Three in midfield and pace on the break

[Lane Ender]

Let's go to Bury and take it to them.
And for a change give us a treat next Saturday
Thanks in anticipation
Lane Ender

 

[alcoblade]

For all this who are stating it has always been obvious that we needed 3 in the middle, have you not been crying out at some point for a partner for Sharp? Did you make your point when others did cry out for 2 up front?

One of the problems Adkins has is that Sharp doesn't look great by himself. And he's probably our best player.

The only reason we are more suited to three in the middle (and we probably are) is because you need three of our midfielders to do the job of two.

Unfortunately, rather than stumbling into a winning formula, I'd argue we got away with it today against a poorly performing team. Should be good enough against Bury, but not nearly good enough to turn the season around.

UTB

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Unfortunately, rather than stumbling into a winning formula, I'd argue we got away with it today against a poorly performing team. Should be good enough against Bury, but not nearly good enough to turn the season around.

UTB

Can anyone say we will definitely win at Bury, we should and I expect a win but and because there is a but it reflects on where we are as a team/club.

 

[Pollingtonblade]

I think Sharp plays better with someone up front and so I think Adkins accommodated accordingly

 

[UnitedBlade]

I think Sharp plays better with someone up front and so I think Adkins accommodated accordingly

It doesn't work with Sammon but I'd quite like to see Adams and Sharp now. I'd like to see them alternating, one up top one in behind..

Sharp could teach Adams a lot.

It might just work.

 

[blade too long]

what the youngsters bring most of is that extra 10 per cent of energy , and fresh motivation
we werent a million miles away from being able to win a game , the margins in this league are minimal
if we improve 10 per cent we will make the play offs, with that bit of luck you always need

 

[Ricky]

It doesn't work with Sammon but I'd quite like to see Adams and Sharp now. I'd like to see them alternating, one up top one in behind..

Sharp could teach Adams a lot.

It might just work.

I definitely think you're right about Sharp being able to teach Adams a lot. He's good at a lot of the things Adams isn't.

I think they should both be on the pitch from now on but not necessarily as a partnership. I'd have Adams on the left with him and Baxter supporting Sharp. If it's 4-4-2 it might as well be Adams and Sharp too because we don't have any partnership and individually Adams is better and less limited than Done. Also needs to be playing to develop and hopefully gain value.

 

[jt64]

For all this who are stating it has always been obvious that we needed 3 in the middle, have you not been crying out at some point for a partner for Sharp?

Kind of gave up hope of Adkins playing three in midfield at the same time as Sharp was on his run of crap form, so no, I was looking to see if two of Sammon/Done/Adams would work together.

If Sharp really is as crap outside of a 4-4-2 as you suggest, and Adkins couldn't work out that we lack the personnel to play 4-4-2 when he bought him, that's kind of a large problem with the manager

 

[sheffielder]

Sharp can play up top by himself if given the proper service from midfield. I think Adams had more balls over the top or down the channels yesterday than sharp has had all season. Sharp receives the ball with his back to goal so needs someone alongside him.

When I think of a sharp goal I always thing of him getting down the channel and hitting it across the keeper. We haven't been giving him that service.

 

[Ricky]

Kind of gave up hope of Adkins playing three in midfield at the same time as Sharp was on his run of crap form, so no, I was looking to see if two of Sammon/Done/Adams would work together.

If Sharp really is as crap outside of a 4-4-2 as you suggest, and Adkins couldn't work out that we lack the personnel to play 4-4-2 when he bought him, that's kind of a large problem with the manager

It's also poor that he didn't sign the players to enable us to play 4-4-2 effectively. I do think Sharp can work without a strike partner if he has proper support though.

 

[jt64]

It's also poor that he didn't sign the players to enable us to play 4-4-2 effectively. I do think Sharp can work without a strike partner if he has proper support though.

