Bellend Sebastian Posted 29 January 2010 Posted 29 January 2010 Unfortunately some seem to think the risk of going bust, is actually a risk worth taking. I suspect that will continue to be the case until a high profile club goes out of business. None of this pissing about administration lark, I mean the gates being locked and the team ceasing to exist. If Portsmouth's current plight isn't enough to worry people, I think this is what it'll take for them to realise what might be at stake
Thracian Posted 29 January 2010 Posted 29 January 2010 For once I disagree.I think several of our players are having to concentrate on playing their assigned roles to the extent that they lose the ability to play even the most basic parts of their natural game. Converting midfield players to full backs would only compound the problem, in the short term at least. Trying to coax some pace from a defense and midfield that really does not have any is, in my few pointless, however desirable it might be. Given our current squad I can't see us attacking from the back with any degree of pace whatever we do, so I would try something else. A possession orientated passing game would be more suited to our current players, three in central midfield prepared to 'pass the ball to death' if required whilst searching for the opportunity to play in our quicker forwards. Some experiment would clearly be necessary but at least it gives us a way of moving forward with the players we do have! Some interesting thoughts but anyone who went to Barnsley would laugh at the notion of us inflicting death by passing on any ball. It makes me laugh how we play that small-sided warm-up game in pre-match practice and our players sometimes string 10/12/15 passes together in the trightest of situations. Trouble is the practice isn't real. There's no proper tackling. And as soon as the match starts and the opposition becomes robust, the whole idea of close, one-touch passing quickly gets rejected by a good portion of our team until there's really only Kingy left making the effort. When he's picked, of course.
kyleolly Posted 29 January 2010 Posted 29 January 2010 Exactly what i thought on wedneday we need to go back to being solid at the back and having a settled team with a mix of youth and experience and natural wingers
l444ry Posted 29 January 2010 Posted 29 January 2010 I reckon people should clarify what they mean when calling for "natural wingers". If we mean the old fashioned hug the line, dont defend too much, get crosses in type and in a 4-4-2 then forget it. That system went out with high buttoned boots years ago. In modern football that system would get slaughtered because the central midfielders and fullbacks get outnumbered and exposed. Hence, nobody plays it anymore at decent level football. The only time two wingers get employed these days is in a front three, and even then flexible enough to make 4-5-1 at a blink.
marbelladave Posted 30 January 2010 Posted 30 January 2010 Some interesting thoughts but anyone who went to Barnsley would laugh at the notion of us inflicting death by passing on any ball. It makes me laugh how we play that small-sided warm-up game in pre-match practice and our players sometimes string 10/12/15 passes together in the trightest of situations. Trouble is the practice isn't real. There's no proper tackling. And as soon as the match starts and the opposition becomes robust, the whole idea of close, one-touch passing quickly gets rejected by a good portion of our team until there's really only Kingy left making the effort. When he's picked, of course. I accept that our passing has been particularly poor of late but we did manage to pass the ball about in spells earlier this season. It will take time to develop and initially we would have to overload the midfield to provide the player in possession with options, but, surely it is a better option than trying to generate pace where there simply isn't any... I reckon people should clarify what they mean when calling for "natural wingers". If we mean the old fashioned hug the line, dont defend too much, get crosses in type and in a 4-4-2 then forget it. That system went out with high buttoned boots years ago. In modern football that system would get slaughtered because the central midfielders and fullbacks get outnumbered and exposed. Hence, nobody plays it anymore at decent level football.The only time two wingers get employed these days is in a front three, and even then flexible enough to make 4-5-1 at a blink. At least some one gets it!.. This is the very reason that Oakley is deployed narrow right, provides a bit of width but mostly helps out in the center. To make 4-4-2 really work you need wide men who work up and down their flank providing attacking option in possession but dropping back and 'tucking in' when we lose it. The nearest we have to that is Dyer, but he is far from ideal, as his defensive play is not great and in attack he often takes too long to get the ball into the box. Playing that role is also very hard work, which is why he fades so much second half. No one else comes close. It also helps if you have a striker who drops off the back 4 and links with the midfield, Howard drops off a little but is not mobile enough to be really effective and it might also explain the logic behind the withdrawn striker role that NP has been trying to get Yanni to play. As I have said elsewhere, many, many times, with the players we have we are far more suited to a 4-3-3 / 4-5-1 than to 4-4-2!
Scow Posted 30 January 2010 Posted 30 January 2010 Back to Basics - eeeee, I hope it's not of the John Major variety...
MC Prussian Posted 30 January 2010 Posted 30 January 2010 Back to winning ways would be a better way of tackling our current issues - we could start discussing basics later. Unfortunately, Newcastle United are coming to town and I can't see the basics having any impact. Not now. It'd take another pre-season to iron that out. Determination does help for a start, though.
Corky Posted 31 January 2010 Posted 31 January 2010 Well, the clean sheet target was achieved, and I also felt, by and large, that we cut out the longball and tried to play through midfield more.
Chrysalis Posted 1 February 2010 Posted 1 February 2010 Have you considered that it might be a lack of funds rather than ambition? obviously it is lack of funds. A lack of funds made available. Why have I got the attacks when I am agreeing with earlier posts?
Tony Pine Posted 2 February 2010 Posted 2 February 2010 there was some great triangles and general passing in the first half v sheff utd. be nice if we could do that all the time. it relies on faith in the back four though.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.