Should we persist with overlapping right and left backs?

[Flagon]

We appear to be caught at the moment with wanting our right and left backs to be the best right and left backs at defending and the best right and left wingers at overlapping and crossing pin point perfect balls in. 

I'm not convinced this is necessarily our best strategy. Matthews would appear to be our most competent at doing this role but it makes us lopsided and very predictable. I can see Johnson desperately wants Bryan to fulfill this role too but he is way off his game at doing this at the moment and Golbourne is definitely more suited to standard left back. 

I think we should just re focus our back four as just that. We always get caught on either side. 

Now it could be that people may think by doing that our opportunities may be reduced and maybe like yesterday's game Wilbs wouldn't have got the opportunity without Matthews doing that. But then what are our wider players doing, filling in while our full backs show them how it's done? 

I really think we need to be looking at quality wide players and another striker in January if this is how we want to play and keep the defence as a standard back four. 

[Londoner]

What's more important is a consistent approach at left back...literally chopping and changing every week no wonder the players are so inconsistent

Give Golborne a run....5 or so games on the trot and rest Bryan for a bit.

[Flagon]

5 minutes ago, Londoner said:

What's more important is a consistent approach at left back...literally chopping and changing every week no wonder the players are so inconsistent

Give Golborne a run....5 or so games on the trot and rest Bryan for a bit.

Yeah would definitely agree we've got to stop the chopping and changing but I think it's the role that's expected of them too which isn't working. We need to expect more from the wide players, if they aren't good enough then it's time to drop and replace in January. 

[Davefevs]

23 minutes ago, Londoner said:

What's more important is a consistent approach at left back...literally chopping and changing every week no wonder the players are so inconsistent

Give Golborne a run....5 or so games on the trot and rest Bryan for a bit.

Magnússon tends to look more assured with Golbourne on his left side too.

[JoeAman08]

You'd think with two holding midfielders you could afford to send your fullbacks forward but our midfielders aren't athletic enough. Our team isn't athletic enough. 

[Flagon]

22 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

You'd think with two holding midfielders you could afford to send your fullbacks forward but our midfielders aren't athletic enough. Our team isn't athletic enough. 

Yes exactly. I can see what Johnson wants but the players don't seem to up to it. That's why at this moment I would prefer a pretty standard back four of Matthews, Flint, Magners and Golbourne and then maybe Reid, Pack, O'Neil and O'Dowda. With Tomlin tucked in just behind Tammy. I wouldn't expect Reid to play as a winger but he should have enough movement with Pack and Tomlin to create triangles, as should O'Dowda, O'Neil, and Tomlin. O'Dowda would probably have the pace to mix it up with the right pass put through to him.

We don't seem to have any wide players that can take on a left or right back without us overlapping and then leaving ourselves exposed. 

[aa_bcfc]

Could try 3 at the back - Moore, flint, maggers. Matthews and Bryan wing backs. 

[Cov 77]

4 hours ago, aa_bcfc said:

Could try 3 at the back - Moore, flint, maggers. Matthews and Bryan wing backs. 

To be honest been thinking this for a while, because of last season's nonsense with Cotterill people are reluctant to think that way, but with 3 actual centre halves, Moore is definitely a centre half never a full back , we can actually defend , the wing backs then are playing where best suited , too often the full backs and wingers seem to get in each others way, and allows three in the middle and two up , preferably Pack  and  O'neill with Tomlin sat just ahead , hopefully the front two would include a new striker Asap

I do think by the way the 'new' striker needs to be experienced , two kids up there will be sussed out soon enough , Wilby coming helped a lot yesterday and a experienced but younger version would be ideal.

[1960maaan]

5 hours ago, aa_bcfc said:

Could try 3 at the back - Moore, flint, maggers. Matthews and Bryan wing backs. 

 

1 hour ago, Cov 77 said:

To be honest been thinking this for a while, because of last season's nonsense with Cotterill people are reluctant to think that way, but with 3 actual centre halves, Moore is definitely a centre half never a full back , we can actually defend , the wing backs then are playing where best suited , too often the full backs and wingers seem to get in each others way, and allows three in the middle and two up , preferably Pack  and  O'neill with Tomlin sat just ahead , hopefully the front two would include a new striker Asap

I do think by the way the 'new' striker needs to be experienced , two kids up there will be sussed out soon enough , Wilby coming helped a lot yesterday and a experienced but younger version would be ideal.

Said many times, there is nothing wrong with the system IF it's played properly. Cott's had everyone but Flint bomb forward when we won the ball, it ended up like school boy football at times..... win ball , charge.... lose ball retreat !!! 2 entire teams running at Flint and FF was pathetic. In Mags and Moore you have 2 mobile CB's to play either side of AF. JB is better as a WB imo and Mathew's or Brownhill on the other side looks balanced. Gives you a lot of options further forward too.