An Embarrassment Of Riches

[Bristol Boy]

City are looking to go from the sublime to the ridiculous as it appears (touch wood) that with ES seemingly on the road to recovery, we will have ALL of our strikers fit for the Brentford game, if not Chesterfield.

Although some can play other positions (Betsy has played FOUR already) we seem to have a rare choice:

Target Men:

Brooker-not quite there & firing.Overdue a goal or five!

Showunmi-Trained on Sat morning but not considered quite ready yet according to GJ who appears frutrated by him.

Smith-Good work ethic, quick enough,well balanced, good movement and a decent touch.We'll have to see about the goals.

All of the above have the added advantage of being able to partner each other, as well as:

Strikers:

Jevons-When all's said and done-rarely injured, can see a pass, shoot, finish and our top scorer.Lacks the physical strength and speed to be a first pick.

Andrews-Strong,Pacy and a goal scorer at this level.Good work rate but GJ wouldn't have liked the tantrum at BHA.

Myrie-Williams-Seems to be the forgotten man at AG.Possibly the quickest player on the books and better suited to the left flank.Raw but improvement will only come with expereince and games.....Loan move next season?

Betsy-Having seen him in a City shirt, I would say that central striker is his worst position.I think RW or RWB followed by LWB, then striker.Fit, strong atheltic and with a better attitude and workrate than advertised.

If I had to pick two to play in a vital game and they were all fit, I'd still go for Brooker & Showunmi as the men most likely.......Trouble is they're also the men most likely to be injured!!!

[RedTop]

At first I agreed with you that in a 4-4-2, I'd pick Brooker and Showman if pushed. However, it's hard to make a case against Jevons in my opinion. Yes, he does seem a little lightweight at times but he was brought in to do one thing - score goals - and that's exactly what he has done. His problem, really, has been the perhaps unexpected emergence of Showman as a genuine goalscorer who also affects the game a bit more than he does.

I must admit my heart initially sunk when I heard the team read out ahead of the Northampton match, as I am really a straightforward 4-4-2 sort of a guy. But I must say I thought it produced a far better style of imaginitive football than we've seen recently, as well as a result which should have been more decisive. If GJ sticks with that, then it'd be difficult to argue against given how effective it was last time. But to be honest, if it was me I'd go back to 4-4-2 and put Showman on the left wing with Brooker and Jevons up front.

It's just an opinion, and I admit that if everyone is fit and not suspended it then means leaving out McAllister (one of our most solid yet unsung performers this season), or Brian Wilson, who had such a positive effect on Saturday. I also admit there are plenty of other permutations for which a decent case can be made, and possibly a far better one. But it is a sign of how well things are going that it's difficult to work out how to fit all the decent players in our team.

We do indeed have an embarrassment of riches, and with that will inevitably come debate about how best to use them. But it's a great debate to be able to have, and it's a credit to GJ and the board that they have managed finally to amass a squad of genuine depth of talent. While we can argue about perming any two from Brooker, Jevons, Showman, Andrews and Smith, and which midfield we should put together from Skuse, Noble, LeeJ and Russell, not to mention Betsy vs Murray or McAllister vs Wilson, in a sense we can't lose - because they have all proved themselves very adept performers at this level and all would do a good job. It's all about degrees, about who works best together and about shape. What a luxury to be having that debate instead of trying to work out which 11 might scrape a result, or what emergency measure to employ to fill a gaping hole left by a suspension or injury.

[Bristol Boy]

At first I agreed with you that in a 4-4-2, I'd pick Brooker and Showman if pushed. However, it's hard to make a case against Jevons in my opinion. Yes, he does seem a little lightweight at times but he was brought in to do one thing - score goals - and that's exactly what he has done. His problem, really, has been the perhaps unexpected emergence of Showman as a genuine goalscorer who also affects the game a bit more than he does.

I must admit my heart initially sunk when I heard the team read out ahead of the Northampton match, as I am really a straightforward 4-4-2 sort of a guy. But I must say I thought it produced a far better style of imaginitive football than we've seen recently, as well as a result which should have been more decisive. If GJ sticks with that, then it'd be difficult to argue against given how effective it was last time. But to be honest, if it was me I'd go back to 4-4-2 and put Showman on the left wing with Brooker and Jevons up front.

