Ryan Bennett

Quoted from Bigdog

I don't doubt what you say about Waterfall.. but as good as he's been playing, I'm getting the feeling that he's nearing the breaking point of his ceiling of ability, playing on full throttle, whereas Smith and Maher seem to have higher gears to step up to in the future if required..

Yep, completely agree.  Waterfall will only ever be a lower league battler.  That's not a slight on him either.  But we also need that type of player whilst we're at this level.  A back 3 of Maher, Bennett and Smith would lack that ruggedness, to my eyes anyway.

Quoted from ska face

I’d like to see Bennett-Waterfall-Smith as a 3 with Maher screening in front, but then are we sacrificing something in the middle to accommodate 4 centre backs?

It might give some scope for wingbacks to be a bit more attacking, as Maher could drop into the back line if one on either side of the 3 needs to push out to close an attacker down the wing, but does Maher have the engine to do that? I couldn’t say, not seen enough of him.

He’s good with the ball and it might save Hunt & co from having to sit so deep to receive it. Glad it’s Hurst’s problem and not mine.

It’s not the worst shout in the world by any means, but it would leave you having to pick just two from Clifton, Hunt, Holohan, Morris and Green (plus potentially even Khan) when all are fit.

It remains to be seen whether we stumbled on something on Saturday, but I liked the shape of us in a 3-5-2 and feel it might enable us to get on the front foot more at home, something we’ve struggled to do thus far.

Something like this could be quite tasty at home



Some of those players would be interchangeable; plenty of arguments to include Maher, Morris, Green and Holohan in there for a start (and of course McAtee when fit), but that for me makes the most of our squad, which is characterised by great strength in depth in central defence and central midfield, and less so elsewhere.

Quoted from diehardmariner

Yep, completely agree.  Waterfall will only ever be a lower league battler.  That's not a slight on him either.  But we also need that type of player whilst we're at this level.  A back 3 of Maher, Bennett and Smith would lack that ruggedness, to my eyes anyway.

A back three of Maher, Smith and Bennett is one that every team at this level could only dream of. They're all rugged enough when required without outwardly looking as rugged as Waterfall if you know what I mean.. I think there wouldn't be any concerns about starting them a level up in League One either..

Anyway.. I'd sign Bennett in a heartbeat if there was a deal to be done, but more pressing is getting the right blend in central midfield and also the right attacking options on the pitch, my choice would be for more mobility up front. If PH can solve both, then the wide areas, to employ either attacking minded or defensively minded, will sort itself out over time or according to opposition..

I think we all want to see Clifton make a stamp on a central midfield role, myself included.  But Saturday just highlighted even further that he's so bloody effective when out wide.  We've got a range of options centrally and the suggestion regards Maher (which I quite like) further adds to that.  Equally so we don't have anyone else who can play that wingback role down the right flank.

I think Clifton comes out the equation centrally.  A combination of needs must in wide areas and also references our range of options centrally.  

Hypothetically, Hurst is reading this forum and having signed Bennett decides that he wants to put him in a back 3, with Maher screening.  Clifton out wide leaves Hunt, Holohan, Green and Morris to occupy two of the other midfield slots, when everyone is fit anyway.  If you've got someone screening already you need players who are prepared to press and push.  So that's Morris ruled out and Holohan starting straight away.   Hunt and Green battling out the last starting role and I think this is where it's horses for courses.  Green is energetic as hell and I quite liked when he was given a bit of licence to roam forward and press teams high.  Hunt on the other hand is technically better, far better but does he naturally get drawn back into a deeper role where he wants to dictate play.  

Not sure Saturdays formation was in the plans tbh, and PH said in his post match interview that that system doesn’t suit us. But it’s surely worth considering in the future and use as and when.

If Bennett does sign then he has to play. Waterfall you play..he’s a leader, been outstanding. Smith also barring the odd error, though I’m not certain that system is the best for him. Maher not seen enough of yet (for us), but you’d assume he can do the job.

