Movement at Crewe

[Barney]

Not sure you watch games to be honest. He looks anything but nervous to me (or many on here by the looks of it)

Bore off.

 

[sheffielder]

Bore off.

Bless

 

[Dnblade]

They're taking the piss...surely they haven't earned the right to wear those pointy Red and White Wizard hats.

View attachment 14280

 

[oldblade]

Indeed he does - some on here do not see a footballer or like Reed and think they are wrong.

We haven't seen much of Reed but he had a decent game away v Burton - Burton (as most teams are) are very well organised, but Reed was certainly trying to move the ball on and doesn't (IMHO) hide when played in CM.
Yes he might be small but at least he is very willing to accept the ball, will take a touch and wants to move it forward. Lack of movement at times doesn't help any of the CM midfield players.

I am asking the question now - is it the coaches who are wanting this slow passing style - jeez, it's Clough MK 2 at present.

UTB

He was also okay at Swindon.

 

[Kevincarterversion2.0]

On Saturday, I dont know why the manager changed the set up from the second half at Milwall.

He put Baxter in the hole - his best position and to quote Adkins "where he is good" and he gets on the score sheet and plays some good football. Then we line up against Crewe and Baxter is shoved out to the right. OK he played a few good passes, but naturally he is going to drift into the middle, and wont skin anyone for pace. As for not wanting to play for the club - never really buy that, and his reaction after scoring against Milwall, and his interview after Bradford shows he does want to get us out of this league.

Adkins then put Che on the left, which is not his natural positon - and he didnt really do all that much. Odd decision.

Coutts then didnt really get hold of it, and Hammond gave the ball away (although he is still finding his feet).


Id have gone for something more like

Hammond Couts
Adams Baxter Done
Sharp

He is basically trying to accomodate too many players and by doing so is playing them out of position. It didnt work for Clough and it wont work for Adkins.

 

[alcoblade]

I'm glad several posters have taken the debate further, including what individual players offer and do not offer. I think most of us agree about the need for more movement, and maybe also that the selected midfielders at Crewe are incapable of giving us that movement, even if they're trying their hardest?

groveblade , fully understand that it's different being there and watching a poor performance compared to wathing the video the next day. When I sit down and watch a game we've lost I've put the frustration and disappointment behind me and just want to see what went wrong and what we should be doing differently. I ffw when gk take their time at goalk kicks.

Regarding players' effort, even in the clips it shows Coutts 'wanting' it. When he hasn't got the ball he comes short and with his hand gesture shows that he wants the ball. He did this constantly, all game, and probably thinks this is effective and his role in the team, his way of showing effort. When this is also Hammond and Baxter's natural game, we don't get enough forward movement, no tempo, no penetration. The pace we had in the forward position was wasted, as we ended up passing it around in midfield. Crewe got men behind the ball all the time and were very comfortable.

I think Harris got frustrated with our midfielders' lack of movement in the second half. First he ignored Coutts coming short, and bypassed him, finding Flynn. Then he did the same, but went on a long diagonal run immediately after, as if to show the pedestrian midfielders how to do it - pass and make a forward run, at least once in a while! Then Harris tried another forward pass, but hit the referee which set Crewe up for a dangerous break. Then he stopped taking these initiatives as well.

There's also a chance to take the debate further, but still go down the route that the players are crap. Though there are always different combinations and formations to try, and that's your strong point, there's also a reality that lots of these have been tried and the result keeps being the same.

So, it's possible to say that, by and large, the players are crap (or to be kinder, playing at their level). That debate can be taken forward to discuss why we keep buying crap, or the wrong players. Why we seem to be skint yet with greater resource than the competition. Why we always buy from above, not around. Why we never buy players that seem to be athletic.

I am an admirer of your input and analysis. But I disagree with the suggestion that it's necessarily lazy to go down the route that the players are, on the whole, crap.

UTB

 

[super_pig]

Are we still blaming McEveley for every defeat whether he's playing or not?

View attachment 14282

yeah dead right.. official club scapegoat
naah i've seen enough of this guy.
we simply aren't dynamic enough IMHO.. too many plodders

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

There's also a chance to take the debate further, but still go down the route that the players are crap. Though there are always different combinations and formations to try, and that's your strong point, there's also a reality that lots of these have been tried and the result keeps being the same.