It's just an opinion, and I admit that if everyone is fit and not suspended it then means leaving out McAllister (one of our most solid yet unsung performers this season), or Brian Wilson, who had such a positive effect on Saturday. I also admit there are plenty of other permutations for which a decent case can be made, and possibly a far better one. But it is a sign of how well things are going that it's difficult to work out how to fit all the decent players in our team.

We do indeed have an embarrassment of riches, and with that will inevitably come debate about how best to use them. But it's a great debate to be able to have, and it's a credit to GJ and the board that they have managed finally to amass a squad of genuine depth of talent. While we can argue about perming any two from Brooker, Jevons, Showman, Andrews and Smith, and which midfield we should put together from Skuse, Noble, LeeJ and Russell, not to mention Betsy vs Murray or McAllister vs Wilson, in a sense we can't lose - because they have all proved themselves very adept performers at this level and all would do a good job. It's all about degrees, about who works best together and about shape. What a luxury to be having that debate instead of trying to work out which 11 might scrape a result, or what emergency measure to employ to fill a gaping hole left by a suspension or injury.

The problem with 4-4-2 is two fold and it's all to do with players & positions.

Like it or lump it, we don't have a left winger/left sided midfielder in the Walsh/Smith....even Aaron Brown mould.We've a pile of players who have or can play there, but it's not their first choice position and never will be.Betys is probably the closest to being comfortable as a left winger.

In central midfield, our most creative players are LJ & DN and they can't play together in a two-three is spot on with Skuse as the anchor that allows both of them to bomb forward while he locks the door behind them-Russell can play either role if a player is injured and we know that any combination of Skuse/Noble/Russell, works in a two.

Someone's been saying this for a while, but I can't remember who it is for the life of me

As you say, we now appear to have cover in every position and players like Artus & Wilson J give us even more depth, in the event of a real crisis.

As with all team sports, it's not always about picking the best XI players, it's about partnerships, shape, balance & organisation.Nothing proved that more than when Bas was in a team that picked up so many points, although I still say that if we'd had McGammon in place of Bas from the start, we'd have made the play offs because he gave us shape and four goals in eight games.

Fingers crossed on the injury front

[cidercity1987]

The problem with 4-4-2 is two fold and it's all to do with players & positions.

Like it or lump it, we don't have a left winger/left sided midfielder in the Walsh/Smith....even Aaron Brown mould.We've a pile of players who have or can play there, but it's not their first choice position and never will be.Betys is probably the closest to being comfortable as a left winger.

Surely if Wilson is good enough at left wing back, he's perfectly capable of playing left wing in a 4-4-2? I'd say it was essentially the same position, especially at home when we're expecting our wing backs to attack more often than defend.

At the moment though, I'd agree that 3-5-2 should be the formation we use.

[RedTop]

Personally, I think Showunmi has looked very good on the left. He may not look like an orthodox left winger in the Smith/Walsh/Gavin etc mould but his touch and dribbling skills are good and defences struggle to handle him. He also gets you goals from that position too.

Incidentally, I knew Betsy reminded me of someone in the style he plays (not the looks!) He seems very similar to Mark Gavin.

[Bristol Boy]

Surely if Wilson is good enough at left wing back, he's perfectly capable of playing left wing in a 4-4-2? I'd say it was essentially the same position, especially at home when we're expecting our wing backs to attack more often than defend.

Wing backs are picked primarily for their attacking skills (Wilson/Betsy/Murray) and full backs (Woodman/Fontaine) for their defending.McAllister is about the nearest thing to a player that can do both equally well, although, I still think he's 65/35 in favour of defending.

I think it's an easier postn at home, as you say.

When you play as a left winger you are normally marked by a full back and often receive the ball with your back to goal or with a defender and midfielder closing you down more quickly than when you are facing play on the majority of occassions as a wing back or even as a full back.That's why Micky Bell was never as effective when he played left side midfield, although still a fine player going forward.

[Bristol Boy]

Personally, I think Showunmi has looked very good on the left. He may not look like an orthodox left winger in the Smith/Walsh/Gavin etc mould but his touch and dribbling skills are good and defences struggle to handle him. He also gets you goals from that position too.

I'll concede that he's OK going forward, however, defensively he's a liability on occassions and he's already given away two pens.Much better striker, IMHO.

Incidentally, I knew Betsy reminded me of someone in the style he plays (not the looks!) He seems very similar to Mark Gavin.

Much more athletic and stronger than Gavs.I thought of Louie Donowa?

[cidercity1987]

Wing backs are picked primarily for their attacking skills (Wilson/Betsy/Murray) and full backs (Woodman/Fontaine) for their defending.McAllister is about the nearest thing to a player that can do both equally well, although, I still think he's 65/35 in favour of defending.

Depends what your tactics are doesn't it. Orr has played wing back recently and I can't see that he has any attacking skill. I'd agree about McAllister, definitely not a left winger in any sense though. He's perhaps the ideal candidate to play LWB away from home when we want to be more solid defensively.

I think it's an easier postn at home, as you say.

When you play as a left winger you are normally marked by a full back and often receive the ball with your back to goal or with a defender and midfielder closing you down more quickly than when you are facing play on the majority of occassions as a wing back or even as a full back.That's why Micky Bell was never as effective when he played left side midfield, although still a fine player going forward.

A wing back playing against a 4-4-2 formation arguably has 2 players to deal with on his own, whereas he'd normally have a mate to help him if we were playing 4-4-2 aswell.

[Bristol Boy]

Wing backs are picked primarily for their attacking skills (Wilson/Betsy/Murray) and full backs (Woodman/Fontaine) for their defending.McAllister is about the nearest thing to a player that can do both equally well, although, I still think he's 65/35 in favour of defending.

Depends what your tactics are doesn't it. Orr has played wing back recently and I can't see that he has any attcking skill. I'd agree about McAllister, definitely not a left winger in any sense though. He's perhaps the ideal candidate to play LWB away from home when we want to be more solid defensively.

I suggested that for a while.On the subject of Orr at RWB I've never seen it and our formations against Rovers morphed into 4-3-1-2 however much GJ told them to play something else at AG and 4-1-2-2-1 however much GJ told them to do something else

I think it's an easier postn at home, as you say.

When you play as a left winger you are normally marked by a full back and often receive the ball with your back to goal or with a defender and midfielder closing you down more quickly than when you are facing play on the majority of occassions as a wing back or even as a full back.That's why Micky Bell was never as effective when he played left side midfield, although still a fine player going forward.

A wing back playing against a 4-4-2 formation arguably has 2 players to deal with on his own, whereas he'd normally have a mate to help him if we were playing 4-4-2 aswell.

He's also got an extra holding midfielder in Skuse and three, as opposed to two, central defenders and that gives him more licence to get forward, although, he still has to defend well.The two lads there are both as fit as fleas so that's not a problem and the obvious cover, Murray & McAllister, are fit lads as well.

[RedTop]

I'll concede that he's OK going forward, however, defensively he's a liability on occassions and he's already given away two pens. Much better striker, IMHO.

I agree he's better as a CF, however he is also very effective as a wide man, and it does enable us to start with Brooker, Showman and Jevo in a 4-4-2 system, which is particularly beneficial when you're looking for goals, as Showman has shown he can get on the score sheet when given that wide left berth. As for his defensive qualities, well as a winger his job is primarily to attack, especially with someone as solid as McAllister behind him. I don't recall Gavin, Donowa or Smith being particularly good defenders, but maybe time has dimmed my memory on that score.

In terms of Showman being expected to perform defensively in our own box from set pieces, that will happen regardless of what position he's in because of his height, so he'll be as much of a liability for pens in that sense if he plays CF as if he is a winger. I can't see him ever being given the job of our lone man left upfield for defensive corners etc.

Anyway, the bottom line I think is that we agree that the squad is strong enough to offer plenty of strong and credible alternative line-ups which should see us through the rest of the season in terms of coping with injuries and suspensions.

