Ben Osborn and Luke Freeman

[Ricky]

Cheerio to both then.

Nothing like giving them incentive, eh Wilder...

How he clearly has Jack Robinson above Osborn in the pecking order is beyond me.

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

Cheerio to both then.

Nothing like giving them incentive, eh Wilder...

How he clearly has Jack Robinson above Osborn in the pecking order is beyond me.

Aiming for least disruption to the side, I imagine. Robinson for JOC is a straight swap. Stevens to LCB and Osborn to LWB is two changes.

I'd have given Osborn and Freeman a game today, for what it's worth.

 

[Chabuddy G]

Aiming for least disruption to the side, I imagine. Robinson for JOC is a straight swap. Stevens to LCB and Osborn to LWB is two changes.

I'd have given Osborn and Freeman a game today, for what it's worth.

Yeah, least disruption has really worked well for us so far

 

[Chabuddy G]

Nice to see we’ve tried something a bit different today then

 

[Stevo]

I can accept a defeat, but not a defeat and another turgid, lacklustre display

 

[CoatesyBlade]

I’m not really surprised by the team selection... but I don’t feel good about the treatment of Freeman and Osborn!
There’s no way I can see us replacing our squad players with anything better than those two.
Unless of course the plan is to recruit massively and push the current starters onto the bench!

 

[Ricky]

It seems Wilder literally only buys these players to push the existing players in their position. Not to ever actually get on the pitch.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Cheerio to both then.

Nothing like giving them incentive, eh Wilder...

How he clearly has Jack Robinson above Osborn in the pecking order is beyond me.

He hasn’t. Robinson is a LCB and Osborne a LWB. Wilder has always said that he likes a player to cover a certain position. The Stearman podcast recently said as much.

There are the odd exception in that he feels Basham can play in numerous roles, same with Berge. But he prefers to keep people in position if possible.

If Stevens has another poor game then there might be a call for Osborn but he probably thinks that Robinson hasn’t done a deal wrong so shuffling Stevens inside to get Osborn on the pitch isn’t worth the hassle.

 

[Ricky]

He hasn’t. Robinson is a LCB and Osborne a LWB. Wilder has always said that he likes a player to cover a certain position. The Stearman podcast recently said as much.

There are the odd exception in that he feels Basham can play in numerous roles, same with Berge. But he prefers to keep people in position if possible.

If Stevens has another poor game then there might be a call for Osborn but he probably thinks that Robinson hasn’t done a deal wrong so shuffling Stevens inside to get Osborn on the pitch isn’t worth the hassle.

Stevens is proven at LCB and doesn't need to be on his game there in the same way he does at LWB. He's also more familiar with Bash and Egan than Robinson is.

Osborn has looked sharp and would improve on Stevens' recent LWB performances.

I can't see how it doesn't make sense to make this change, in this game.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Stevens is proven at LCB and doesn't need to be on his game there in the same way he does at LWB. He's also more familiar with Bash and Egan than Robinson is.

Osborn has looked sharp and would improve on Stevens' recent LWB performances.

I can't see how it doesn't make sense to make this change, in this game.

I agree that Stevens is as good, if not better than Robinson and I’d definitely have Osborn over Stevens on recent form, particularly if Stevens gives us the ‘overlapping’ option from LCB. I just don’t think Wilder likes to change too much and I think psychologically with Robinson it would be a blow if the shuffle is made at his expense. He’s been far from the worst player of late.

 

[Swannyblade]

Aiming for least disruption to the side, I imagine. Robinson for JOC is a straight swap. Stevens to LCB and Osborn to LWB is two changes.

I'd have given Osborn and Freeman a game today, for what it's worth.

You’re probably right, but I don’t see a problem with disrupting a losing, underperforming side...probably a benefit if anything

 

[Silent Blade]

How he clearly has Jack Robinson above Osborn in the pecking order is beyond me.

Brilliant cross in for Basham who should have scored and his long throw led to our equaliser.

 

[Ricky]

Brilliant cross in for Basham who should have scored and his long throw led to our equaliser.

Osborn's a really decent crosser too.

Good point about the long throws though, I'm sure they'll be a crucial weapon for us over the next few years.

 

[Come from away]

Weren't both being lined up for extra time?

 

[Shoreham_Bhoys]

Both need to show good effort and intensity in training, if either of them are going at it half hearted and feeling sorry for themselves then it's not going to get them in the side.

 

[LenTednTony]

Agreed, Fleck and Stevens received the courtesy from Wilder of a chance to respond to the Newcastle game at Old Trafford. They didn't in the main.

If Osborn in particular doesn't get a game then he'll be wondering why he bothered coming.

I agree with what you are saying but, don’t you think we are playing a different system at the
Moment. There seems to be a LOT of long balls cutting out Stevens, Fleck and to a certain extent, Berge or Lundstram. Playing to the strength of McBurnie who played really well today, detracts from our more enthralling game. We seem to be trying to play a hybrid of the two and don’t know if it is working.