Understandable that the board doesn't allow him to buy an entire new midfield and two new centre backs

 

[blade too long]

coventry have no game this week , so if we can win our 2 we can move within a point , millwall have 2 games so them stumbling a bit might help , think we have to watch bradford now as they are 2 points behind us with a game in hand and starting to gather momentum , something hopefully we can do with these two games

 

[Ricky]

Understandable that the board doesn't allow him to buy an entire new midfield and two new centre backs

I think it's more about a strike partnership, a suitable central midfielder and at least one good quick winger. He should have been able to sign players to make 4-4-2 a better option for us than it is. But he shouldn't have been fixed on 4-4-2 in the first place with the squad we had. To say he made such a point of assessing the squad he has no excuses for the subsequent poor decisions he's made on how to use it. He still can't seem to judge them properly.

 

[alcoblade]

Kind of gave up hope of Adkins playing three in midfield at the same time as Sharp was on his run of crap form, so no, I was looking to see if two of Sammon/Done/Adams would work together.

If Sharp really is as crap outside of a 4-4-2 as you suggest, and Adkins couldn't work out that we lack the personnel to play 4-4-2 when he bought him, that's kind of a large problem with the manager

Would it be so obvious,from outside, that our midfielders would be quite so average? A good number of our own fans still think Coutts can run! I can imagine most managers would like to think they could work with it as a starter.

And I didn't emphasise the point about a Sharp being crap by himself, just that he's better with a partner.

The manager will have hoped for more from Sammon ( whom I'm told wasn't his signing, the deal was done before Adkins came?) and also hoped that we'd bring better players in. He contributed to the mess by investing heavily in the average Hammond.

UTB

 

[PeteBlade]

Yes, which is why I said it wasn't something I was gloating about... It was an observation that Adkins had finally realised - through luck or good observation, that the middle three combination would be one that works

It's not about 4-4-2, 4-5-1 or 4-3-3, but finding the right types of players to play together. So the point about mentioning it in September was again related to the types of players, not just 3 min midfield.

Isn't that a bit like saying, " I've just walked up these stairs, but it's not something I'm gloating about"?

 

[SwissBlade]

Isn't that a bit like saying, " I've just walked up these stairs, but it's not something I'm gloating about"?

Probably, but if you spend time worrying about the semantics then you missed the point I was trying to make... That perhaps the penny has dropped with Adkins on how best to utilise his players

 

[PeteBlade]

Probably, but if you spend time worrying about the semantics then you missed the point I was trying to make... That perhaps the penny has dropped with Adkins on how best to utilise his players

I'm only pulling your plonker, metaphorically speaking...

 

[Grappler]

For all this who are stating it has always been obvious that we needed 3 in the middle, have you not been crying out at some point for a partner for Sharp? Did you make your point when others did cry out for 2 up front?

One of the problems Adkins has is that Sharp doesn't look great by himself. And he's probably our best player.

The only reason we are more suited to three in the middle (and we probably are) is because you need three of our midfielders to do the job of two.

Unfortunately, rather than stumbling into a winning formula, I'd argue we got away with it today against a poorly performing team. Should be good enough against Bury, but not nearly good enough to turn the season around.

UTB

"...Should be good enough against Bury, but not nearly good enough to turn the season around...."

Let's hope the 6-0 drubbing yesterday doesn't mean that Bury are going to "bounce back" against us.

Six goals.....we can only dream of that at the moment.

 

[Grappler]

Would it be so obvious,from outside, that our midfielders would be quite so average? A good number of our own fans still think Coutts can run! I can imagine most managers would like to think they could work with it as a starter.

And I didn't emphasise the point about a Sharp being crap by himself, just that he's better with a partner.

The manager will have hoped for more from Sammon ( whom I'm told wasn't his signing, the deal was done before Adkins came?) and also hoped that we'd bring better players in. He contributed to the mess by investing heavily in the average Hammond.

UTB

I am sure that Sammon was a deal done by Clough, just like the retained list was, because I think we all agree now that the plan was NOT to get rid of him.