Right Back

[spudski]

5 minutes ago, billywedlock said:

I understand about evolving tactics and positions, but , that I would assume is possible if players are coached from a very early age multiple positions. They do that in Germany but England ? Not yet from what I have seen. In the last group of games we have struggled to get any rhythm into our game (LJ says) and that comes from confidence, the ability to be brave (something else he said)  . If you change too much, and the players cannot keep up, you risk making that task harder. We have gone from total tactical intransigence to the other extreme. The ability to transform the team during games is clearly becoming more evident, the ability to switch rapidly from defence to attack, and how to pick a way through the oft used 2 blocks of 4 by away teams essential. But whilst I can see how Smith, O'neil, Reid, Freeman and Pack work in an evolving midfield, I am yet to understand the other three. But then none of them has managed to string together a number of 90 min appearances so that will not help, and they are young and learning. LJ has tried with those players signed a 4-2-3-1 with the obvious choices for the holding midfielders, and a very mobile three , linking to Tammy. That is where I saw O'dowda and Patterson for example fitting in well with Tomlin. I know he has used it on occasions, but maybe he cannot get his starting 11 where he needs it to be yet or the players to use it well enough. Hence he has tried other approaches, certainly the midfield 3 are not linking to Tammy, so he tried 2 up front on Saturday. It will not help if the full backs are not on their game, as they have (in the modern game) in my view, the toughest multi tasking role of any outfield player. If they are not performing, then it messes with the rest of the team performance. Be interesting to see how we line up against Brighton and a very "old fashioned" 4-4-2 , 7 clean sheets in 9 unbeaten matches. (Newcastle also playing 4-4-2 (1-1) most games too. With Mathews out of sorts, LJ may defer to 4-4-1-1 himself.

Never mind about formations , LJ will have been pulling his hair out about our throw in leading the Barnsley equaliser, and the defending on the byline that allowed Hammil to cut inside. Both pretty basic errors he would be hoping we would not be making 2-1 up away from home with 3 min left. 

 

I agree with a lot of that mate...and I think we as fans will be frustrated as much as LJ.

But i'm sure most fans will see, that we are trying to develop a young squad, and it will take time and there will be errors. It's the nature of the beast. We are far from the finished article.

It's nice we have the options and the flexibility.

I for one am enjoying the ride and the development...and am over the moon at our progress in the past year.

4 minutes ago, Londoner said:

Against promotion candidates and one of the best sides in the division? Mark Little was fit and benched.

Sorry but he was no where near ready, didn't start again, and is now a top Accrington. That is one that LJ did get very wrong

I think LJ got it spot on...he blooded the kid and gave him the experience. He found out where his weaknesses were...gave the kid a level to which he now knows he has to work towards. How else are these kids going to find out?

You can't keep playing them in the Academy and them doing well and never giving them a chance in the first team. Hence McCoulsky being given a start recently.

It's one of the draws for young kids to sign for us...knowing they will get a chance if they keep improving.

No point having an Academy otherwise.

[Londoner]

2 minutes ago, spudski said:

I agree with a lot of that mate...and I think we as fans will be frustrated as much as LJ.

But i'm sure most fans will see, that we are trying to develop a young squad, and it will take time and there will be errors. It's the nature of the beast. We are far from the finished article.

It's nice we have the options and the flexibility.

I for one am enjoying the ride and the development...and am over the moon at our progress in the past year.

I think LJ got it spot on...he blooded the kid and gave him the experience. He found out where his weaknesses were...gave the kid a level to which he now knows he has to work towards. How else are these kids going to find out?

You can't keep playing them in the Academy and them doing well and never giving them a chance in the first team. Hence McCoulsky being given a start recently.

It's one of the draws for young kids to sign for us...knowing they will get a chance if they keep improving.

No point having an Academy otherwise.

Well that's fact that's SL came out an questioned LJ directly about the "free game" comment contradicts your views.

I am all for the playing of youngsters.....but against one of the best sides in the division when in a relegation battle....bizarre decision.

He was directly at fault for 3 goals....he had a shocker

[LondonBristolian]

10 minutes ago, Londoner said:

Well that's fact that's SL came out an questioned LJ directly about the "free game" comment contradicts your views.

