The Casual Connoisseur Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 The first game has gone and the major thing that troubled me was our complete and utter lack of width, there was no overlapping so no crosses, everything went through the middle or not as it were. When we gave the ball away they broke with ease through the huge gaps that appeared down the flanks and in the middle. Personally I thought clayton did well but for me Tommy was awesome his experience and footballing brain is outstanding, when he is fully fit he will be superb. 3-5-2 anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stylus Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 the only width was the wing back. When they went forward the ball came inside every time as no one not even Murray went wide too support them. This resulted in crosses from miles away which were wasted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fat Controller Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 No. Keep 4-3-3. Al we need is murray & Lita (or whoever plays) to stick to the touchline. Personally, despite his goal i would drop Lita for Anyinsah on the left. Otherwise the team looks good, otherwise just opening day nerves & stifled by Torquay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Browner Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 Maybe if Woodman got off his lazy @ss and crossed the halfway line some crosses might come in from the left. Gets the ball, casually produces the same pass, doesn't then continue his run into space for the return or to take one of the defenders away. Just stands there, admires himself and thinks that's my job done!! As for his corners, front defender anyone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jay mizel Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 YES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mickey Bells left foot Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 i was thinking the very same thing during the game, woodman hasnt really got the crossing abilty at the moment (bell should be teaching him) so its not surprising our crosses were poor, and what the hell were those pathetic little chips/dinks over the torquay defence all about, i think only 2 actually worked all the rest either went to the keeper or our player was offside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zookeeper Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 Maybe if Woodman got off his lazy @ss and crossed the halfway line some crosses might come in from the left. Gets the ball, casually produces the same pass, doesn't then continue his run into space for the return or to take one of the defenders away. Just stands there, admires himself and thinks that's my job done!! As for his corners, front defender anyone? ← His corners were frustrating to say the least. As for width, it has to come from the full backs initially linking with the wide three and Woodman did not do this effectively enough. Smith did but when had options for passes always seem to take the wrong option. For me the midfield was the area where we lacked the width but I guess that is part of the formation. I also think that the midfiled was too flat and that was the major problem. I think if a different player to tinman was playing we would have more passing triangles sucking the midfielders in to exploit more of the width. Too much went though him and it was all a bit obvious. Generally unless Fortune beat his man, with some fancy footwork or luck, we allowed the midfiled enough time to regroup and cover the wide passes that we did play. I think that all of these can and will be improved with a few more games. It's not quite time to panic yet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazred Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 The first game has gone and the major thing that troubled me was our complete and utter lack of width, there was no overlapping so no crosses, everything went through the middle or not as it were. When we gave the ball away they broke with ease through the huge gaps that appeared down the flanks and in the middle. Personally I thought clayton did well but for me Tommy was awesome his experience and footballing brain is outstanding, when he is fully fit he will be superb. 3-5-2 anyone. ← Id stick with 4-3-3. But ONLY if we are going to play players on the outside of the front 3 who can beat players and cross the ball. I dont see the point in playing a striker in a wide position, i.e Lita when his main ability is finishing, not beating players and providing chances. BT needs to sort out his best front 3, and to be honest i dont think he really knows at this moment. Say we get this target man, presumably he will play in the middle of the 3, so wheres Heffernan going to go...out wide...i cant see him skinning a full back and whipping in a cross can you? The attack was the problem last season and after seeing us score plenty in pre season i was confident we could put 2 goals in everytime we played in this league.....i hope I'm still right but the early signs are not good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Browner Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 If you think back to Bradley Orr's shot in the first half which just went over, Smith made a run up the wing taking a defender with him which allowed Orr to run into the vacated space and get his shot away. That's all Woodman has to do. Basically Lita always had two blokes on him cos Woodman never ventured forward, their right midfield player could sit back on Lita when we had poccession. Just a little bit of effort would be nice, that's all we're asking. Mickey Bell who isn't too far away from being twice the age of Woodman would have covered more ground and showed a bit more purpose in his runs. Woodman was the same in the final, missing!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BCFC Matt Posted August 9, 2004 Share Posted August 9, 2004 I said the exact same. Playing a 4-3-3 sounds simple enough and may seem like it gives us and edge but IMHO i reckon we'd be far better off with a 3-5-2 where the wing-backs can actually get to the touchline and get more-effective balls into the box as opposed to relying on the full-backs to cross from deep. A 3-5-2 provides a solid base from where we can have 2/3 players joining the attack from midfield whilst having enough cover in the event of a counter attack from the opposition to get the ball back. My team would be:- .................Phillips .........Coles....Butler....Hill..... Murray...Doherty...Tinnion..Orr...Bell/Anyinsah ..........Gillespie....Heffernan..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.