None Up Front

[AlBlade]

In 3 out of our last 5 games before the Barnsley game we have fielded a starting line up which includes no recognised striker on the pitch. I appreciate that some may argue that Jose Baxter was playing up front, but I don't see Jose as an out and out striker, he is an attacking midfielder. Whilst NC may argue there is merit to this new system, results and even the stats do not back this up.

In the last 5 games before Barnsley we have played 254 minutes of football with no recognised striker on the pitch, and during this time we have scored 2 goals (a goal every 127 minutes). In contrast, during the last 5 games we have played for 202 minutes with at least one recognised striker on the pitch and we have scored 7 goals (a goal every 29 minutes).

Once again on Saturday we saw the same old story, we played without a striker for an hour, and whilst we had the bulk of possession and created some good chances, the Barnsley centre halves were under no pressure at all. We wait until we go a goal down and then decide we might have more attacking threat with a centre forward on the pitch. Whilst I rate NC as a manager (and he's certainly one of the best we have in recent times) I can't see the logic behind stubbornly persisting with our current 4-6-0 starting formation when it clearly doesn't work.

 

[boo radley]

And when the striker came on he cocked up by not doing his job. If a defender had not defended a set piece properly some would be all over him.

 

[Latters]

And when the striker came on he cocked up by not doing his job. If a defender had not defended a set piece properly some would be all over him.

He missed the one chance he had. No striker scores 100% of the chances he gets. Not Shearer, Van Nistelrooy, Henry, anyone. If McNulty had had longer on the pitch he would have created more chances than the solitary one he had, through his movement alone. I would have fancied him to take at least one, more than I would Baxter, who I do rate, but who was stationery for a lot of the game and who isn't a poacher or an out and out striker.

 

[HoodedClaw]

And when the striker came on he cocked up by not doing his job..

No pressure on the lad then eh??

Well I suppose he did get 30 minutes in which to score today.

 

[Worksop_Blade]

I would love to know whether it was NC telling Murphy and JCR to get head height crosses in the box for Baxter and Scougall or whether those two lads just automatically play like that.

Because if it was NC then he had officially gone full retard.

 

[boo radley]

I would love to know whether it was NC telling Murphy and JCR to get head height crosses in the box for Baxter and Scougall or whether those two lads just automatically play like that.

Because if it was NC then he had officially gone full retard.

I cannot understand why Murphy stands so far out of the box when JCR is getting a cross in? surely he would be better lingering about ten yards from the goal line but still slightly away from the back post for the over hit cross.

 

[grafikhaus]

I would have fancied him to take at least one, more than I would Baxter, who I do rate, but who was stationery for a lot of the game and who isn't a poacher or an out and out striker.

Did you think he'd stamp his authority on the game? Maybe paper over the cracks? Letters hope you're write.

 

[JJ Sefton]

We've got less up front than Kate Moss.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it Jean Hatchet.

 

[JJ Sefton]

We've got less going on in the box than Ann Widdecombe.

 

[FTPE]

My mate said barnsley were lucky, I disagree- they play strikers to score goals.... We don't.
They
whip good crosses in from corners... We don't.
1-0, how can we argue against it

 

[Latters]

Did you think he'd stamp his authority on the game? Maybe paper over the cracks? Letters hope you're write.

God Damn the predictive text on my phone. Perhaps I should have jotted my post down using a note pad and pen and proof read it prior to posting.

 

[madeinsheffield]

I cannot understand why Murphy stands so far out of the box when JCR is getting a cross in? surely he would be better lingering about ten yards from the goal line but still slightly away from the back post for the over hit cross.

Exactly what I said saturday, every cross was over hit

 

[Lane Ender]

Exactly what I said saturday, every cross was over hit

Exactly what I said saturday, every cross was over hit

Yea but even if they was pristine crosses we only had a midget and a little fat lad arriving late to get on the end of them.

 

[Esablade]

HIgdon will start next game then eh?
(if 'fit')

 

[Bergen Blade]

This short video gives a simple explanation of Baxter's role.




In theory it should work. Baxter's got a many of the required attributes. But the point of the system isn't to have fewer players in the box.
When Baxter's moving out of the box, other players has to move into the box. To do this you need the right type of attributes from other players as well. But we haven't done this part as well as last season, and here are some reasons:

• The loss of Brayford's attacking contribution - overlapping, runs on and off the ball, crosses, long shots, the support and availability when teammates needed help and an extra outlet, composed passing
• The loss of good passing and forward runs from centre halves. Maguire and also Collins' contributions were considerable last season. If the opposition had our midfield sussed, suddenly those two would give them something more to think about.
• The loss of Coady's movement into the box. Scougall's running remains, but Wallace's stamina is still nowhere near Coady's and he's been unable to make as many runs into the box. Wallace is a better creator, but that doesn't solve the mentioned problem.

One more thing, opposition teams have often defended deeper against us this season, partly because they've often taken the lead. This has made it more difficult for us to counter attack, and it's increased the need for more height and strength in the box.

 

[Lane Ender]

It apparent Baxter is clearly uncomfortable role he's being asked if Clough isn't careful he'll ruin him
It's like asking a bricklayer to do joiners job

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

HIgdon will start next game then eh?
(if 'fit')

He may do so but it certainly won't be Higdon AND McNulty.

