Team for Sunday - What Needs To Change?

Quoted from mariner91

I'm not sure he is good technically. He's got a wonderful footballing brain but it's often his technical ability that lets him down.  He's certainly not bad technically but he's not the best. For a centre midfielder, he gives the ball away cheaply too often.

And he doesn't seem a natural leader. If a captain is going to lead by example, he can't afford to have the number of below par games that Dis has had lately.

'If you can't explain it simply  you don't understand it.' -Albert Einstein.

Whereas Venney has took the game by the scruff of the neck and pinged it about nicely in the tiny amount of game time he's been given. Probably just destined for the scrap heap like the rest of them though unfortunately.

Quoted from Rick12

Think Disley may still have a season in him left with us though.I like him as a player.Good technically  

I'm not too sure he has another season in him. He's lost a lot of his legs and Thursday night showed it. Just sat in front of the back 4 and not really making any contributions going forward. Which in turn meant Nolan was being outnumbered in midfield.
If we insist on playing a 442 then we need our 2 CM's to be running up and down that pitch for 90 minutes on sunday. Nolan and Clay for me.

Braintree have not scored a league this season from a cross from the wings.  According to NL stats.

Can we exploit this fact?   Can we afford to play without wingers?  Or do we need to play with wingers to get crosses in and try and get behind their defence?

Try to take control of midfield is a must. l like the idea (suggested above) of Arnold playing just behind Podge and Bogle (if fit). Maybe Arnold can recreate his 2 goals at Eastleigh?

Then Nolan, Clay and Disley in midfield.  Maybe Venney in as a sub for Disley, if he is tired or playing poorly.

No Monkey.  Arnold played in that position early in the season without much success.  We have to try something different though and be positive.  Nolan and even Disley could get forward as they both can get goals.  

I would like Pearson to start forToto. Toto always has a mistake in him and we cannnot afford to concede again.    Pearson to go up for corners.  

  

Pearson is a leader of men. Disley entering into his footballing swansong and reaching that point where his games need to be managed, as is The Monk but they both been ever presents which always ran the rusk of them both spluttering towards the finishing line on the final stretch.

We need energy, match them in the effort stakes then pull them apart with movement and defence splitting (low) passes.

The 4-3-3 sounds a great idea to me, got to be worth a roll of the dice after over 270 minutes of drawing blanks; we can easily change if clearly failing. To do the same again and expect a different result would be insanity. Einstein again....

I wouldn't go 3-5-2 personally.

We've not played a back 3 other than a tiny bit in the Trophy. I think it's a big change that'd leave us looking lost at the back and we could potentially get embarrassed.

We do have to change something though, I'd keep a back 4 but go 3 up front. Don't ask the two wider forwards to get back to make a 5 man midfield though, like Hurst has done before. If we lose the ball, the central 3 shuffle across to the side we lose the ball and the wide forward on the opposite side gets back in to take the defensive position of a wide midfielder on that side.

Arnold and Monkhouse dropped as both not doing enough. I'm surprised Arnold is getting in so many people's teams he's been dreadful for ages.

          McKeown
Tait  Toto  Gowling  Horwood
    Clay  Disley  Nolan
   Bogle  Amond  Pittman

Quoted from Tommy

I wouldn't go 3-5-2 personally.

We've not played a back 3 other than a tiny bit in the Trophy. I think it's a big change that'd leave us looking lost at the back and we could potentially get embarrassed.

We do have to change something though, I'd keep a back 4 but go 3 up front. Don't ask the two wider forwards to get back to make a 5 man midfield though, like Hurst has done before. If we lose the ball, the central 3 shuffle across to the side we lose the ball and the wide forward on the opposite side gets back in to take the defensive position of a wide midfielder on that side.

Arnold and Monkhouse dropped as both not doing enough. I'm surprised Arnold is getting in so many people's teams he's been dreadful for ages.

          McKeown
Tait  Toto  Gowling  Horwood
    Clay  Disley  Nolan
   Bogle  Amond  Pittman

I think the thing with Arnold is that this time last year he scored two cracking goals at Eastleigh, and I for one am hoping he makes us forget recent games by repeating that feat

He has the potential to win a game single handedly if he takes the game by the scruff of the neck. Unfortunately it's almost been like playing with ten men when he not up for it and thus is why he isn't gracing a higher division.

People talk about Arnold being crap.  He is not crap, its just that he hasn,t been getting proper service, not getting the support to help him when he has got 2 men marking him.  The 1 man  opposing managers fear most in Towns team will not be Podge , it will certainly be Arnold. They have normally 2 men marking him so where is the Town player left unmarked. He should be helping Arnold out by moving into an open position.How many times has Arnold had the ball with no one in an open position except 1 of Towns players standing about 2 yards away waiting for a pass. We have seen last season and early this season how good Arnold is. In my day an " inside forward or half back " would have the responsibility of feeding his winger and then backing him up.  Why is he not getting the service that he was to enable him to have these good games.  He hasn,t suddenly become a bad player. Also why aren,t any of our attacks created from a midfield position.  To me it is as clear as the light of day.