Jump to content
IGNORED

Who’s next on the rank…

Davefevs

By Davefevs
in Football Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

petehinton

petehinton

Posted
Posted
44 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

…if Rob is out for a while?

Jamie Knight-Lebel?

Josh Campbell-Slowey?

or if double-barrel names, how about…

Duncan Idehen-Reprieve?

 

Gotta be JKL. I’ve nailed my flag to him for too long and need to made a fool of after he gives a pen away on his debut. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
firstdivision

firstdivision

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

…if Rob is out for a while?

Jamie Knight-Lebel?

Josh Campbell-Slowey?

or if double-barrel names, how about…

Duncan Idehen-Reprieve?

 

The squad is definitely going to be tested over the next month.

I know we tried to sign a centre back in January. But I think we're light in midfield as well, especially with JW and AS one booking away from a ban. Can't see the rationale behind the signing of Harry Cornick in January over a midfield player (with money quite tight). Perhaps we were trying. Anyway, it's left our squad strangely lop-sided. With Mehemti and Cornick cup-tied, the bench is going to be interesting for Man City.

(Btw - good old Gavin Ward - always said he was a top referee.)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LondonBristolian

LondonBristolian

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

…if Rob is out for a while?

Jamie Knight-Lebel?

Josh Campbell-Slowey?

or if double-barrel names, how about…

Duncan Idehen-Reprieve?

 

J K-L seems to be the most likely candidate for the squad player on the bench but, if we get more injuries and need a centre-back to start, there is an argument for Idehen in that he has played first team football for us before and did okay. Obviously I have no idea if the rumours around his attitude are true or how far his form has dropped over the last year. At least Williams, whilst not having his best game today, is doing enough to mean we can have Naismith back in defence once fit too.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hxj

Hxj

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, firstdivision said:

Can't see the rationale behind the signing of Harry Cornick in January over a midfield player (with money quite tight).

The club could have signed both and a centre back, but only Cornick's deal made financial sense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hxj

Hxj

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, firstdivision said:

They tried to sign a midfield player? Do you know that for a fact?

Depends what you mean by tried, and I never said they did.  I know for a 'fact' that the club is always in the market for what the club considers to be a player with potential at the right price.  I also know for a 'fact' that several midfielders were considered or suggested by agents etc.  It is also clear that the FFP position has been well and truly sorted (even without Semenyo's sale).  Therefore the purchases of Cornick and Mehmeti didn't stop other targets being signed, if they were available at the right price.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
NcnsBcfc

NcnsBcfc

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, City until i die said:

Naismith back in few weeks. Kalas in for now. Just hope for no more injuries now!!

From my viewpoint up in the gods today, you could see we missed Naismith in the centre.

James , and to a lesser extent Williams were excellent, but their collective distribution can still be a bit too slow. Scott has to come and get the ball, turn, and then drive the pace.

With Naismith back in the middle, the pace of passing to both wide men increases, alongside releasing Scott a bit more.

Great to see Kalas back, and he was solid. But it was obvious that Pring was under instruction to cover for him on the left hand side, and generally played 4-5 yards deeper than he would normally do.

We also miss Atkinson's breaks forward, something that Kalas has never been wholly comfortable doing.

I suppose the natural replacement on the bench would be Idehen (played ok there against Huddersfield last season for 25 mins). But i'm not sure NP trusts him at the moment, as he's working his way back with the under 21s.

I would keep Kalas there, and then have Naismith back into midfield again for the present. King on the bench can be cover in case of emergenct again (like today). 

The difficulty is if Scott or Williams gets those yellow cards and are out for a couple of games. Then King is the cover for both CM & CB.

All fun this isn't it.

Roll on the summer had getting those much needed squad replacements in.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
firstdivision

firstdivision

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Hxj said:

Depends what you mean by tried, and I never said they did.  I know for a 'fact' that the club is always in the market for what the club considers to be a player with potential at the right price.  I also know for a 'fact' that several midfielders were considered or suggested by agents etc.  It is also clear that the FFP position has been well and truly sorted (even without Semenyo's sale).  Therefore the purchases of Cornick and Mehmeti didn't stop other targets being signed, if they were available at the right price.

Well, tried as in they tried to bring in Currie from Wimbledon and O'Brien from Palace. But they failed because they couldn't agree terms with their clubs.

My point is that, to me, a midfield player was a priority, so you go after one, like we clearly went after Mehmeti (because he's what we needed). I don't think we needed Cornick and I'm surprised we didn't prioritise a midfield player over him. I thought you might have known that we pushed for someone but you obviously don't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hxj

Hxj

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, firstdivision said:

I don't think we needed Cornick and I'm surprised we didn't prioritise a midfield player over him. I thought you might have known that we pushed for someone but you obviously don't. 

With respect you don't know what I know and what I don't know, and I don't know what you know and what you don't know.  What I do know is that the signatures of both Mehmeti and Cornick did not have any impact on the signature of any midfield target.  I understand, but accept that I cannot prove, that all other targets were (at the point the window closed) outside the 'value criteria' for the club.  

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrahamC

GrahamC

Posted
Posted

@NcnsBcfc Not going to quote your entire post but think yesterday was the cut off for 10 bookings meaning a two match ban, so if (when?) Williams & Scott are booked again they miss a game now. Would expect us to continue to try to manage this situation.