So, it's possible to say that, by and large, the players are crap (or to be kinder, playing at their level). That debate can be taken forward to discuss why we keep buying crap, or the wrong players. Why we seem to be skint yet with greater resource than the competition. Why we always buy from above, not around. Why we never buy players that seem to be athletic.

I am an admirer of your input and analysis. But I disagree with the suggestion that it's necessarily lazy to go down the route that the players are, on the whole, crap.

UTB

All these players have played well at some point. They have strengths and weaknesses. We are looking for a combination which enables them to play to their strengths and minimizes exposure of their weaknesses.

We started very strongly against Crewe and could have had a couple of goals early on.

The players who put us in that position didn't become crap 15-20 minutes into the game.

No real idea what the problem or the solution is but I don't think the players individually are crap.

And I don't think they're not trying either.

Looking at it superficially I think we need more dynamism in midfield.

I think that may well be more of a priority than CH.

 

[BushBlade]

Anyone know how long Edgar is out for?

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Anyone know how long Edgar is out for?

This is an interesting one because I'm pretty sure Adkins said before Fleetwood that he wouldn't be available for the Tuesday, but might be available for the Saturday. We've had two Saturday games since then.

The other side of this is hamstrings take a long time to heal properly, so he may just be out recovering.

 

[BushBlade]

This is an interesting one because I'm pretty sure Adkins said before Fleetwood that he wouldn't be available for the Tuesday, but might be available for the Saturday. We've had two Saturday games since then.

The other side of this is hamstrings take a long time to heal properly, so he may just be out recovering.

We could do with the pre-international break Edgar back really.

 

[alcoblade]

All these players have played well at some point. They have strengths and weaknesses. We are looking for a combination which enables them to play to their strengths and minimizes exposure of their weaknesses.

Actually, I think the difference between good and bad players is consistency - most players' best is more than good enough - it's just that the crap ones are not, and will never be, consistent enough.

We started very strongly against Crewe and could have had a couple of goals early on.
The players who put us in that position didn't become crap 15-20 minutes into the game.
No real idea what the problem or the solution is but I don't think the players individually are crap.

See above, even the shittiest teams play well some of the time.

Ad I don't think they're not trying either.

Agreed - it's not about effort IMHO.

Looking at it superficially I think we need more dynamism in midfield. I think that may well be more of a priority than CH.

So do I. Though I think we have too many third division players, the good news is that I think you can get away with quite a few in "less important" areas. It's lack of dynamism / movement in midfield that's our issue - and it wont be tackled by combinations of Coutts (crap), Scougall (crap)
Baxter, Reed and Basham (all very limited). Early signs for Hammond aren't good, but he can't possibly be nearly as crap as he's been for us so far.

UTB

 

[Fulwood Blade]

He was also okay at Swindon.

good - personally I can't see what Hammond and Coutts give to the team that Reed doesn't.

He is young, fit, ready to play, and we are already paying him - unlike Hammond.

UTB

 

[alcoblade]

good - personally I can't see what Hammond and Coutts give to the team that Reed doesn't.

He is young, fit, ready to play, and we are already paying him - unlike Hammond.

UTB

Hammond, for the next 5 or 6 games, brings the hope that he might answer a question for us. It doesn't look good now but we've seen this many times before with other players.

Reed may be a good player in a longer term future, right now he's the same as the rest. Not good enough and won't become so.

UTB

 

[BushBlade]

Hammond, for the next 5 or 6 games, brings the hope that he might answer a question for us. It doesn't look good now but we've seen this many times before with other players.

Reed may be a good player in a longer term future, right now he's the same as the rest. Not good enough and won't become so.

UTB

You can't say he'll never be good enough Alco, he's still very young.

 

[alcoblade]

You can't say he'll never be good enough Alco, he's still very young.

Re read it - "Reed may be a good player in a longer term future, right now he's the same as the rest. Not good enough and won't become so."

To explain - there's no way Reed is going to prove to be the answer to our problems in the next 5 or 6 games. Hammond might be. As I said, "Reed may be a good player in a longer term future".

