The "Highlights" (1 Viewer)

fernandopartridge · Jan 29, 2019

robbiekeane said:
You love the old “unconfirmed” transfer fee don’t you

Haha, yes I've mentioned it once or twice

Johhny Blue · Jan 29, 2019

Otis said:
I think we ARE close though.

If we had one single striker who was taking half the chances we have been creating we'd have won a lot more games and be very close to the top 6, if not in it.

I think we are close to being a good side. The failure to take excellent chances has cost us dearly.

Just 31 goals scored in 30 games tells you everything you need to know.

With just one extra chance taken in each home game we would be in 6th and 6 points behind Luton

ccfchoi87 · Jan 29, 2019

Nick said:
Results disagree with Robins.

As does the lame attempt at getting back into the game at the weekend.

Do the results disagree? Hasn't Chaplin started 10 of our 11 wins? We hit form when he joined so I'd be surprised if the results were better without him.

Otis · Jan 29, 2019

ccfchoi87 said:
Do the results disagree? Hasn't Chaplin started 10 of our 11 wins? We hit form when he joined so I'd be surprised if the results were better without him.

Never thought of it that way.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Jan 30, 2019

ccfchoi87 said:
Do the results disagree? Hasn't Chaplin started 10 of our 11 wins? We hit form when he joined so I'd be surprised if the results were better without him.

When you are basically undroppable it’s no surprise he has started in most of our victories.

ccfcricoh · Jan 30, 2019

I think that Chaplin needs to be dropped for a game but based on what others have just said about results had a quick look at form with and without him...

8 games not started (first 6 when not signed and then Pompy ineligible and he didn't start against Luton, effectively only dropped once!)
22 games has started

We've picked up 5 points out of 24 without him (21%) and 34 points out of 66 with him starting (52%)

Quite interesting how much of a difference there is...

Otis · Jan 30, 2019

Stats can be misleading though.

I wouldn't drop him. He's scored a few lately and I would like to see him being given a go alongside Enobakhare up front.

ccfchoi87 · Jan 30, 2019

ccfcricoh said:
I think that Chaplin needs to be dropped for a game but based on what others have just said about results had a quick look at form with and without him...

8 games not started (first 6 when not signed and then Pompy ineligible and he didn't start against Luton, effectively only dropped once!)
22 games has started

We've picked up 5 points out of 24 without him (21%) and 34 points out of 66 with him starting (52%)

Quite interesting how much of a difference there is...

Of course there are other factors such as Sterling's form, bringing Shipley back, Burge's return etc. However, it does confirm that the results do not show we are better without Chaplin (even if we might be). Apparently we have only won one game without Sterling, Bayliss and Thomas all playing which was Oxford away.

Nick · Jan 30, 2019

Here are some stats as well (obviously might not be 100% accurate) . Have a look at the formations played for each game.

This is what I mean by Robins trying to shoehorn things in at detriment to the team through stubborness. It would be interesting to see how many of those Chaplin was closer up front to another player (and who) and the system played.

It certainly looks that playing a lone striker doesn't work.

Otis · Jan 30, 2019

Nick said:
Here are some stats as well (obviously might not be 100% accurate) . Have a look at the formations played for each game.

This is what I mean by Robins trying to shoehorn things in at detriment to the team through stubborness. It would be interesting to see how many of those Chaplin was closer up front to another player (and who) and the system played.

It certainly looks that playing a lone striker doesn't work.

View attachment 11404

Agree. Should be two.

steve82 · Jan 30, 2019

Nick said:
Here are some stats as well (obviously might not be 100% accurate) . Have a look at the formations played for each game.

This is what I mean by Robins trying to shoehorn things in at detriment to the team through stubborness. It would be interesting to see how many of those Chaplin was closer up front to another player (and who) and the system played.

It certainly looks that playing a lone striker doesn't work.

View attachment 11404

We’ve spoke before about us both not being fans of the 4231 as the lead mans too isolated which I advocated but what other formation can we play with current players putting 2 up top together with no natural left winger.

A return to 442 puts Shipley back at left wing, that will keep everyone happy on here and Hiwula is heavily exposed as a left winger defensively which was displayed during that unbeaten run.

I’m not seeing it as stubbornness currently and see why he’s returned to the 4231 it just suits the majority of the side better, unfortunately for our desired choice.

The current way we’re creating enough chances a game at the minute, it’s just getting the balance right and taking opportunities when they come. I’d stick with it unless that natural left winger arrives.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

ccfchoi87 · Jan 30, 2019

The truth is there's very little difference between the 4-4-2, 4-2-3-1 and the 4-4-1-1. Attacking formations can be redundant anyway as players naturally pick up certain positions. For example, when Bright played on the left against Wimbledon, he spent a lot of time playing centrally. Do we really think Thomas plays any different in a 4-2-3-1 to a 4-4-2? The only difference I see is Chaplin noticeably starts deeper in the 4-2-3-1 but he tends to drop deep in the 4-4-2 anyway.

Maybe I'm not tactically nuanced enough to notice the differences.

Nick · Jan 30, 2019

ccfchoi87 said:
The truth is there's very little difference between the 4-4-2, 4-2-3-1 and the 4-4-1-1. Attacking formations can be redundant anyway as players naturally pick up certain positions. For example, when Bright played on the left against Wimbledon, he spent a lot of time playing centrally. Do we really think Thomas plays any different in a 4-2-3-1 to a 4-4-2? The only difference I see is Chaplin noticeably starts deeper in the 4-2-3-1 but he tends to drop deep in the 4-4-2 anyway.

Maybe I'm not tactically nuanced enough to notice the differences.

The difference usually is the strikers and how one is pretty much a central midfielder.

If Thomas gets the ball on the right and runs down the wing, we have 1 in the box against their defence.

steve82 · Jan 30, 2019

Nick said:
The difference usually is the strikers and how one is pretty much a central midfielder.

If Thomas gets the ball on the right and runs down the wing, we have 1 in the box against their defence.

That’s for me where the attacking players need to be braver and get in and around the box quicker or be looking for the cut back, back post... etc.

Too often players are guilty of watching on instead of being part of or a option being in a position for the final phases of a attack.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

The "Highlights" (1 Viewer)

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member

Johhny Blue

Well-Known Member

ccfchoi87

Well-Known Member

Otis

Well-Known Member

SkyBlue_Bear83

Well-Known Member

ccfcricoh

Well-Known Member

Otis

Well-Known Member

ccfchoi87

Well-Known Member

Nick

Administrator

Otis

Well-Known Member

steve82

Well-Known Member

ccfchoi87

Well-Known Member

Nick

Administrator

steve82

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

The "Highlights" (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Administrator

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency