Team v The Gas

[Bristol Boy]

GJ reckons "one or two" will be back but "two or three" would be pushing it, so I'll take him at his word and look at McAllister & McCombe making it.

On Saturday we had:Weale, McAllister, McCombe, Murray, Russell & Showunmi all in the physios room.

We could do with Murray as both of our other right wing options are cup tied in Wilson & Betsy, however, overall, I think that the player we need most is McAllister and that McCombe would be handy if he played or he was on the bench as a defensive or attacking option.

We know that we've got defensive cover and (touch wood)we haven't conceded a goal since McCombe left the field against Blackpool despite two of the three games being away at in form opposition.

Unless Basso's injured, Weales injury which is minor, won't be important.Russells hamstring won't be key unless Skuse is injured again and the addition of the hard working Smith makes Showunmis return important yet not desperate against 4th Divsion opposition.

Our only danger is a GJ tactical cock up like the first leg.That's not a dig at GJ who's coped brilliantly with players missing for various reasons this season however he, like all of us, can get it wrong and I'm not joking when I say that Rovers had their best chance of a victory last week.

Now, ex pros have told me that it doesn't matter what formation you play, the players still have to play well.I agree 100% but would add that it does matter and if it doesn't lets give it a try against the Gas with Cole Skuse & Craig Woodman up front and Jamie McCombe on the left wing!! :noexpression:

Looking at the team it's difficult to see how we can go 4-4-2 without Murray, Wilson & Betsy and please God we don't put Skuse wide right.

So, here are some options from those probably available:

3-5-2

..............BASSO..................

..............KEOGH....CAREY.........FONTAINE.......

ORR.......JOHNSON..............SKUSE.........NOBLE...........MCALLISTER.........

.......BROOKER.............JEVONS..........

SUBS

THOMAS

MCCOMBE

ANDREWS

WOODMAN or ARTUS

MYRIE-WILLIAMS or SMITH

We could always bring back McCombe and replace Orr at RWB with Carey but it seems a pity to disrupt what is looking a solid, well organised defence.

If GJ wants to experiment with a player in the hole, it could be

4-3-1-2

..............BASSO..................

ORR...........MCCOMBE.....CAREY............MCALLISTER....

............JOHNSON................SKUSE.......NOBLE.............

................JEVONS...............

................BROOKER...............ANDREWS........

SUBS

THOMAS

SMITH

FONTAINE

MYRIE-WILLIAMS

KEOGH

The only option I can see for 4-4-2 would be switching LJ to the right flank which GJ seems loathe to do or perhaps Jevons which is something else that IMHO, would fail.Outside that it's Bradley Orr with Keogh moved to RB which wouldn't seem great to me either.

[The Fat Controller]

Its clear that we need width, so i think maybe a call for a return to 442 is just. Very unlikely, but i'd like to see:

Basso

Orr Keogh Carey Fontaine

Andrews Skuse Noble McAllister

Brooker Jevons

Subs (5 from): Johnson, McCombe, Thomas, Williams, Artus, Smith

I understand Smith can also play wide, so maybe he'd be worth a shout on the right, but i havent seen him play, and we know Andrews has the pace and strength to play out there. Noble was oustanding on Wednesday, didnt see the Brighton game but IMO is fully deserving of a run in the side. Williams offers pace if on the bench, and Artus could be given an opportunity as the battling midfielder if Skuse is struggling. Maybe time to give LJ a rest from the squad completely?

[Bristol Boy]

Its clear that we need width, so i think maybe a call for a return to 442 is just. Very unlikely, but i'd like to see:

Basso

Orr Keogh Carey Fontaine

Andrews Skuse Noble McAllister

Brooker Jevons

Subs (5 from): Johnson, McCombe, Thomas, Williams, Artus, Smith

I understand Smith can also play wide, so maybe he'd be worth a shout on the right, but i havent seen him play, and we know Andrews has the pace and strength to play out there. Noble was oustanding on Wednesday, didnt see the Brighton game but IMO is fully deserving of a run in the side. Williams offers pace if on the bench, and Artus could be given an opportunity as the battling midfielder if Skuse is struggling. Maybe time to give LJ a rest from the squad completely?

Agree that Andrews is an option wide right, but it seems a bit of a gamble and I can't honestly see GJ leaving LJ out twice.

The injuries, suspensions and his departure from 4-4-2 are keeping us guessing and so must our opposition and that can't hurt.

[The Fat Controller]

Agree that Andrews is an option wide right, but it seems a bit of a gamble and I can't honestly see GJ leaving LJ out twice.

The injuries, suspensions and his departure from 4-4-2 are keeping us guessing and so must our opposition and that can't hurt.

Agree with what your saying.

However, IMO Andrews wide is less of a gamble than playing 3-5-2/5-3-2 with BO on the right again.

Orr does not have the attacking ability, and wont get behind their full back which is where we'd hurt them from.