My thoughts on how we ‘progress/iron out home form’ is the role of Hunt, and the link and protection of back line, together with working out linking offensively. For me atm Hunt is trying too hard so to speak, he’s dropping more or less in to the back line to receive the ball, knows it’s his job to get the ball moving, the team going and create. And I think he’s caught somewhere between the middle in that respect..wants to move the ball quickly and guilty of giving it away at times. That’s not a dig or criticism..as said think he’s trying to hard at times, and utilising someone like Morris, who can sit and do the untidy stuff - may allow Hunt a little more help, in not having to drop as deep, and not cover as much ground, and help offensively in being closer to the options.  A similar problem that we have at top end of pitch until McAtees return. Taylor has a thankless task at times..we’ve got to work out how to get someone nearer, maybe utilise Orsi/Richardson as a forward next to him rather than behind. If Hunt can play ahead of Morris that should help in Richardson/whoever not dropping deeper.

Then there’s the quandary of how we play..use the width with Khan and Clifton who you know what you get, or create with JMD, but the 3-5-2 wouldn’t suit his play imho. Holohan could be used as someone to get between the lines, and the plus I guess for PH is that there are indeed numerous options to try during games. We’ve a decent squad, so if Bennett signs potentially a side like..

  Crocombe
Bennett Waterfall Smith
Morris
Clifton Hunt Holohan Khan
Richardson Taylor
(3/5/2)

Again there’s the likes of Kiernan to consider bringing on later on.

Or a 4-4-2

Crocombe
Clifton Waterfall Smith Bennett
JMD Hunt Morris Khan
Taylor Richardson/Orsi

Or Efete when form returns, Clifton in midfield (still think his best position is the one he played Saturday, but he’s prob first name on team sheet in whatever position, that’s to his credit)

Of course there’s the problem of keeping those who aren’t getting games happy, and the impending return of McAtee, possible transfer activity in/out in January..

Not easy this management lark, but nice problems to have.

For me, 3 at the back makes sense and if he does go with it then Bennett is a no brainer.

Our wingers are usually picked on their ability to defend first and foremost so I don’t really think we’re losing much going forward with wing backs instead. If we do then Clifton is perfect for that RWB role, it’s the role that most suits his skill set IMO.

In my simple opinion, Smith is not our player, and if Hull don't want to sell him at the end of his loan spell, then he will be gone.  I believe that Bennet should be in the team in place of Smith, you just cannot leave Bennet out for a young loanee.  As good as he is, he is nowhere near the class or has the experience that Bennet has.

Quoted from 123614

In my simple opinion, Smith is not our player, and if Hull don't want to sell him at the end of his loan spell, then he will be gone.  I believe that Bennet should be in the team in place of Smith, you just cannot leave Bennet out for a young loanee.  As good as he is, he is nowhere near the class or has the experience that Bennet has.

but then you dont bring in a loan player to not play him... you find a way to play your best players, smith is one of ours.

Quoted from 123614

In my simple opinion, Smith is not our player, and if Hull don't want to sell him at the end of his loan spell, then he will be gone.  I believe that Bennet should be in the team in place of Smith, you just cannot leave Bennet out for a young loanee.  As good as he is, he is nowhere near the class or has the experience that Bennet has.

It's a good point, but.. Only Hurst will know the possibility of signing Smith in the future. We'll stand more chance in the player's eyes if he's playing. There is also the question of looking to where we want to go as a club as much as present day needs. If we're looking to build for the future.. ie League One, which we'll need to do to get to the level of a promoted team from League Two, then Smith must come into the equation as we'd be a nice permanent proposition for him at a level up from where we are now. That would leave us in the seemingly unlikely position from a short few month's ago where Waterfall could be fourth choice.. if Bennett did sign. Maybe not fourth choice right now, but at some point in the not too distant future, and that would be very strong position to be in defensively..

Why are we talking about where Bennett will play? Have I missed something or have we not learnt from these rumours last time?