 

[Lane Ender]

He may do so but it certainly won't be Higdon AND McNulty.

No way too adventurous don't want to go over the top do we.

 

[Revolution]

This short video gives a simple explanation of Baxter's role.


In theory it should work. Baxter's got a many of the required attributes. But the point of the system isn't to have fewer players in the box.
When Baxter's moving out of the box, other players has to move into the box. To do this you need the right type of attributes from other players as well. But we haven't done this part as well as last season, and here are some reasons:

• The loss of Brayford's attacking contribution - overlapping, runs on and off the ball, crosses, long shots, the support and availability when teammates needed help and an extra outlet, composed passing
• The loss of good passing and forward runs from centre halves. Maguire and also Collins' contributions were considerable last season. If the opposition had our midfield sussed, suddenly those two would give them something more to think about.
• The loss of Coady's movement into the box. Scougall's running remains, but Wallace's stamina is still nowhere near Coady's and he's been unable to make as many runs into the box. Wallace is a better creator, but that doesn't solve the mentioned problem.

As I have maintained for some time now, this system does not work consistently in the lower divisions because it requires really good attacking full backs and central midfielders to make it work consistently, and these players by and large do not exist outside the PL.

Has anyone actually gone up from this league in recent years playing one up front?

 

[Torrix1889]

For me he's trying to accommodate too many "luxury" players.....and those that fit that bill are Murphy, Baxter, Scougall and JCR. Any 3 of those 4 but not all of them at the same time. Murphy has the ability to make a difference as does JCR so it's got to be one of Scougs or Baxter that makes way for a striker for the other to play just behind.

I would like to see Clough give McNulty or Higdon, or someone else, (loan signing, Evans even bloody Porter) a good run in the side. Strikers feed on confidence, (Clough should know that) and the confidence of every striker at the club must be rock-bottom at the moment as Clough clearly has no faith in them.

 

[AlBlade]

I think our current playing style has a lot to do with how NC views his own playing career. He was an accomplished attacking midfielder who had a pretty impressive scoring record (almost 1 in 3 whilst at Forest, and 1 in 4 at Liverpool), so I guess he assumes that there is no reason why midfielders cannot score goals - and to an extent I agree, I think our midfielders do have the ability to score.

What NC seems to have forgotten from his playing career, is that in the teams in which he scored freely from midfield, there were also some rather handy forwards on the pitch, e.g. Sheringham, Fowler, Collymore, etc.

Agree with Torrix, we need to give Mcnulty and Higdon decent runs in the side to see what they can do.

 

[ghandi]

We've got less up front than Kate Moss.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it Jean Hatchet.

"It's all about the base no treble"

 

[jt64]

Once again on Saturday we saw the same old story, we played without a striker for an hour, and whilst we had the bulk of possession and created some good chances, the Barnsley centre halves were under no pressure at all. We wait until we go a goal down and then decide we might have more attacking threat with a centre forward on the pitch.

i didn't see the game - as it was just a tenner more, i thought i'd do some scouting on what good teams do when playing with recognised strikers, and saw messi, suarez and neymar put on a master class of not scoring. but this doesn't compute - if we are having possession and creating "good chances", then the system is working - whoever the "good chances" are falling to needs to improve their finishing. until the football league introduces a rule that says goals scored by "centre forwards" count double, i really don't care who gets the goals, as long as we do. they can come from midfield, wingers, false nines, deflections off the ref's arse, doesn't matter really

 

[AlBlade]

i didn't see the game - as it was just a tenner more, i thought i'd do some scouting on what good teams do when playing with recognised strikers, and saw messi, suarez and neymar put on a master class of not scoring. but this doesn't compute - if we are having possession and creating "good chances", then the system is working - whoever the "good chances" are falling to needs to improve their finishing. until the football league introduces a rule that says goals scored by "centre forwards" count double, i really don't care who gets the goals, as long as we do. they can come from midfield, wingers, false nines, deflections off the ref's arse, doesn't matter really

JT, I don't care who gets the goals either, but the system we currently play without any recognised centre forward is going to make scoring incredibly difficult. When we don't have a striker on the pitch, no one is playing far enough up front to keep the centre halves busy, or at least make them think about their positioning. Also, our midfielders do not get into the box quick enough when we have the ball in attacking positions to try and get on the end of things, and they do not take up the right positions when crosses come into the box - something strikers (or good ones) do naturally.

The stats speak for themselves, 2 goals in 254 minutes when we don't have a striker on the pitch, and 7 goals in just over 200 minutes when we do. This doesn't mean the strikers score all the goals, but it does mean that they give the opposition defense enough to think about, force defensive mistakes and ultimately this results in creating space.

 

[Sirius]

It apparent Baxter is clearly uncomfortable role he's being asked if Clough isn't careful he'll ruin him
It's like asking a bricklayer to do joiners job

Nigel, in his pomp was a proper number 9. A centre forward. He put his all into the accepted role of a number 9 which is to attack, be a real handful to defend against and score goals.

To parody a. George. Best story. 'Nigel, where has it all gone wrong?

 

[WhiteHawk]

if we are having possession and creating "good chances", then the system is working - whoever the "good chances" are falling to needs to improve their finishing.

That's the problem though, we're having loads of possession and creating chances but there's no-one there for them to fall to.