Brief Report.............

[alcoblade]

The football style we play at the moment is ineffective and will only work with players who are far superior to the opposition. Given time, and another transfer window, that may become the case, but we should be making tweaks now, and this message board has offered a number of constructive advice on how to improve things.

The lack of forward passing was ridiculous vs Scunthorpe. We played like we mainly wanted to make the possession stat look good.

Again our full backs failed to play a part going forward, as did the holding central midfielders, who were more than happy when they managed to find Maguire or Collins with a backwards pass.

Flynn, McFadzean and Ironside were poor, hardly created anything, although it doesn't help them when our build up is so slow. They must wonder what's the point in making a run in behind when our back six are only interested in keeping the ball among themselves. Cuvelier clearly has more to offer, but didn't really impress in McDonald's role. There were a good touch here and there from him.

Baxter was more positive when he came on. He has the ability to receive the ball, turn his marker and run at the opposition defence. He will also be looking to thread balls through and he's the one player who can actually manage to make us play with more tempo, and I have hopes he'll help Murphy and Taylor improve.

After failing to score from open play the last ten hours, I think we must make our attacking play our priority and this would probably help us create more:

Long​

Westlake Maguire Collins McFadzean​

Cuvelier McGinn​

Brandy - - - - Baxter - - - - - Murphy​

Taylor​

I know many would want to see McMahon or Hill, but I can't see us creating enough if we keep a holding back four and a holding central midfield duo, i.e. seven players who will rarely cross the halfway line.

So in short, you love hoof then?



UTB

 

[Bergen Blade]

So in short, you love hoof then?



UTB

It was code speak for 'bring back Blackie!'

 

[Revolution]

After failing to score from open play the last ten hours, I think we must make our attacking play our priority

And yet you are advocating a team with one man up front...

When are people (or, more accurately, Weir) going to accept that having one poor forward on his own up front is not going to lead to us scoring a lot of goals? Do we have to go 5 more games without scoring for this message to hit home?

 

[Wards]

Go on then, I'll bite.

Man Utd, Barca, Real - all play 1 up front yet don't struggle for goals. Obviously have very good players at their disposal but on paper so do we for this division - or at least we should have.

Do you think they cry at the manager for playing 2 up front?

I'd suggest it's more the formation/strategy of the players behind the front man that needs tweeking. If we can't get the ball up to the front man with 5 players in midfield, what hope do we have with 4, especially as we don't have wingers capable of playing in a 4-4-2? (in my opinion of course)

 

[Revolution]

Go on then, I'll bite.

Man Utd, Barca, Real - all play 1 up front yet don't struggle for goals. Obviously have very good players at their disposal but on paper so do we for this division - or at least we should have.

That part of what you say is true. Those teams can play that formation because of the quality of their lone striker and their support players.

We have no good forwards that are fit. Porter can work well with a partner on occasion, but we don't do that. He is poor on his own. Ironside looks like a little boy lost. Taylor has shown us nothing.

Behind them - Baxter is a good player, Brandy shows flashes but is suspended, and Murphy is either woefully out of form or just a poor player.

Unless Baxter plays like the League One equivalent of Lampard, if we keep playing this formation with these players my prediction of 40 goals for us this season will hold good I fear.

 

[alcoblade]

That part of what you say is true. Those teams can play that formation because of the quality of their lone striker and their support players.

We have no good forwards that are fit. Porter can work well with a partner on occasion, but we don't do that. He is poor on his own. Ironside looks like a little boy lost. Taylor has shown us nothing.

Behind them - Baxter is a good player, Brandy shows flashes but is suspended, and Murphy is either woefully out of form or just a poor player.

Unless Baxter plays like the League One equivalent of Lampard, if we keep playing this formation with these players my prediction of 40 goals for us this season will hold good I fear.

I'm suprised how little we deviate from ourt plan, and don't understand why. Watching the Bristol derby last night, it was evident how Bristol Rovers realised what wasn't workimg and altered the way they played (I know they lost anyway, ), within a match. We can't do it over 5 games.

It is possible to have constancy of purpose, and react to the realities that are playing out in front of you.

I think our anti-hoof ethos has been taken to such an alternative extreme that we are scared shitless to deviate. Hopefully I am wrong, and Weir's determination will win through. Someone wake me up when it does.....

UTB

 

[Bergen Blade]

After failing to score from open play the last ten hours, I think we must make our attacking play our priority

And yet you are advocating a team with one man up front...

When are people (or, more accurately, Weir) going to accept that having one poor forward on his own up front is not going to lead to us scoring a lot of goals? Do we have to go 5 more games without scoring for this message to hit home?

It was an attempt to show how I think we could create more within the set up decided by the current manager. I think the signings of Cuvelier and Baxter suggests that he wants to continue with the 4-2-3-1.