It looks like Naismith isn’t going to be available for at least a fortnight so it will be interesting to see who is on the bench v Man City, we can name 9 subs, but only managed 8 v West Brom with numerous kids & even that number looks slightly optimistic with Mehmeti & Cornick both cup tied. Whether Idehen, Knight-Lebel or neither of them is on it will be instructive.

Wilson has now played twice for the 21s so I think there is far more chance of him being involved than Idehen (who is not cup tied) with Tanner filling in at CB.

I am actually ok with our squad numbers, if one of Atkinson or Naismith was available I think that would be fine.

Of yesterday’s bench 4 don’t have a contract for next season yet, likewise 2 of our starters, one for one replacements (or contract renewals) would see us fine.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
View from the Dolman

View from the Dolman

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

@NcnsBcfc Not going to quote your entire post but think yesterday was the cut off for 10 bookings meaning a two match ban, so if (when?) Williams & Scott are booked again they miss a game now.

The cutoff is after 37 games in the EFL as per The FA's Player Essentials: https://www.thefa.com/football-rules-governance/discipline/player-essentials

Getting a 10th booking after the cut-off wouldn't mean any ban unless 15 are reached before the end of the season.  

 

2023-02-19 10_08_37-essential-information-for-players-2022-23-english.pdf.png

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BigTone

BigTone

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Hxj said:

With respect you don't know what I know and what I don't know, and I don't know what you know and what you don't know.  What I do know is that the signatures of both Mehmeti and Cornick did not have any impact on the signature of any midfield target.  I understand, but accept that I cannot prove, that all other targets were (at the point the window closed) outside the 'value criteria' for the club.  

Are you in the know or out of the know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shuffle

Shuffle

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, GrahamC said:

@NcnsBcfc Not going to quote your entire post but think yesterday was the cut off for 10 bookings meaning a two match ban, so if (when?) Williams & Scott are booked again they miss a game now. Would expect us to continue to try to manage this situation.

It looks like Naismith isn’t going to be available for at least a fortnight so it will be interesting to see who is on the bench v Man City, we can name 9 subs, but only managed 8 v West Brom with numerous kids & even that number looks slightly optimistic with Mehmeti & Cornick both cup tied. Whether Idehen, Knight-Lebel or neither of them is on it will be instructive.

Wilson has now played twice for the 21s so I think there is far more chance of him being involved than Idehen (who is not cup tied) with Tanner filling in at CB.

I am actually ok with our squad numbers, if one of Atkinson or Naismith was available I think that would be fine.

Of yesterday’s bench 4 don’t have a contract for next season yet, likewise 2 of our starters, one for one replacements (or contract renewals) would see us fine.

 

 

 

13 hours ago, NcnsBcfc said:

From my viewpoint up in the gods today, you could see we missed Naismith in the centre.

James , and to a lesser extent Williams were excellent, but their collective distribution can still be a bit too slow. Scott has to come and get the ball, turn, and then drive the pace.

With Naismith back in the middle, the pace of passing to both wide men increases, alongside releasing Scott a bit more.

Great to see Kalas back, and he was solid. But it was obvious that Pring was under instruction to cover for him on the left hand side, and generally played 4-5 yards deeper than he would normally do.

We also miss Atkinson's breaks forward, something that Kalas has never been wholly comfortable doing.

I suppose the natural replacement on the bench would be Idehen (played ok there against Huddersfield last season for 25 mins). But i'm not sure NP trusts him at the moment, as he's working his way back with the under 21s.

I would keep Kalas there, and then have Naismith back into midfield again for the present. King on the bench can be cover in case of emergenct again (like today). 

The difficulty is if Scott or Williams gets those yellow cards and are out for a couple of games. Then King is the cover for both CM & CB.

All fun this isn't it.

Roll on the summer had getting those much needed squad replacements in.

 

Squad depth is a huge issue with King now covering CB & MF as you say. I’m not sure from what I’ve seen if any of the u21 cbs are ready but guess we might find out. I’d assume Pring would move centrally with JD coming in at LB if anything happens to kalas or Vyner.  Big risk not strengthening at CB before window shut & could see some interesting team selection coming up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Harry

Harry

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, NcnsBcfc said:

 

Great to see Kalas back, and he was solid. But it was obvious that Pring was under instruction to cover for him on the left hand side, and generally played 4-5 yards deeper than he would normally do. 

 

Interesting point. My thoughts on Pring being a tad deeper and narrower was to combat their tricky wide men. 
On both sides, with any combination of Clarke/Roberts/Diallo, it looked to me that we tried to ‘double up’ on them as much as we could and not let them cut inside. 
 

Of course, for Clarke’s goal we left Tanner 1 on 1 - which I think was the one and only time it happened. And we paid for it. 
 

Problem here was that Vyner went too high into the opposition half but Kalas didn’t come across and cover. It left a huge gap for the pass into Clarke and he was one on one. 
 

I’ve noticed recently that Vyner & Atkinson have done really well ‘covering’ each other when one goes high or wide. When Vyner went high, I think Atkinson would’ve dropped back and to the right about 10-15 yards and would’ve been in a better position to prevent Clarke cutting inside. Kalas obviously isn’t back ‘fully at it’ yet and this little lapse of positional focus ended up costing us. 
I thought the plan looked very much to make sure we doubled up on the wide men and that relies on the CB’s coming across, which Kalas didn’t do in that one moment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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