Oldham analysis

[Bergen Blade]

We started in a 4-3-3 again, like this:

Long

Brayford Collins McEveley Harris

Coutts
Basham - - - Hammond

Done - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Adams
Sharp
​

When I saw the team selection I thought we were very close to my current preferred team. It was quite interesting to see that Coutts and Hammond had swapped roles from the Barnsley match, with the likely aim being better playmaking from deep midfield, and better work rate from the left sided central midfielder.

Listening to the game I was disappointed to hear that it didn't work better first half. I've been advocating this formation and as mentioned I feel Adkins is pretty close to what I'd play at the moment. Having watched the full game now on BP I think this is why it didn't work:

• Some credit has to go to Oldham, for winning the midfield battle. Pressing high up the pitch, they looked more up for it and comfortably dealt with our midfield's attempts to get moves going.
• They put a man (usually no 15 Winchester) on our deep playmaker, Coutts, and this meant he was unable to dictate things and start off moves. He was always marked at throw ins and when we built from the back:
• 
• Basham and Hammond are both mediocre playmakers and couldn't compensate for the above
• This lead to poor tempo and a lot of hopeful attempts to find Sharp, Adams or Done.
• Sharp had a nightmare, nothing stuck.
• Our wide men either had their back to goal when they got the ball, or the passes into space lacked accuracy. Oldham's defenders easily read what we tried to do.
• Basham disappointed me with lower energy levels than normal.
• Hammond for me is too slow and also lacks the energy for a box to box role. He was better in the holding role at Barnsley. We need quicker feet in there, tenacity and someone who can bomb forward on and off the ball.

2nd half:

Wallace had replaced Harris just before half time. Adkins put Scougs on for Sharp at the break, meaning we switched to a diamond:

Long

Brayford Collins McEveley Wallace

Coutts
Basham - - - Hammond
Scougall

Done - - - - -Adams
​

This helped. Oldham didn't have too much width themselves, and with four mostly central midfielders we got amongst them better. Scougall's pressing made a difference and he also made the odd run into space, which finally asked some questions from the Oldham midfielders who had been comfortable first half.

An example of us pressing better after losing possession high up the pitch. Basham gives it away, but immediate pressing from him, Scougall, Done and then Brayford means we don't just stop their chance to counter attack, we eventually regain possession and can go forward again:



We must do more of this, not just get men back to block them as they get close to our goal. Superb fitness levels are required though, we can't get away with (too m)any luxury players. Get this right and in time we'll improve a lot.

Anyway, we got ahead and restricted Oldham pretty well until the sending off. We managed to increase the tempo a little bit, although we were far from impressive and still couldn't create much.

Although it improved us, I don't think the diamond formation is a long term solution. Some former managers have tried it as well, but never kept it for very long. After the sending off we played:

Long

Brayford Collins McEveley Wallace

Coutts Basham Hammond Scougall

Done​

A man down, it was all about stopping them, and we defended well. Oldham's limitations going forward also showed, but we dropped deep and made it difficult for them to find space in the last third. They tried attacking quite a bit on our left, but Wallace and Scougall did very well.


I hope Adkins realises he's not too far from getting it right with the 4-3-3, but we must get more aggression, running and energy in there. Coutts showed at Barnsley that he's not a great box to box man and Hammond showed the same yesterday. Sharp is struggling at the moment and we must get more out of our attacking assets. Scrapping 4-4-2 has given us more defensive control, but we must be positive and try to find some rhythm to our attacking play as well.

 

[alcoblade]

"Some credit has to go to Oldham, for winning the midfield battle."

I mean, who'd have thought it!

UTB

 

[UnitedBlade]

Great post again. I still worry about taking on the better sides in the league.

For me Coutts and Hammond are too similar to have in the same side. I'm now getting more persuaded on the case for Scougall. His energy was much needed but he still doesn't do enough when he's on the ball yet.

I get the feeling we are tightening up but we must take our chances.

Oldham aren't the yardstick but Coventry next week will be.

We need getting on for 2 points a game to get into the play offs so wins are crucial now or we'll have to much to do.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Great analysis again. Thanks.

 

[Zlatan]

Good analysis. I like the 4-3-3 but it's just so obvious we don't have the players with pace who can play in front of the holding midfielder and get forward quickly. I'd like to see Scougall given a chance in place of Hammond, Basham or Coutts.

