|
maxfox44 |
November 19, 2011, 7:30pm |
|
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 1,469
Posts Per Day: 0.26
Reputation: 85.79%
Rep Score: +22 / -3
Location: Unfortunately, Lincoln!
Approval: +139
|
Walking outside the ground afterwards, loads of people were debating the double subs.
1) Some were pleased as it showed that S&H were prepared to make an early change.
2) Others were suggesting that S&H got their tactics and preparation wrong.
What do you think?
|
| I remember being pelted with ice by the Norwich fans during the Milk Cup match, do you? |
|
|
|
|
Borbs |
November 19, 2011, 7:36pm |
|
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 678
Posts Per Day: 0.11
Reputation: 83.41%
Rep Score: +2 / 0
|
4-3-3 was not working Hearn was inaffective on the right I'Anson could not deal with the big bloke. Had to go 4-2-2
|
|
|
|
|
jonnyboy82 |
November 19, 2011, 7:36pm |
|
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 6,324
Posts Per Day: 1.27
Reputation: 67.42%
Rep Score: +71 / -36
Approval: +5,688
Gold Stars: 95
|
Walking outside the ground afterwards, loads of people were debating the double subs.
1) Some were pleased as it showed that S&H were prepared to make an early change.
2) Others were suggesting that S&H got their tactics and preparation wrong.
What do you think?
number 2
|
| GTFC |
|
|
|
|
Shithouse Rat |
November 19, 2011, 7:47pm |
|
Lower Findus
Posts: 166
Posts Per Day: 0.03
Reputation: 79.9%
Rep Score: +8 / -2
|
Do H&S have any tactics? Unless their masterplan is to let Kempson hoof it aimlessly forward, I fear we are fooked.
|
| [img]http://www.musicquizworld.com/images/banner_bobmarley.jpg[/img] |
|
|
|
|
75 |
November 19, 2011, 8:11pm |
|
Guest User |
I wouldn't suggest a 4-2-2 formation as above. What worries me is we don't actually pass the ball forward to players. At least it appears that way, we hit areas. I've never seen an area score a goal or whip a cross in. Is it a tactic or are the players that bad they can't pass the ball ten yards?
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
|
Chris |
November 19, 2011, 8:17pm |
|
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 701
Posts Per Day: 0.12
Reputation: 84.43%
Rep Score: +19 / -3
Approval: +1
|
Quoted from 75
I wouldn't suggest a 4-2-2 formation as above. What worries me is we don't actually pass the ball forward to players. At least it appears that way, we hit areas. I've never seen an area score a goal or whip a cross in. Is it a tactic or are the players that bad they can't pass the ball ten yards?
Well Kempson certainly can't.
|
|
|
|
|
kevikov |
November 19, 2011, 8:48pm |
|
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,196
Posts Per Day: 0.24
Reputation: 75.68%
Rep Score: +14 / -5
Approval: +854
Gold Stars: 13
|
No 2, pretty much all season. N0 1 shows they are able to see it at least?
|
| I was there, the day Bradley Wood scored a 35 yarder!
From the black and white striped shirts To the fish in the sea You'll hear us singing Coz we are Grimsby.
You won't hear us crying But you'll hear us shout Coz we are the Grimsby And this is our chant.......... Grimsby! Grimsby! Grimsby!
A.S.A.F.A.T. |
|
|
|
|
Borbs |
November 19, 2011, 8:56pm |
|
Table Wine Drinker
Posts: 678
Posts Per Day: 0.11
Reputation: 83.41%
Rep Score: +2 / 0
|
No other alternative than 4-4-2 too congested in midfield with no outlet hence all the lumping forward so that the big guy at the back could tussle with Duffy.
|
|
|
|
|
Mighty_Mariner |
November 19, 2011, 9:36pm |
|
Pontoonite
Posts: 4,437
Posts Per Day: 0.83
Reputation: 81.96%
Rep Score: +42 / -9
Approval: +2,246
Gold Stars: 10
|
Sort of both for me.... I can see why they were tempted to stick with 433 after the Port Vale performance, but as someone else pointed out it clearly didn't work on the smaller blundell park pitch, but I'am happy they had the balls to admit their mistake and make the necessary changes when many managers would have stuck with it.
Has anybody ever seen 2 subs that early in a game for tactical reasons???? I know I haven't!
|
| "They shall grow not old, as we that are left grow old, Age shall not weary them, nor the years condemn, At the going down of the sun, and in the morning, We WILL remember them" |
|
|
|
|
biggles9999 |
November 19, 2011, 9:42pm |
|
Main Stander
Posts: 2,809
Posts Per Day: 0.51
Reputation: 69.34%
Rep Score: +24 / -12
Approval: +367
|
I am pleased that they were willing to make the subs early to change the game, however they must surely have had some information on this team before they chose their tactics? They must have known that Newport were more than likely going lump the ball forward to a big man and look to bring it down for their wide men?
Presumably they decided the midfield was too crowded since both teams were effectively playing with 5 in the middle, which meant Thanoj was the one who lost out to the two more experienced players, but I personally felt sorry for I'anson. I can only guess they wanted Pearson on for his heading ability but he is incredibly poor to my mind.
Several times he was easily turned, on others he was too slow to turn and appeared to be a liability. I'anson can more than hold his own aerially imo, and is a better all round player.
|
|
|
|
|