Id be concerned if we start with the same formation on Tuesday.

[Redhyde]

Our only danger is a GJ tactical cock up like the first leg.That's not a dig at GJ who's coped brilliantly with players missing for various reasons this season however he, like all of us, can get it wrong and I'm not joking when I say that Rovers had their best chance of a victory last week.

Now, ex pros have told me that it doesn't matter what formation you play, the players still have to play well.I agree 100% but would add that it does matter and if it doesn't lets give it a try against the Gas with Cole Skuse & Craig Woodman up front and Jamie McCombe on the left wing!! :noexpression:

I really can't guess at what GJ will do after the first leg so i won't. Could be anyone playing anywhere. Except Jennison who I doubt he'll risk. That's the weird thing, i don't actually mind not really knowing who our best line up is, i'm happy with everyone of our players when they're on the pitch

Would you want McCombe running at you as a full back? I'd be bloody terrified! He made one run on his debut down the right, he's not a half bad winger.

[Bristol Boy]

Would you want McCombe running at you as a full back? I'd be bloody terrified! He made one run on his debut down the right, he's not a half bad winger.

Yes I understand Murray, Wilson & Betsy are $h1tting themselves

In all seriousness, if we hadn't signed Smith, who looks decent in the air & reasonably quick around the pitch with good movement, I would have considered McCombe or even Partridge up front purely as a physical presence because our other strikers, Jevons, Andrews, Betsy & JMW need that to play off in order that they're effective.

[cidercity1987]

I hope we don't go 3-5-2 with two defenders as wing backs. It didn't work on Wednesday so I doubt it'd work on Tuesday. Noble is undroppable at the moment, but Johnson will probably be in the team. Trying to accomodate both of them may not be the best idea but we're suffering from a shortage of wingers so maybe this would work:

.............Basso..

Orr..Keogh..Carey..Fontaine

.......Johnson.Skuse.Noble. McAllister

Jevons

..Brooker

It probably looks a bit scruffy but Jevons would try to cover the right wing area as well as giving support to Brooker. There would also be a lot of emphasis on Noble and McAllister getting in the box.Another option would be to play Smith/Andrews instead of Fontaine and go for 4-3-3.

Presuming of course that given a straight choice between Fontaine and McAllister, GJ would choose the latter. Maybe GJ thinks Fontaine has done enough to keep a starting place?

[bcfcphoenix]

i think wingbacks are only a good idea if we have mcallister fit. i don't like woodman much as a wingback.

the back three of keogh, carey, fontaine is fine but i wasn't convinced of the level of understanding between carey and fontaine on tuesday night. assuming mccombe returns, you'd have to move keogh to right back as it's unfair to drop him, which necessitates a 442, allowing you to keep in fontaine at LB who is not a suitable wingback, and use mcallister on the left wing. that doesn't solve the problem of a missing right winger, so i suspect GJ will go for wingbacks, regardless of mcallisters fitness.

in my opinion gary johnson WILL send out...

basso; orr, carey, keogh, fontaine/ mccombe, woodman/ mccalister; skuse, noble, johnson; brooker, enoch.

not a bad team if mccombe and mccalister make it - if not i'm not convinced.

also with the state of the swamp/paddock at the mem stadium, a simple 442 may be a better plan. big debates for this one...

[Bristol Boy]

i think wingbacks are only a good idea if we have mcallister fit. i don't like woodman much as a wingback.

OK with Wilson & McAllister or Murray & Betsy-however three out of four are unavailable

the back three of keogh, carey, fontaine is fine but i wasn't convinced of the level of understanding between carey and fontaine on tuesday night.

Three games with Fontaine in, two away, no goals.It's not bad.

assuming mccombe returns, you'd have to move keogh to right back as it's unfair to drop him, which necessitates a 442, allowing you to keep in fontaine at LB who is not a suitable wingback, and use mcallister on the left wing. that doesn't solve the problem of a missing right winger, so i suspect GJ will go for wingbacks, regardless of mcallisters fitness.

The right side is the problem and we finished up with a hole there in the first leg

in my opinion gary johnson WILL send out...

basso; orr, carey, keogh, fontaine/ mccombe, woodman/ mccalister; skuse, noble, johnson; brooker, enoch.

Enoch's availability would mean we could go 4-4-2, but with him on the left.As he's unlikely to play, I think it'll be McAllister or even JMW.

not a bad team if mccombe and mccalister make it - if not i'm not convinced.

With them helps.Without them we should still be strong enough to win providing GJ doesn't make a mess of the formation

also with the state of the swamp/paddock at the mem stadium, a simple 442 may be a better plan. big debates for this one...

If we can't pass on it at all......and I doubt it'll be any worse than Scunny, Blackpool or BHA, then perhaps using the wings make sense and 3-5-2 will utilise that as well as 4-4-2.