 

[derryblade]

Might be too simplistic, but why doesn't NA choose a style/system that suits the players he has rather than one that doesn't.

 

[Harry's Game]

"Some credit has to go to Oldham, for winning the midfield battle."

I mean, who'd have thought it!

UTB

Yes the midfield three of Coutts, Hammond and Basham is too slow to all play In the same side, and the only options with any pace who can play there are Reed and Scougall who are out of form / not good enough.

That needs urgent work in the JTW and the summer.

 

[alcoblade]

Might be too simplistic, but why doesn't NA choose a style/system that suits the players he has rather than one that doesn't.

Tiddlywinks? Walking football?

UTB

 

[derryblade]

Tiddlywinks? Walking football?

UTB

Haven't we tried walking football?

 

[alcoblade]

Haven't we tried walking football?

Aye, for the last 4 years.

But seriously, there isn't a system for these players. They need a door, and a boot up there arses. The day when they are just a bad memory can't come soon enough.


UTB

 

[Lane Ender]

Yes the midfield three of Coutts, Hammond and Basham is too slow to all play In the same side, and the only options with any pace who can play there are Reed and Scougall who are out of form / not good enough.

That needs urgent work in the JTW and the summer.

Scougall is not good enough L2 tops.
Reed is only young but his confidence must be low and playing with this shower could ruin him.

 

[Cyprus Blade]

the midfield three of Coutts, Hammond and Basham is too slow to all play In the same side,

I agree - they are also too similar and present extremely poor creativity and passing. I don't think any of them are good enough. Additionally Coutts doesn't seem to have the stamina to play 90 mins, let alone twice a week. Hammond looks to have improved a bit but if he is at full speed god help us. I still don't rate Basham in MF and to make an accomplished CH out of him will take work. That trio in MF looks dour, slow, lacklustre and extremely limited ideas and ability-wise. Sadly we are at a point where that represents improvement. Just get through the season and stay in this division and rebuild. That's about the best I am hoping for. Never mind the JTW - the next 6 matches will probably determine our season I am afraid.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

That trio in MF looks dour, slow, lacklustre and extremely limited ideas and ability-wise.

Brilliant. Sad but true.

Our creative outlets have been JCR and Baxter, both were missing - and it showed. But Collins stepped up literally and figuratively.

 

[Fjortoft's Aeroplane]

Things won't stick with Sharp as the one up front. He's just not that kind of player. Sammon would be an improvement but then that means dropping Sharp as he's not suited to winger/stiker role. I'm not sure that Sammon has enough goals in him to really be our one up front either. I understand where you are coming from re: 3 in midfield, but any system needs to consider the best use of our attacking players and I just don't think 4-5-1/4-3-3 can achieve that with the current squad. We have 3 strikers in Sharp, Done and Adams that all look like they'd prefer to play off a big man in a front 2. Perhaps if we can get a big, physical, proven goal scorer centre forward in it would be worth considering more?

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Might be too simplistic, but why doesn't NA choose a style/system that suits the players he has rather than one that doesn't.

I suspect it’s because some are more suited to 442 (JCR, Sharp, Sammon etc.) and some are more suited to 433 (Scougall, Hammond, Baxter etc.). It always feels like we don’t have the complete forward to play the lone striker role but we also don’t have complete central midfielders to play in a 2.

 

[HoodedClaw]

I hope Adkins realises he's not too far from getting it right with the 4-3-3, but we must get more aggression, running and energy in there.

Do you feel we have the players at the club to provide the aggression, running and energy Bergs?

 

[AlienBlade]

Things won't stick with Sharp as the one up front. He's just not that kind of player. Sammon would be an improvement but then that means dropping Sharp as he's not suited to winger/stiker role. I'm not sure that Sammon has enough goals in him to really be our one up front either. I understand where you are coming from re: 3 in midfield, but any system needs to consider the best use of our attacking players and I just don't think 4-5-1/4-3-3 can achieve that with the current squad. We have 3 strikers in Sharp, Done and Adams that all look like they'd prefer to play off a big man in a front 2. Perhaps if we can get a big, physical, proven goal scorer centre forward in it would be worth considering more?

tbf sharp doesnt have enough goals in him playing this way either... so you might as well get Sammons on to at least allow some of the midfielders to join the attack... Sharp and Adams for that matter can seemingly trap a ball further than I cana kick it... that's why it rarely sticks imo.