[cidercity1987]

It seemed to me that Orr played RWB in both Rovers games. But maybe that was more down to our tactical confusion than any set plan for him to play there.

We now have strong competition for the wing back slots with Murray and McAllister returning. As we said, McAllister could replace Wilson if needs be, but would Murray ousts Betsy? Can Murray play RBW as well as he does RW? On Betsy's form Murray won't go straight back into the team, perhaps unless we go back to 4-4-2.

[Robbored]

It seemed to me that Orr played RWB in both Rovers games.

He did and was dreadfull in both games - particularly at the Mem. Orr is very one-dimensional and should stay doing what he's good at - defending.

If I had been asked earlier in the season whether I was in favour of 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 as a basic starting formation then I would have said 4-4-2 but with the flexibility to change and go to 3-5-2 if the game dictated it, or to attack with 3-5-2 and defend as 4-4-2.

I was impressed with the width provided by Wilson and Betsy on saturday with the luxury of having three in midfield but N'hampton set out for a point and didn't really try to come forward untill the last 20mins which made it more effective - and then Johnson resorted to 4-4-2.

[exiledinwatford]

Good debate with a lot of sensible stuff.

I was impressed on Saturday but whatever happens I hope GJ picks a formation and sticks to it - he even changed from 3-5-2 back to 4-4-2 half way through the second half on Saturday! I think like most others that we have the players to play a very effective 3-5-2 so I hope he sticks to it.

I'd give Brooker and Smith another start or two as they showed potential and a really high work rate. I'd have Murray straight back in for his finishing as we still don't get enough men forward to support the front two in scoring positions. I know Betsy scored I just think Murray would score more.

[Nibor]

Brooker and Smith both played well enough to start the next game. Smith's movement made a huge difference to the number of opportunities we created and his substitution, and the lack of movement after was why a big part of why we stopped playing football in the last 20 minutes IMO. It's my biggest criticism of Jevons and Showunmi that they don't move around enough to offer options and that's why we resort to long balls, I think they will be on the bench and those four players are decent enough for this level.

Harsh perhaps but I think we may as well send Andrews back. He is behind four players in the queue by my reckoning and although he found the net a couple of times does not look to me to have the quality to have a longer term future here. He has a new boss to impress and it's probably best for him too. If we need other cover at some unspecified point in the future then lets loan someone like Best who could be part of longer term plans.

Betsy hopefully will never play up front and I'm still not sure why some people consider him a striker, it's a position he's never played in successfully and the strength of his game is quite clearly beating people out wide and getting the ball in. Myrie-Williams probably has played his last first team game this season and to be honest the rest will do him good mentally.

[cheshire_red]

Jevons - 6 league goals from open play in a team that often dominates, is that good enough?

[Nibor]

Jevons - 6 league goals from open play in a team that often dominates, is that good enough?

What does it matter which competition he scores in - it's the same job no matter - or who takes the penalties?

Personally I think he lacks pace or power for this level and his movement is poor but considering he's not had a chance to forge a partnership with either of the other injury prone crocks, oops I mean senior strikers, and is still our top scorer by some distance in his first season at the club we should cut him a little slack.

[cidercity1987]

Jevons - 6 league goals from open play in a team that often dominates, is that good enough?

I'd say the argument about Jevons lack of league goals is a bit of weak. I'd rather he scored his goals in the league but none of his cup goals have been against lower league opposition so I don't really understand why people use that point to suggest Jevons is poor. Fact is, he's our top scorer with a better ratio than Brooker, Smith and maybe Andrews off the top of my head. It's funny how 20 goals a season is a benchmark for a good striker, Jevons is on course to be only our 2nd striker in a while to reach that figure, yet he gets more stick on here than any other player (except maybe LJ?).

Having said that, he wouldn't be in my first choice front pairing at the moment. With everyone fit I'd go for Showumni and Brooker. Reading Northampton's messageboard and listening to the Northampton radio commentary on Saturday, they were all suprised how we could afford to have 'a player of Jevons quality on the bench'. Says a lot about our squad I reckon.

[Robbored]

Personally I think he lacks pace or power for this level and his movement is poor but considering he's not had a chance to forge a partnership with either of the other injury prone crocks, oops I mean senior strikers, and is still our top scorer by some distance in his first season at the club we should cut him a little slack.