I am all for the playing of youngsters.....but against one of the best sides in the division when in a relegation battle....bizarre decision.

He was directly at fault for 3 goals....he had a shocker

The fact you think Mark Little was fully fit contradicts your views somewhat.  He'd missed the previous game and had a late fitness test then decided he wasn't ready to start.  Pretty sure when Little came on in that game he showed he wasn't really fit to start...  Maybe he would have done better than Vyner or maybe he wouldn't have done but the idea that that LJ didn't pick a fully fit player to give a youngster a game is just making stuff up...

[Londoner]

2 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

The fact you think Mark Little was fully fit contradicts your views somewhat.  He'd missed the previous game and had a late fitness test then decided he wasn't ready to start.  Pretty sure when Little came on in that game he showed he wasn't really fit to start...  Maybe he would have done better than Vyner or maybe he wouldn't have done but the idea that that LJ didn't pick a fully fit player to give a youngster a game is just making stuff up...

Proof in the outcome....and the fact he didn't a start again. Yet.

[Londoner]

2 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

I thought Matthews played well against Blackburn. I would not want him here permanently if he is like what people are suggesting, but not sure where people get their info from. I really don't think signing a right back should be a priority when we have moore, Brownhill, smith and vyner will be back when Matthews loan runs out. I think Brownhill could potentially be a quality right back going by that man of the match performance against forest. Smith was a right back for quite a while at Oldham and moore looks like he could be a right back in the future as he isnt the tallest for a centre back. Id work with what we have got in that position till the end of the season at least. I think we only need a striker in January.

Brownhill was caught out a few times against forest, mainly with positioning.....if we are going to push on then we need someone's proven in that position.

[LondonBristolian]

3 minutes ago, Londoner said:

Proof in the outcome....and the fact he didn't a start again. Yet.

Of course proof isn't in the outcome 'cos we don't know what the outcome of starting Little would've been. Perhaps Little would've done better, perhaps he'd have been exposed or perhaps he'd have aggravated his injury and been out for longer 'cos he wasn't fit to play 90 minutes.  Fact is we don't know.

Nonetheless that's actually besides my point.  What my point is not whether Vyner or Little should have started.  It's that you're being massively disingenuous in ignoring the fact that LJ had perfectly valid reasons not to start Little and in pretending he was fully fit. 

[devoncider]

Matthews was a class act against QPR, and has done okay from what I've seen of him at the Gate, this year and last.

He may well have had a shocker yesterday, but I'd still have him as our best RB - only Ayling was close and of course he is now at Leeds.

Vyner may be the answer LT, but in the here and now I'd play Matthews there.

[LondonBristolian]

Am I the only one who feels Matthews' performance against QPR to be a tad overstated?  He was decent enough but I thought us not having the option of bringing Little on to give us width (as LJ did against Fulham in the League Cup in another game where we were being thwarted going through the middle) was a major in the fact we weren't able to make the changes needed to get us back into the game...

[devoncider]

6 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Am I the only one who feels Matthews' performance against QPR to be a tad overstated?  He was decent enough but I thought us not having the option of bringing Little on to give us width (as LJ did against Fulham in the League Cup in another game where we were being thwarted going through the middle) was a major in the fact we weren't able to make the changes needed to get us back into the game...

goes back to it being a game of opinions I suppose..

I was at Loftus Road with a Spurs supporting mate, and we both thought he was the best player in a red shirt (admittedly he didn't have too much competition in that regard).

He may not go on the bulldozing runs forward like Little, but his control, touch and final ball is better than ML.

Matthew's pace is also underrated too, a couple of times he has shown good speed to chase down a winger and diffuse a counter attack

[Chairman Mao]

Matthews is an excellent player. Was very good vs QPR and Blackburn. 

[Olé]

2 hours ago, Londoner said:

He wasn't good at MK, he was fortunate that the they didn't make the most of his poor positioning despite getting the chances.