 

[judge]

I think the bearded tattoo look is becoming a bit outdated now and perhaps the players need to concentrate their energies elsewhere
Maybe trying at football or not being nesh

 

[Bergen Blade]

Do you feel we have the players at the club to provide the aggression, running and energy Bergs?

Yes. I think we can afford picking one of our not-very-mobile players in the holding role, one from Hammond, Coutts or Baxter. Then make sure the other two have superb fitness and can do box to box. Basham and Scougall would be my choice for Sunday.

Adams' suspension is a real shame. One of the reasons to prioritise energy in midfield was to get more out of him.

 

[Snowman]

We started in a 4-3-3 again, like this:

Long

Brayford Collins McEveley Harris

Coutts
Basham - - - Hammond

Done - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Adams
Sharp
​

When I saw the team selection I thought we were very close to my current preferred team. It was quite interesting to see that Coutts and Hammond had swapped roles from the Barnsley match, with the likely aim being better playmaking from deep midfield, and better work rate from the left sided central midfielder.

Listening to the game I was disappointed to hear that it didn't work better first half. I've been advocating this formation and as mentioned I feel Adkins is pretty close to what I'd play at the moment. Having watched the full game now on BP I think this is why it didn't work:

• Some credit has to go to Oldham, for winning the midfield battle. Pressing high up the pitch, they looked more up for it and comfortably dealt with our midfield's attempts to get moves going.
• They put a man (usually no 15 Winchester) on our deep playmaker, Coutts, and this meant he was unable to dictate things and start off moves. He was always marked at throw ins and when we built from the back:
• View attachment 14688
• Basham and Hammond are both mediocre playmakers and couldn't compensate for the above
• This lead to poor tempo and a lot of hopeful attempts to find Sharp, Adams or Done.
• Sharp had a nightmare, nothing stuck.
• Our wide men either had their back to goal when they got the ball, or the passes into space lacked accuracy. Oldham's defenders easily read what we tried to do.
• Basham disappointed me with lower energy levels than normal.
• Hammond for me is too slow and also lacks the energy for a box to box role. He was better in the holding role at Barnsley. We need quicker feet in there, tenacity and someone who can bomb forward on and off the ball.

2nd half:

Wallace had replaced Harris just before half time. Adkins put Scougs on for Sharp at the break, meaning we switched to a diamond:

Long

Brayford Collins McEveley Wallace

Coutts
Basham - - - Hammond
Scougall

Done - - - - -Adams
​

This helped. Oldham didn't have too much width themselves, and with four mostly central midfielders we got amongst them better. Scougall's pressing made a difference and he also made the odd run into space, which finally asked some questions from the Oldham midfielders who had been comfortable first half.

An example of us pressing better after losing possession high up the pitch. Basham gives it away, but immediate pressing from him, Scougall, Done and then Brayford means we don't just stop their chance to counter attack, we eventually regain possession and can go forward again:



We must do more of this, not just get men back to block them as they get close to our goal. Superb fitness levels are required though, we can't get away with (too m)any luxury players. Get this right and in time we'll improve a lot.

Anyway, we got ahead and restricted Oldham pretty well until the sending off. We managed to increase the tempo a little bit, although we were far from impressive and still couldn't create much.

Although it improved us, I don't think the diamond formation is a long term solution. Some former managers have tried it as well, but never kept it for very long. After the sending off we played:

Long

Brayford Collins McEveley Wallace

Coutts Basham Hammond Scougall

Done​

A man down, it was all about stopping them, and we defended well. Oldham's limitations going forward also showed, but we dropped deep and made it difficult for them to find space in the last third. They tried attacking quite a bit on our left, but Wallace and Scougall did very well.


I hope Adkins realises he's not too far from getting it right with the 4-3-3, but we must get more aggression, running and energy in there. Coutts showed at Barnsley that he's not a great box to box man and Hammond showed the same yesterday. Sharp is struggling at the moment and we must get more out of our attacking assets. Scrapping 4-4-2 has given us more defensive control, but we must be positive and try to find some rhythm to our attacking play as well.

And you think Yaser Kasim at Swindon is too slow. Bloody like lightening compared to our lot.

