Should we be expecting more from James & King?

[CliftonCliff]

34 minutes ago, Clutton Caveman said:

I wonder if you would have agreed with moving them on if you knew who we would get as replacements

Not sure what your point is. Who are you thinking of, specifically?

[Davefevs]

51 minutes ago, Edgy Red said:

I like James but i'm not going over the top regarding his performances to date, as others have.

However the main problem for him, and for all of our other midfielders is the lack of options upfront. They don't have a target man to hit, they don't have a quick striker who is looking to play off the shoulder and they don't have wide men who hug the touchline demanding the ball. Therefore when looking forward there options are fairly non existant!

Brian Tinnion is my favourite City player of years gone by, but even he will admit that Scott Murray made his job easy at times by constantly making clever runs and using his pace.

Whilst i acknowledge this is a rebuild, the old saying "attack is the best form of defence" would be worth remembering!

Agree.

In the main we haven’t got enough controlled possession to build congestive cohesive attaching moves / threat.

if you ignore the goal for the moment….this came from a good press, a clearance under pressure where two or three quick passes (on our left wing) resulted in us being able to open out to the right wing inside their half.

We also see that with good territory gained (in a good shape) how good movement then enables us to create a chance. In this case a goal.  We also see James getting into the box in case there’s a chance to pull it back.  It’s pretty simple but very effective, and constructed off the back of two or three quick passes.

The Tanner / Wells chance was created from a couple of quick headers, Tanner bursting through, crossing (to nobody) but then us picking up the loose ball in their third…with several bodies forward.

When we attack in ones and twos, it’s difficult to string anything together.  I think we need to get up the pitch so James and whoever plays alongside him have less distance to join the attack and less distance to support the defence.

Edited October 18, 2021 by Davefevs

[KegCity]

Asking "Why did we let Paterson go?" is a very reactionary comment. Blew hot and cold his entire time here, certainly a match winner on his day, his day comes along twice a month tops. Don't really know what more you can ask from James, been available all season which nobody else can say and he's been very consistent keeping things ticking. The jury's still out for me on King, don't think he was brought in with the intention of playing as regularly as he has.

[Clutton Caveman]

23 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree.

In the main we haven’t got enough controlled possession to build congestive attaching moves / threat.

if you ignore the goal for the moment….this came from a good press, a clearance under pressure where two or three quick passes (on our left wing) resulted in us being able to open out to the right wing inside their half.

We also see that with good territory gained (in a good shape) how good movement then enables us to create a chance. In this case a goal.  We also see James getting into the box in case there’s a chance to pull it back.  It’s pretty simple but very effective, and constructed off the back of two or three quick passes.

The Tanner / Wells chance was created from a couple of quick headers, Tanner bursting through, crossing (to nobody) but then us picking up the loose ball in their third…with several bodies forward.

When we attack in ones and twos, it’s difficult to string anything together.  I think we need to get up the pitch so James and whoever plays alongside him have less distance to join the attack and less distance to support the defence.

Problem is that our defence is reluctant to play a high line and condense the play because we are vulnerable to fast strikers and midfielders running past ours. When the defence plays deep we give our 2 midfielders a massive amount of space to fill. This year we are very short of options and NP just has to get enough results to keep us up. Hopefully if we can show a stable set up we can attract some better quality next season and our kids will be 1 year older.

[brady bunch]

Massive fan of James and still think he has to be first on the team-sheet, but and its a big BUT, he did not look match fit on Saturday and seems to be gaining weight in "not a good way", not yet in Tomlin territory, but one to watch....

[Red-Robbo]

4 hours ago, Rob k said:

Korey wasn’t dependable week in week out as he was often out injured - hence why not was the right decision to move him on 

 

I think if you could magic back the younger Korey Smith, he'd be your man.  KS had a good availability record for us until his last two seasons.

Thing is, he's pushing 31 now.

[aa_bcfc]

4 hours ago, CliftonCliff said:

Absolutely spot-on. It was an opportunist deal in response to an unexpected and financially attractive offer. My impression at the time was that the player did not want to leave the club, nor did LJ particularly want to lose him.

It had Ashton's finger prints all over it. Improved the bank balance, near-fatally weakened the midfield, especially when the other departures mentioned above are taken into consideration.

Dead right. 

[brad blit]

Regarding King, in terms of playing style he’s no Williams or Massengo, but he’s quite clever positionally. Watch him carefully and he does win a lot of second/loose balls and does always try to make himself available for simple passes. Plus he has contributed with a few goals/assists early in the season. He’s a good option who came as a free and on low wages, and is probably a good model pro to have around the club, but he won’t stay beyond this year