Bergen Blade
Well-Known Member
We started like this:
I applaud Adkins' choice of formation. It's exactly the shape that I thought we needed, although personally I would have played Adams on the left and Scougall for Coutts.
The extra body in midfield, with Hammond sweeping up behind Basham and Coutts meant that the latter two could be far more aggressive and close down much more effectively than what's been the case in our 4-4-2 efforts. This gave us a feeling of being mostly in control of the game, more difficult to get through. Our defenders were more comfortable with the extra protection, although there were a couple of situations where their weaknesses showed.
We also went forward a lot quicker, and there was less sideways and backwards passing. Done was a constant threat and showed that he can be very effective from a wide starting position, as long as he's asked to play the right role (inside forward) and we have the right formation (4-3-3/4-5-1). JCR was quiet, and I noticed more good defensive involvements than offensive.
Hammond was fine as the holding midfielder and also looked more at home in the new formation. He's decent in the air and it's good for the centre halves that they get some help with high balls, meaning one of them doesn't have to break out of the defensive line all the time. There was one occasion when Edgar ended up in noman's land, and it was good to see that Hammond realised he had to drop down in the back four to fill in for him. He also played a couple of good through balls and must have enjoyed the extra time he had on the ball being a bit deeper.
Basham did as expected. Not very creative, but his energy, tackling and ability to do box to box helped us. If only his finishing and heading technique was a little bit better. I think the goal was an own goal by the man who marked him. If we're sticking with this formation Basham must play in this role. He needs a fitter partner though, a nippy little terrier who likes to get into the box is ideal, and then I can see us really improving and getting even more out of our attacking assets.
Coutts had a bit of a nightmare from after we scored to well into the second half. I think he must be disappointed that Hammond was given the holding role, as it's the only one Coutts is really capable of playing himself. In terms of closing down and doing box to box he's simply not able to do it effectively. He's normally good technically, but in the mentioned period that part of his game was poor too. Maybe the extra running he did on occasions affected his touch. He did pick himself up a little later on, but Adkins shouldn't be asking him to do this role.
I think our goal made us a bit more defensive than I'd hoped. Despite not attacking in numbers we kept producing chances though, helped by our tempo and the work rate and running of Done and Sharp with Basham and Brayford also joining in when they could.
We haven't lost under Adkins when we've started in a 4-3-3 formation, and I think he's on the right path again now. I thought that was the case a few weeks ago as well, but he ruined it by reverting to his beloved 4-4-2. There are still tweaks required though, and we have to make these tweaks (the exact right ones) to get where we want to be. For me this was a definite step in the right direction though.
Long
Brayford Edgar Collins Harris
Hammond
Basham - - - - Coutts
Done - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JCR
Sharp
Brayford Edgar Collins Harris
Hammond
Basham - - - - Coutts
Done - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - JCR
Sharp
I applaud Adkins' choice of formation. It's exactly the shape that I thought we needed, although personally I would have played Adams on the left and Scougall for Coutts.
The extra body in midfield, with Hammond sweeping up behind Basham and Coutts meant that the latter two could be far more aggressive and close down much more effectively than what's been the case in our 4-4-2 efforts. This gave us a feeling of being mostly in control of the game, more difficult to get through. Our defenders were more comfortable with the extra protection, although there were a couple of situations where their weaknesses showed.
We also went forward a lot quicker, and there was less sideways and backwards passing. Done was a constant threat and showed that he can be very effective from a wide starting position, as long as he's asked to play the right role (inside forward) and we have the right formation (4-3-3/4-5-1). JCR was quiet, and I noticed more good defensive involvements than offensive.
Hammond was fine as the holding midfielder and also looked more at home in the new formation. He's decent in the air and it's good for the centre halves that they get some help with high balls, meaning one of them doesn't have to break out of the defensive line all the time. There was one occasion when Edgar ended up in noman's land, and it was good to see that Hammond realised he had to drop down in the back four to fill in for him. He also played a couple of good through balls and must have enjoyed the extra time he had on the ball being a bit deeper.
Basham did as expected. Not very creative, but his energy, tackling and ability to do box to box helped us. If only his finishing and heading technique was a little bit better. I think the goal was an own goal by the man who marked him. If we're sticking with this formation Basham must play in this role. He needs a fitter partner though, a nippy little terrier who likes to get into the box is ideal, and then I can see us really improving and getting even more out of our attacking assets.
Coutts had a bit of a nightmare from after we scored to well into the second half. I think he must be disappointed that Hammond was given the holding role, as it's the only one Coutts is really capable of playing himself. In terms of closing down and doing box to box he's simply not able to do it effectively. He's normally good technically, but in the mentioned period that part of his game was poor too. Maybe the extra running he did on occasions affected his touch. He did pick himself up a little later on, but Adkins shouldn't be asking him to do this role.
I think our goal made us a bit more defensive than I'd hoped. Despite not attacking in numbers we kept producing chances though, helped by our tempo and the work rate and running of Done and Sharp with Basham and Brayford also joining in when they could.
We haven't lost under Adkins when we've started in a 4-3-3 formation, and I think he's on the right path again now. I thought that was the case a few weeks ago as well, but he ruined it by reverting to his beloved 4-4-2. There are still tweaks required though, and we have to make these tweaks (the exact right ones) to get where we want to be. For me this was a definite step in the right direction though.