 

[finlaytheblade]

We started in a 4-3-3 again, like this:

Long

Brayford Collins McEveley Harris

Coutts
Basham - - - Hammond

Done - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Adams
Sharp
​

When I saw the team selection I thought we were very close to my current preferred team. It was quite interesting to see that Coutts and Hammond had swapped roles from the Barnsley match, with the likely aim being better playmaking from deep midfield, and better work rate from the left sided central midfielder.

Listening to the game I was disappointed to hear that it didn't work better first half. I've been advocating this formation and as mentioned I feel Adkins is pretty close to what I'd play at the moment. Having watched the full game now on BP I think this is why it didn't work:

• Some credit has to go to Oldham, for winning the midfield battle. Pressing high up the pitch, they looked more up for it and comfortably dealt with our midfield's attempts to get moves going.
• They put a man (usually no 15 Winchester) on our deep playmaker, Coutts, and this meant he was unable to dictate things and start off moves. He was always marked at throw ins and when we built from the back:
• View attachment 14688
• Basham and Hammond are both mediocre playmakers and couldn't compensate for the above
• This lead to poor tempo and a lot of hopeful attempts to find Sharp, Adams or Done.
• Sharp had a nightmare, nothing stuck.
• Our wide men either had their back to goal when they got the ball, or the passes into space lacked accuracy. Oldham's defenders easily read what we tried to do.
• Basham disappointed me with lower energy levels than normal.
• Hammond for me is too slow and also lacks the energy for a box to box role. He was better in the holding role at Barnsley. We need quicker feet in there, tenacity and someone who can bomb forward on and off the ball.

2nd half:

Wallace had replaced Harris just before half time. Adkins put Scougs on for Sharp at the break, meaning we switched to a diamond:

Long

Brayford Collins McEveley Wallace

Coutts
Basham - - - Hammond
Scougall

Done - - - - -Adams
​

This helped. Oldham didn't have too much width themselves, and with four mostly central midfielders we got amongst them better. Scougall's pressing made a difference and he also made the odd run into space, which finally asked some questions from the Oldham midfielders who had been comfortable first half.

An example of us pressing better after losing possession high up the pitch. Basham gives it away, but immediate pressing from him, Scougall, Done and then Brayford means we don't just stop their chance to counter attack, we eventually regain possession and can go forward again:



We must do more of this, not just get men back to block them as they get close to our goal. Superb fitness levels are required though, we can't get away with (too m)any luxury players. Get this right and in time we'll improve a lot.

Anyway, we got ahead and restricted Oldham pretty well until the sending off. We managed to increase the tempo a little bit, although we were far from impressive and still couldn't create much.

Although it improved us, I don't think the diamond formation is a long term solution. Some former managers have tried it as well, but never kept it for very long. After the sending off we played:

Long

Brayford Collins McEveley Wallace

Coutts Basham Hammond Scougall

Done​

A man down, it was all about stopping them, and we defended well. Oldham's limitations going forward also showed, but we dropped deep and made it difficult for them to find space in the last third. They tried attacking quite a bit on our left, but Wallace and Scougall did very well.


I hope Adkins realises he's not too far from getting it right with the 4-3-3, but we must get more aggression, running and energy in there. Coutts showed at Barnsley that he's not a great box to box man and Hammond showed the same yesterday. Sharp is struggling at the moment and we must get more out of our attacking assets. Scrapping 4-4-2 has given us more defensive control, but we must be positive and try to find some rhythm to our attacking play as well.

Great analysis as usual bergen and giving Oldham credit is right as well ,10 league matches 1 defeat at Crewe last week shows they are no mugs when playing away there home record is shocking.I have said before that this league has improved in the time we have been in it and this season is no different.Teams come here knowing we lack legs (runners)and take us on in midfield ,lack of pace and physicality means we are always vulnerable as our results show .clough never really attempted to rectify these problems Adkins I think will but it could be too late for this season (I hope not).We do have flare in the side but rarely win the battles to allow this to flourish.
James Wallace when fit (got a full match in today for the 21s)would go a long way to improve our midfield fingers crossed he can get up to speed.

 

[crucialkneeligaman]

That shot of Collins stood wondering what the fuck to do with the ball, whilst his colleagues were planted motionless around the pitch, was one of my abiding memories of Saturdays cup tie.