Agree with the first part of your reply - Jevons certainly does lacks pace.In fact he's downright pedestrian.It wouldn't suprise me if he's the slowest player at the club.His positioning isn't too bad but he seems to lack strength or stamina and gets pressured off the ball far too easily.He doesn't effect the game enough for me.

The last real goal poacher we had was Tony 'tap-in' Thorpe who many fans didn't like but I'd rate him far higher than Jevons.At least Thorpe put himself about and could create a goal from nothing.Crap attitude though' and not a player that would have got along with Johnson.

[Nibor]

The last real goal poacher we had was Tony 'tap-in' Thorpe who many fans didn't like but I'd rate him far higher than Jevons.At least Thorpe put himself about and could create a goal from nothing.Crap attitude though' and not a player that would have got along with Johnson.

I've heard the comparison made before and it's not a bad one. However it's interesting to note that Thorpe was in side containing players like Tinnion, Murray, Bell, and Brennan who were all far better providers than what we have now and yet still didn't manage 20 league goals.

I didn't think Thorpe was a bad player, he had some good quality on the ball and he could score - but he never once put himself about!

[cidercity1987]

I've heard the comparison made before and it's not a bad one. However it's interesting to note that Thorpe was in side containing players like Tinnion, Murray, Bell, and Brennan who were all far better providers than what we have now and yet still didn't manage 20 league goals.

I didn't think Thorpe was a bad player, he had some good quality on the ball and he could score - but he never once put himself about!

Doubt he set up anywhere near the amount of goals Jevons has either. I thought he was an excellent player for us back then, but his heart wasn't in it at times.

[Robbored]

I didn't think Thorpe was a bad player, he had some good quality on the ball and he could score - but he never once put himself about!

He didn't 'put himself about' like a Wayne Allison or a Steve Brooker but for a small guy Thorpe scored some cracking headers by going in where the heads and boots were flying.Maybe 'brave' is a better word.Thorpe also created lots of goals with his clever movement and quick feet.

You don't see Jevons going in where it hurts..

[PhatWill]

Jevons - 6 league goals from open play in a team that often dominates, is that good enough?

Jevons has the best strike rate at the club. Lack of chances in my opinion, too often we haven't had enough out wide to provide the chances for Jevo. When he gets the opportunities he more often than not scores them, no-one else at the club comes close to him in that department.

[Bristol Boy]

Harsh perhaps but I think we may as well send Andrews back. He is behind four players in the queue by my reckoning and although he found the net a couple of times does not look to me to have the quality to have a longer term future here.

Not with SB & ES likely to be out again anytime soon and Brooker's still not on the goal trail.If we signed Best then fair enough.

Betsy hopefully will never play up front and I'm still not sure why some people consider him a striker,

Possibly because GJ said so when he signed him.

[cheshire_red]

Well I'm sorry I don't agree with the majority of you. 6 league goals from open play in the majority of games played is poor for a striker brought in specifically to score the goals to fire us to promotion.

And yes, of course it matters in what competition he's scored his goals. The League is the bread and butter, it is where we have the opportunity to better ourselves as a club long term. As GJ rightly points out the Cup games have seen the pressure taken off of the players, therefore is it not correct that Jevo performs less well when the pressure is on?

[Nibor]

Well I'm sorry I don't agree with the majority of you. 6 league goals from open play in the majority of games played is poor for a striker brought in specifically to score the goals to fire us to promotion.

And yes, of course it matters in what competition he's scored his goals. The League is the bread and butter, it is where we have the opportunity to better ourselves as a club long term. As GJ rightly points out the Cup games have seen the pressure taken off of the players, therefore is it not correct that Jevo performs less well when the pressure is on?

I agree that the league is of overriding performance but scoring goals is the same job in either competition. He's not fluffing chances in the league that he's taken in the cup with the pressure off as far as I've seen - he's simply not getting the same amount of chances. Part of this is because he's neither quick nor strong, but part is because the team haven't played consistently well in the final third.

[Guest Topbuzz]

Has Best joined anyone yet??