UTB

 

[BarcaBlade]

At the risk of incurring someone's wrath, while the players didn't manage to achieve anything great, our fans were the worst. I don't see the Blades much, but thought that the fans would still be solid at a game like Crewe. Apart form about 5 minutes at the start, they showed no support for the team other than a small section down the Crewe kop end.

Embarrassing. Do we only sing when we're winning these days?

A disillusioned Barca.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

At the risk of incurring someone's wrath, while the players didn't manage to achieve anything great, our fans were the worst. I don't see the Blades much, but thought that the fans would still be solid at a game like Crewe. Apart form about 5 minutes at the start, they showed no support for the team other than a small section down the Crewe kop end.

Embarrassing. Do we only sing when we're winning these days?

A disillusioned Barca.

Really strange. Most away games the fans have been pretty vocal but someone around me pointed out how quiet it was, right from the start.

Either there was a sense of morbid dread at what we all knew was the inevitable outcome of the game - we started well but even that didn't rouse much enthusaism - and/or we've realised how daft parts of the Follow, Follow song are and not come up with an alternative.

Had a tasty Eccles cake in a cafe before the game, after that the whole thing was downhill.

UTMB

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Hammond, for the next 5 or 6 games, brings the hope that he might answer a question for us. It doesn't look good now but we've seen this many times before with other players.

Reed may be a good player in a longer term future, right now he's the same as the rest. Not good enough and won't become so.

UTB

Your belittling of Reed is becoming tiresome.

UTB

 

[alcoblade]

Your belittling of Reed is becoming tiresome.

UTB

Not as your inability to read what I've actually said, it seems.

I've made about 3 posts specifically about Reed. None of them belittle him. I think, for whatever reason, you're a bit sensitive to read on objectively, either way,

Anyway to summarise, as it can't have been clear;

He's an average 3rd division player at the moment, with plenty of time to become better than that in future. Which sadly for us places him in the upper echelons of our player rankings.

There you go.......

UTB

 

[alcoblade]

I noticed Silent has liked Fulwood's post. Can someone point out the belittling of Reed that's occurred, because I'm mystified!

UTB

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Reed may be a good player in a longer term future, right now he's the same as the rest. Not good enough and won't become so.

Words of gnomic inexactitude:

Reed will be a good player in the long term or Reed won't be a good player in the long term

It's the kind of thing a Buddhist monk might say to a naive pupil. An apparent contradiction encompassing all possibilities - and therefore all reality.

A post to be puzzled on and interpreted across the ages.

 

[alcoblade]

Words of gnomic inexactitude:

Reed will be a good player in the long term or Reed won't be a good player in the long term

It's the kind of thing a Buddhist monk might say to a naive pupil. An apparent contradiction encompassing all possibilities - and therefore all reality.

A post to be puzzled on and interpreted across the ages.

Too clever for me

For the simpleton's like me - "he may be a good player - long term". Belittling, really?

I don't think anyone can argue that he's a really good player for us now, can they?

UTB

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Too clever for me

For the simpleton's like me - "he may be a good player - long term". Belittling, really?

I don't think anyone can argue that he's a really good player for us now, can they?

UTB

But you then go on to say he won't be a good player...

Not good enough and won't become so.

At least it can be reasonably interpreted that way.

 

[alcoblade]

But you then go on to say he won't be a good player...

Not good enough and won't become so.

At least it can be reasonably interpreted that way.

Which is why I went on to (try to) clarify that I was referring to the next 5 or 6 games - in the context
that Hammond might become an answer to a midfield problem right now, I can't see Reed all of a sudden becoming one.

UTB

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Which is why I went on to (try to) clarify that I was referring to the next 5 or 6 games - in the context
that Hammond might become an answer to a midfield problem right now, I can't see Reed all of a sudden becoming one.

UTB

I get that - but the question was how can it be interpreted as anti-Reed, and if you come at it from a certain angle it's possible.

 

[alcoblade]

I get that - but the question was how can it be interpreted as anti-Reed, and if you come at it from a certain angle it's possible.

Which is why I qualified it soon after, and before the belittling accusation - hence the surprise.

Anyway, onwards............

UTB