Jump to content
IGNORED

Lee Tomlin's ribs...


BS4 on Tour...

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, spudski said:

Also puts an end to the thought, that we set up teams because we are worried about the opposition. Nice to see LJ telling him to do his thing and let them worry.

Hmmm not sure it does. Remember we have constant tinkering between games. I think it puts to bed that LT has a free role - just as he should - not more than that though I don't think else perhaps we'd have a settled 11. 

I am not criticising at all. We are Bristol City, our best 11 is not the best 11 for every situation and this is a marginal league where small gains differentiate between 3 and 0 points. We should be worrying about the opposition and looking to counter there threats whilst relying upon a free-role Tomlin and TA and one of the other 2 advanced players to make the difference. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, 29AR said:

Hmmm not sure it does. Remember we have constant tinkering between games. I think it puts to bed that LT has a free role - just as he should - not more than that though I don't think else perhaps we'd have a settled 11. 

I am not criticising at all. We are Bristol City, our best 11 is not the best 11 for every situation and this is a marginal league where small gains differentiate between 3 and 0 points. We should be worrying about the opposition and looking to counter there threats whilst relying upon a free-role Tomlin and TA and one of the other 2 advanced players to make the difference. 

But by worrying about oppositions and constantly changing the team line up,  are we letting the team bond enough to actually play as a unit? 

As recent games I've watched at home the players seem not in the same channel of thought and dont provide enough movement off the ball with lots of square passing.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, miketh2nd said:

But by worrying about oppositions and constantly changing the team line up,  are we letting the team bond enough to actually play as a unit? 

As recent games I've watched at home the players seem not in the same channel of thought and dont provide enough movement off the ball with lots of square passing.  

You are absolutely right.

But in retort I would say we have a young squad - today we will not see the best of them and promotion this season is outside at best.

However after rotating for 46 games, consolidating our foundation, I think by next season we would have let the team bond enough to play as a unit interchangeably - perhaps even by Feb/March time.

I suppose it depends upon where the club sees itself. If promotion this year is the aim then perhaps we are not best serving ourselves, if sustainable growth is the aim then we are best serving ourself. If the chequebook is open in Jan and June, perhaps we should be less conservative.

I think both approaches are excusable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 29AR said:

Hmmm not sure it does. Remember we have constant tinkering between games. I think it puts to bed that LT has a free role - just as he should - not more than that though I don't think else perhaps we'd have a settled 11. 

I am not criticising at all. We are Bristol City, our best 11 is not the best 11 for every situation and this is a marginal league where small gains differentiate between 3 and 0 points. We should be worrying about the opposition and looking to counter there threats whilst relying upon a free-role Tomlin and TA and one of the other 2 advanced players to make the difference. 

If margins are so small you'd think having a relatively settled, cohesive team, where players are used to playing with the majority around them, would be to our advantage.

There's little doubt in my mind that the constant tinkering is detrimental, and plays a notable part in our unimpressive and often disjointed first half performances.

Worrying about the opposition is defeatist imo.,, yes, you point out their strengths and how to counter them, but you need to instill confidence in the team that they are a match for anyone. This comes from picking your best team as often as possible, giving them every opportunity to gel, and by confirming to them that if they play well under the consistent formation and tactics you have drummed into them, then they have nothing to fear from any team in the division.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

If margins are so small you'd think having a relatively settled, cohesive team, where players are used to playing with the majority around them, would be to our advantage.

There's little doubt in my mind that the constant tinkering is detrimental, and plays a notable part in our unimpressive and often disjointed first half performances.

Worrying about the opposition is defeatist imo.,, yes, you point out their strengths and how to counter them, but you need to instill confidence in the team that they are a match for anyone. This comes from picking your best team as often as possible, giving them every opportunity to gel, and by confirming to them that if they play well under the consistent formation and tactics you have drummed into them, then they have nothing to fear from any team in the division.

Square pegs in square holes - this counts as much for our own approach as it does countering the opposition.

I can't agree it is defeatist. We do not have the strongest first 11 and preferred system for all scenarios and all opposition - we are Bristol city lest we forget. That's an arrogance we should not have. 

I wholly agree it is short term detrimental. Not long term. We have a lot of young players, each needing experience to kick on and develop. Settling on a preferred 11 and rigidly sticking to it can never be the way to develop them. Perhaps that's why Lee's dad had a shocking record at bringing them through. We need to rotate to see how the likes of O'Dowda kick on, Patterson settle, Brownhill develops his role etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a difference to worrying about the opposition and setting up with the best players to beat the opposition.

Having a settled 11 doesn't mean it's your best 11 against each opposition.

You look at the opposition and find it's weaknesses, and find a matchday squad of players that are the best to beat those opponents. Each opposition is different.

If we were playing against the same team each week it would make sense.

Cotts pretty much played the same team, and opposition managers said they knew how to set up against us, as they knew what they were going to be facing.

It's the modern way to rotate players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/11/2016 at 17:19, Nogbad the Bad said:

If margins are so small you'd think having a relatively settled, cohesive team, where players are used to playing with the majority around them, would be to our advantage.

There's little doubt in my mind that the constant tinkering is detrimental, and plays a notable part in our unimpressive and often disjointed first half performances.

Worrying about the opposition is defeatist imo.,, yes, you point out their strengths and how to counter them, but you need to instill confidence in the team that they are a match for anyone. This comes from picking your best team as often as possible, giving them every opportunity to gel, and by confirming to them that if they play well under the consistent formation and tactics you have drummed into them, then they have nothing to fear from any team in the division.

The argument is though that your best team against one side is not necessarily the best team against another , hence the rotation.

Personally I like to see a well oiled unit that knows each other's strength's and weaknesses and is n't just a collection of players wearing the same coloured kits .

Is this possible in these days of high energy , high stress games ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...