position is absolutely critical in a successful team. (Liverpool again!!)
Use Daniel/Howe and Garbutt/Mitchell creatively on the wings providing the ammunition for your front 3 who can all get in the box.
I think it was Critchley's plan to go with this option.
So far that hasn't worked because we haven't had the holding mid-fielders behind them coupled wih a centre back pairing that hasn't been solid enough so we've shipped goals
Put Turts and Hubby in at FB and you will have a strong back 4 with an improving Ekipteta and the new boys hopefully adding a bit more solidity in the centre.
It looked a bit like we were half way there yesterday with Williams filling the holding mid-field role.
The goal still came from an intial mistake from Eky quite high up the pitch, Turts failing to cut out the cross and no height left in the middle with Hubby and Mitchell as the 2 defenders back to cover.
So I don't know what the final answer is but I did say before that maybe we should stick with the defensive option for the time being and get some confidence in the squad with a couple of 1-0 wins.
 

Goforgoal

Well-known member
That’s the beauty of football isn’t it. One mans god is another mans devil. I have no problem with anyone who rates Turton, that’s your vision, mine is he isn’t good enough.
Turton sets very low standards and unfortunately fails to live up to them.
 

fcblackpool

Well-known member
We get back to my unsolvable question, full backs.
I have for a long time believed that position is absolutely critical in a successful team. (Liverpool again!!)
Use Daniel/Howe and Garbutt/Mitchell creatively on the wings providing the ammunition for your front 3 who can all get in the box.
I think it was Critchley's plan to go with this option.
So far that hasn't worked because we haven't had the holding mid-fielders behind them coupled wih a centre back pairing that hasn't been solid enough so we've shipped goals
Put Turts and Hubby in at FB and you will have a strong back 4 with an improving Ekipteta and the new boys hopefully adding a bit more solidity in the centre.
It looked a bit like we were half way there yesterday with Williams filling the holding mid-field role.
The goal still came from an intial mistake from Eky quite high up the pitch, Turts failing to cut out the cross and no height left in the middle with Hubby and Mitchell as the 2 defenders back to cover.
So I don't know what the final answer is but I did say before that maybe we should stick with the defensive option for the time being and get some confidence in the squad with a couple of 1-0 wins.
Until you have defensive midfielders that can cover for the FB playing high up, you can't do anything else but keep the two as defenders first and foremost.

Of course the defensive unit as a whole gets to be under more pressure than it should because the ball doesn't stick for any period in the last third, so we need to make sure we don't just keep possession on the halfway line then give it away when the ball goes forward. Their defensive unit doesn't really have much to think about- it's easy. Give it Cj and there's 2 on him, ball lost. Yates, same, going nowhere and blind alley's. Madine, unless he has a chance for a head on goal, he's easy to look after. We have to have other threats so CJ gets the space as defenders are occupied. Someone near Yates so he has options and someone looking for Madine's knockdowns. We need at least 4 constant 'need to be looked after' threats. Until that gets sorted we'll compete with the poorer teams and get beat by the better ones.
 

voyeur

Well-known member
That's better. We've been getting caught on the counter attack because of our full/wing backs getting forward. Thus allowing crosses to come into the box and then poor marking by our central defenders.

Yet it was you who quoted the Ipswich goals! And you want our full backs to get down the flanks. We need to get the defence tightened first. I made the point a few times over the last couple of weeks wthat whilst we are leaking soft goals I'd rather play with full backs whose primary job is to defend rather than wing backs who are gonna get caught out and leave us exposed at the back. Sort out the defence and stop conceding soft goals and then you can focus on players getting forward.
I agree, I'm talking about where we need to get to. For now we need more security at the back. It's a key issue I think, the formation requires 3 forwards who are narrow generally speaking, but width needs to come from full backs getting forward. But one step at a time. Can we get to a place where we play 433 and the full backs provide the width? Remains to be seen. Our failure to do so up to now is part of the reason we are struggling in the final third.
 

TANGERINETOWERPOWER

Well-known member
I agree, I'm talking about where we need to get to. For now we need more security at the back. It's a key issue I think, the formation requires 3 forwards who are narrow generally speaking, but width needs to come from full backs getting forward. But one step at a time. Can we get to a place where we play 433 and the full backs provide the width? Remains to be seen. Our failure to do so up to now is part of the reason we are struggling in the final third.
I would rather have 3 at the back with two wing backs bombing forward to support the attack particularly in the away games
 

voyeur

Well-known member
I would rather have 3 at the back with two wing backs bombing forward to support the attack particularly in the away games
It might be the only way to get things working. If you want the full backs to commit forward often, you need a strategy to cover them. With a back three, or a midfield that can stretch the width of the pitch and work really hard to stop attacks as well as start our own. Or a combination of both.
 

TANGERINETOWERPOWER

Well-known member
I think we probably should set up differently in some games particularly away from home where we have gone a very long time without a win (Doncaster away was the last one and that was in injury time)
 
Top
X