Alexikokopops Posted 25 July 2006 Share Posted 25 July 2006 The defence minus McCarthy looked weak and easily exposed, Gerrbrand is no right back and Sheehan looked dodgy at times, Kisnorbo and Mcauley suffered as a result of that, however Mcauley reminds me a lot of Matt Heath with his aimless headers and hoofball. In fairness to MacAuley he did pass it around the back a fair bit too, and he's played the past few seasons under Keith "Hoofball" Alexander, in the classic 5-2-3 formation, just needs a couple of games to get it out his system Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookwhaticando Posted 25 July 2006 Share Posted 25 July 2006 ' date='Jul 25 2006, 01:23 PM' post='355374']In fairness to MacAuley he did pass it around the back a fair bit too, and he's played the past few seasons under Keith "Hoofball" Alexander, in the classic 5-2-3 formation, just needs a couple of games to get it out his system I was worried that was where we were heading with all these defenders of ours. Seems Kelly's content with a standard 4-4-2, though, so looks like the danger's passed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 26 July 2006 Share Posted 26 July 2006 I would have no objection to that at all. But does that mean you'd go 4-3-3 and who would you choose in midfield? I'm not sure whether i'd start O'Grady out wide as kind of a third striker but it's definately worth doing with 20 mins to go when we need to change things round. But if he were to start as a winger/third striker then i'd want mobile midfielders to play so that they can cover the space of the whole of midfield, probably Johnson sitting in the centre alongside Wesolowski and Stephen Hughes. If we had an attacking full-back then width shouldn't be lost and as an emergency, Iain Hume could drift out wide to create space if things weren't working during a game. He's very good cutting in from the wing, that was often his position he took up at Tranmere during games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 26 July 2006 Share Posted 26 July 2006 That all sounds sensible enough. Like you I'm not sure how it would pan out until it's tried but it might give us a little more firepower, especially with attacking full-backs, and 4-4-2 has certainly not given us a flowing team to date, whoever we've played against. That is not because 4-4-2 cannot be flowing it just seems to me that we haven't got the players to make it flow. I could also see Porter aiding 4-3-3 as a substitute (or 4-4-2 for that matter because he has no problem providing width)) because he can thread the clever through balls into the channels, something no-one else really does consistently (though I haven't seen enough of Johnson and Weso). Anyway, it would be nice if we had an alternative to 4-4-2 cos I have the feeling we're going to need it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filbertway Posted 26 July 2006 Share Posted 26 July 2006 Let's not forget that all 3 of Elvis's goals have been from less than 6 yards out. Now I know that shouldn't matter as most of Lineker's goals were from that distance, but he needs to score more than 3 tap ins against League 2 opposition to convince me he's worth ousting Fryatt, Hume or O'Grady in the team. 3 of o gradys goals have been open goals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Flair Posted 26 July 2006 Share Posted 26 July 2006 3 of o gradys goals have been open goals Correct, that wasn't the issue with O'Grady though. When O'Grady played last season he often instantly improved the way the team were playing and helped close matches out when we were winning or helped chase the victory. When Elvis played he wasted so many goalscoring opportunities and didn't contribute anything else other than giving the opposition free-kicks from being offside profusely. What I was saying is that it's great to see Elvis amongst the goals, but I still fear that his technique when he's one on one or from more than a few yards out will be shown up again next season. Perhaps confidence of a good pre-season could improve the way he snatches at shots though, I sure hope so. Because pace like he's got along with being able to shoot usually equates to being a good footballer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filbertway Posted 26 July 2006 Share Posted 26 July 2006 Correct, that wasn't the issue with O'Grady though. When O'Grady played last season he often instantly improved the way the team were playing and helped close matches out when we were winning or helped chase the victory. When Elvis played he wasted so many goalscoring opportunities and didn't contribute anything else other than giving the opposition free-kicks from being offside profusely. What I was saying is that it's great to see Elvis amongst the goals, but I still fear that his technique when he's one on one or from more than a few yards out will be shown up again next season. Perhaps confidence of a good pre-season could improve the way he snatches at shots though, I sure hope so. Because pace like he's got along with being able to shoot usually equates to being a good footballer. One thing ive noticed is that elvis is not offside as much, maybe he's worked on it in pre season. His finishing from distance still needs some work, but his pace has helped the team create chances and his pace was the reason chris scored his 2 goals against boston. First half without elvis at lincoln we didn't ahve one shot on goal did we? Second half I counted 17 shots on goal. Fryatt and Hume are better finishers and more talented but elvis' pace will help score goals becuase the defenders can't handle him. I think he could probably become a bit of a super sub for us coming on with 20-25 minutes left and helping create chances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 26 July 2006 Share Posted 26 July 2006 Elvis did constantly insist on being offside. He was a bit like a dog anticipating a stick being thrown. Completely focussed on running as quickly as possible towards the goal. Head down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alexikokopops Posted 26 July 2006 Share Posted 26 July 2006 One thing ive noticed is that elvis is not offside as much, maybe he's worked on it in pre season. His finishing from distance still needs some work, but his pace has helped the team create chances and his pace was the reason chris scored his 2 goals against boston. First half without elvis at lincoln we didn't ahve one shot on goal did we? Second half I counted 17 shots on goal. Fryatt and Hume are better finishers and more talented but elvis' pace will help score goals becuase the defenders can't handle him. I think he could probably become a bit of a super sub for us coming on with 20-25 minutes left and helping create chances. Apparently we had 14 in the second half. I wasn't counting but I read it somewhere, maybe in the Lincolnshire Echo, I can't remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultra Posted 27 July 2006 Share Posted 27 July 2006 As a footnote, Lincoln played a full-strengh Forest side last night and beat them 1-0. It adds a little perspective to our result there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 27 July 2006 Share Posted 27 July 2006 As a footnote, Lincoln played a full-strengh Forest side last night and beat them 1-0. It adds a little perspective to our result there. What division are Forest in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookwhaticando Posted 27 July 2006 Share Posted 27 July 2006 What division are Forest in? The one below ourselves. One division above Lincoln. So Lincoln beat a team in the division above, and drew with a team two divisions above. Good results for them, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 27 July 2006 Share Posted 27 July 2006 The one below ourselves. One division above Lincoln. So Lincoln beat a team in the division above, and drew with a team two divisions above. Good results for them, really. And Lincoln's manager plays 4-3-3, so I read. If you're saying that's a pointer for the future I can tell you... no chance! Rob Kelly is not for turning... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookwhaticando Posted 27 July 2006 Share Posted 27 July 2006 And Lincoln's manager plays 4-3-3, so I read. If you're saying that's a pointer for the future I can tell you... no chance! Rob Kelly is not for turning... The only content in my post was to inform you of the relative standings of the three teams. Nothing subliminal Honest. Not that I wouldn't like us to try a 4-3-3 at some point - even if it's a late-in-the-game Plan B to try to salvage something. It's not likely to replace the trusty 4-4-2 formation, but it's not completely unlikely to make an appearance at some point in time. I'm sure we've stuck a third striker up front when we were up against it recently. I could be imagining things, but I'm almost sure it happened at least once. :pinch: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filbertway Posted 27 July 2006 Share Posted 27 July 2006 And Lincoln's manager plays 4-3-3, so I read. If you're saying that's a pointer for the future I can tell you... no chance! Rob Kelly is not for turning... But also when we improved our attacking threat they conceded 3 goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 27 July 2006 Share Posted 27 July 2006 But also when we improved our attacking threat they conceded 3 goals. Being fair - and thank goodness they did concede three, plus another disallowed - Lincoln had actually changed most of their team by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.