Search results

Any real evidence: a) That they even want him that much, I don't accept them being tacked on to a few stories is actual evidence. The press use them to drive up clicks. b) That we still wanted Manneh, the news was we had pulled out as we were not happy with something and decided Esse and Yang...

What else is he going to say? He isn't going to give out tactical information in interviews. Just 2 games ago we changed shape mid game as the one we started with wasn't working, we have also played different formations away from home this season. There is no evidence we won't change...

They are told to play and stay high and wide

Issue with that is unless the full backs or Eccles push higher the front 3 comes isolated

Rushworth MVE-Thomas-Kitching-JDS Grimes-Torp/Eccles Esse-Rudi/Eccles-EMC Wright Drop the 2nd CM deeper to close the gaps in the midfield. Having a midfield at 10 rather than BTA will also add support in there. If we don't go mad with the tactics we should have far more than enough, Looking...

Give it a rest yeah, you've made your point.

Why? As it looks like we are close to signing the guy from Brentford (if Nigerian reports are true) then we are signing a very different type of midfielder to what we have now, a defensive midfield that would if playing last night have helped plug the gaps in our midfield.

Well unless we unregistered an over 21 or sell we will have no more spaces in the squad. I'd be happy

3-4-3 doesn't solve anything on it's own, the number of defenders is not the issue it's the position of the players in front of them. We basically play with 3 defenders anyway in possession, it is the "donut" shaped hole in front of them that caused the issue last night.

Why does it feel like he won't budge? He will clearly set the team how he thinks is best to get the result, he got in really wrong yesterday but for example we have turned up at Portsmouth, Preston and Charlton and played a completely different system unforced with various degrees of success...

The profile of midfielder we seem to be looking at does indicate that a knowledge that we need a different type of player for some games.

Why? What he says in the privacy of the dressing room and what he says to a local BBC journalist who he clearly thinks is an idiot are likely to be very different things.

He plays in a position where up to very recently the players already here have been good. He's been here half a season and frankly anyone who is already calling him a flop is an idiot.

The 2 loan signings were and no matter what people will say remain to be the most important signings. Cover on the wings was needed most of all. The issues with the midfield and how we defend against transitions can if needed be solved tactically.

no one is saying that, people are just saying for games like today having someone who will add defensive shield, fill gaps in the midfield when we lose the ball and win the ball back is valuable

he then say this " Can see why you want him, he wont shy away from tackles and will win the ball back... on the ball is the issue but your midfield should be able to make up for it. He isnt making our squad, I reckon this is done by thursday." which would be valuable for tougher games

Also the pedant in me has to say it was 2-1

Oh and we also played a back 3 against Charlton and were not great. Apart from you still not solving the space in the midfield issue you also haven't taken into account the issue that good teams will push their full backs ultra high creating overloads on each flank as their isn't a natural wide...

Yes because the midfield was deeper and left no space for the opposition to flood through. If you have no idea what I posted then you really shouldn't be discussing football tactics.

Your back 3 idea seems to not take into any account our current in possession shape has a back 3, the issue is the cover and space left in front of them. We can play 4 CBs and they still struggle if we keep giving away so much space in the midfield.