Couldn't believe it the first time you wrote it, so reading this second description, I went back to check what I wrote at the time to make sure I'm not going mad "Thought Vyner was exceptional for a teenage debutant, thinking back to Aaron Brown, Dominic Barclay type debuts, our academy players are obviously now quality technique wise and ready to be pitched in, was very assured bar a couple of loose touches second half."

I can remember vaguely the loose touches and don't remember them taking much away from how technically comfortable he otherwise looked, something historically our young players have never done. Brighton wasn't good granted but how you can write him off across both games is beyond harsh. For what its worth I watched that game from a sideline view in the main stand and don't recall any comment on his positioning.

[Londoner]

11 minutes ago, Olé said:

Couldn't believe it the first time you wrote it, so reading this second description, I went back to check what I wrote at the time to make sure I'm not going mad "Thought Vyner was exceptional for a teenage debutant, thinking back to Aaron Brown, Dominic Barclay type debuts, our academy players are obviously now quality technique wise and ready to be pitched in, was very assured bar a couple of loose touches second half."

I can remember vaguely the loose touches and don't remember them taking much away from how technically comfortable he otherwise looked, something historically our young players have never done. Brighton wasn't good granted but how you can write him off across both games is beyond harsh. For what its worth I watched that game from a sideline view in the main stand and don't recall any comment on his positioning.

Where have I written him off?

Brighton bough he has said, MK he was caught with balls over the top in numerous occasions.

[LondonBristolian]

1 hour ago, devoncider said:

goes back to it being a game of opinions I suppose..

I was at Loftus Road with a Spurs supporting mate, and we both thought he was the best player in a red shirt (admittedly he didn't have too much competition in that regard).

He may not go on the bulldozing runs forward like Little, but his control, touch and final ball is better than ML.

Matthew's pace is also underrated too, a couple of times he has shown good speed to chase down a winger and diffuse a counter attack

It's a tricky one.  I'd actually agree he did what he did as well as anyone on the night.  I just felt that what he didn't do was the specific thing we needed against QPR - especially once their left-back went off and was replaced by a terrified looking substitute.  If we'd had a right-back who could push forward to support Tomlin, I really think it might have made the difference.  

[Juan Domingo Roldan]

Ayling doing brilliantly at LUFC.

[Londoner]

3 minutes ago, Juan Domingo Roldan said:

Ayling doing brilliantly at LUFC.

Absolutely got him partly to thank for the 3 points earlier in the season.

[Aaron-Bcfc]

14 hours ago, JasonM88 said:

I disagree, for me he was class last season in most of the games he played, barring wolves. 

Fulham away, poor. People said he was brilliant because he cleared one off the line. Should've been more goals down at half time and everything was going through his side.

Hull away, poor.

Brentford away, awful. Worse than yesterday, tore apart all game by Canos.

That's 3 games that stand out in my mind where he was noticeably bad last season, I wasn't at Wolves.

[JasonM88]

33 minutes ago, Aaron-Bcfc said:

Fulham away, poor. People said he was brilliant because he cleared one off the line. Should've been more goals down at half time and everything was going through his side.

Hull away, poor.

Brentford away, awful. Worse than yesterday, tore apart all game by Canos.

That's 3 games that stand out in my mind where he was noticeably bad last season, I wasn't at Wolves.

Fulham away class.

hull away, everyone was shit, most definitely can't pin it on him.

Brentford I wasn't there. 

[robin_unreliant]

Sorry but doesn't Zak Vyner normally play at CB but was given a debut at RB? Same with Moore who I thought looked much better in his preferred CB position against Hull.

RB is clearly a problem for us as we have played two youngsters out of position there. However I think the lack of width in midfield also leaves them a bit exposed.

Against Hull I was struck by how damgerous their crossing was. We have brought in O'Dowda and Patterson who both have shown ability at times. However neither seems like a proper wide player who can put in a decent cross. So I think we need a proper, specialist wide player on the right of midfield before a RB.

I find it really frustrating that we seem unable to play with any width and rely on LT to thread it through the middle way too often. I also think this may contribute to our full backs and defence generally getting put under pressure. Joe Bryan seems to be the only player who has the ability to put in a decent cross but playing LB restricts him getting forward too.