433

Quoted from 1739

Does anyone know how Liam is getting on with his recovery?

Pretty well according to Dave Moore on MP but admits it's a long old journey.
No estimates were given in the interview but IIRC wasn't it around Feb we were looking at ?

Quoted from 1600

Pretty well according to Dave Moore on MP but admits it's a long old journey.
No estimates were given in the interview but IIRC wasn't it around Feb we were looking at ?

All I know is that he has said he will not be back this year. He is the answer to our problems in my opinion, he would have scored 3 or 4 yesterday if he had been playing.

Seeing as we're playing Tamworth who we never beat we might as well send the under 10s!

Wouldn't mind seeing Soares back and played in the position he played in pre season.

McKeown

Wood
Pearson
Pond
Thomas

Colbeck
Niven
Disley
Artus

Soares

Hannah

Horses for courses - our tactics and selections for Tamworth may not be the same as they are for Hyde and/or Woking, for several different reasons. All I know is...Artus has had repeated opportunities to stake a claim for the left midfield position and has been (generally) very average at best, and disappointing at worst. Let's not forget - this was the reason why we sought out Nielson on loan - we needed better. For that reason, I'm not very excited about the prospect of slotting Artus back in to that position in Nielson's absence.

I might favour the 4-3-3 that AdamHaddock mentioned for Tamworth, or, of course, we could recall Soares (surely we will) and try him again there (although a similar observation to Artus applies re - his form there earlier in the season). However many we play up front (2, or 3), I'm hoping that Pearson or Southwell come into the team and take their opportunity, because, for me, Cook and Elding have been given a host of opportunities and both have looked substandard (at least, for a team that has pretensions to automatic promotion). I'm also of the opinion that we should refrain from d1cking about with the back four - this should remain the same personel and shape wherever possible, so long as we are still looking tight, calamitous losses of form notwithstanding.

Has Soares ever actually played up front for us, could be wrong but don't think he has. He seems the ideal candidate for the wide left of a front three but H&S seem reluctant to give him a go up front. I agree with Chaos Cook and Elding both have had lots of game time now with a truly miserable return, time to give Soares a run in the side and Pearson (if fit).

Thanoj in a middle three for me and I also agree that we shouldn't be messing with the back four - yet although Pond should be feeling Miller breathing down his back to get back into the side.

Quoted from chaos33

I'm also of the opinion that we should refrain from d1cking about with the back four - this should remain the same personel and shape wherever possible, so long as we are still looking tight, calamitous losses of form notwithstanding.

Obviously best 4 at the back is best but in this specific case I'm not suggesting picking the best team, I'm suggesting(and no more) a "shake up".

Though bear in mind playing an extra central defender should (least in theory) make you even more solid.
Notwithstanding the effects of any new formation - if that's your part your point then I certainly accept it !
But once again it wouldn't overly concern me if I thought it right to implement any wider longer term plan.

Suppose my whole point initially was whether Thomas is the "elephant in room" (or at least a contender to look at) for this left side midfield position.

Think Swansea Mariner makes a good point about Soares playing left side striker.
But if he doesn't come back it's either:

a) Artus left side of a 442  
b) 3 central midfielders (possibly Artus again or an arguable lack of cover on the flanks from central midfielders like e.g. Thanoj)
c) 433/451 (with strikers helping to cover the flanks) in which case who plays up front as...

- main/sole striker ? (you don't seem to fancy Cook and not sure I fancy Hannah often all on his own)
- left side striker ?!

Southwell Pearson or Colbeck perhaps but any of them playing that side having to track back hardly fills you with total confidence either !

Tbc I'd probably go Artus in a "442/433" if I wasn't "rotating the lot" so to speak (and not sure I'd actually do it tbh)

But if I was I'd be thinking of going something (admittedly much weaker on the face of it) like...

...............Fleming
.....Ford....Pearson...Miller
Hatton..........^..........Thomas
..|.............Pond..............|
...v.....Thanoj......Artus.....v
.........Southwell...Cook

Just giving some food for thought that we might get more out of Thomas (or Hatton) in a formation that allows them to play further up the pitch.
(+ there's an opportunity to change things around to learn more about players, rest players for Hyde, get others fitter etc)

Anyway if you don't fancy "squad rotation" and think our "best XI" can take us all the way every game until the end of the season (which you obviously don't), then left side it's a choice of either Artus, Thomas or someone else, take your pick !

Well, I think what S&H will do is bring in Artus on the left and stick with 4-4-2. For me, that selection is only proven not to work very well. What it does do is resist the temptation to disturb the side too much. That leaves the debate about to what extent we should be making changes after a defeat. A similar conundrum applies with Soares, although he's not here at present - he hasn't had as many chances as Artus to impress.

We could go 5-3-2, and bring in Miller - encouraging Thomas and Wood to get forward, but where would Colbeck fit into that? If he was retained at right midfield that would make us unbalanced.
I think I would personally go 4-3-3 and bring in Thanoj to play left-centre mid. Hannah would play up front with Pearson ideally. If not, well have to stick with Cook or Elding and hope for improvement. Again, the theme for me would be minimal disruption to the back four.

There's a case for a 'shake up', but I'm not sure it's the answer - especially if it involves bringing in Ford or Hatton. One or two changes would be the max for me. The great unknown, of course, is how much we have practiced another formation, eg: 4-3-3. There'll be those who'll point out that when we've tried it, we haven't looked particularly competent or comfortable.

100% keep the back four as it is !

You have got to play Hannah, he doesn't seem to do much but his movement off the ball is actually really good and he knows where the goal is.

Play thanoj more, I like Disley and Niven but think thanoj brings something else to the team, and he is only a young lad.

Never play elding again, of Saturday was one of his better days, then god help us, we need G Pearson back

If we'e going to stick with 4-4-2 then I'd actually consider Thanoj for the left ahead of Artus - that's essentially a choice between a square peg and a dud. Square peg for me

Appreciate where you're coming from chaos.

Quoted from chaos33

Well, I think what S&H will do is bring in Artus on the left and stick with 4-4-2.

That's what I thought too until I saw this....
http://www.thisisgrimsby.co.uk.....71-detail/story.html

Quoted from chaos33

I think I would personally go 4-3-3 and bring in Thanoj to play left-centre mid.

Certainly an option but hope you see my point even that's not 100% ideal.

Quoted from chaos33

The great unknown, of course, is how much we have practiced another formation, eg: 4-3-3. There'll be those who'll point out that when we've tried it, we haven't looked particularly competent or comfortable.

Perhaps though I see 433 more as a 442 if e.g. Colbeck wide right tracks back and then the 3 central midfielders "pan out" over to the left so to speak.
Personally I'd have no eneromous concerns playing it (though like I said Thanoj left side isn't ideal) especially away but that's just my opinion.

Quoted from chaos33

We could go 5-3-2, and bring in Miller - encouraging Thomas and Wood to get forward, but where would Colbeck fit into that?

Well for me he wouldn't (and neither would Wood with them both rested) but once again it's all about opinions of strategy.

Quoted from chaos33

There's a case for a 'shake up', but I'm not sure it's the answer - especially if it involves bringing in Ford or Hatton. One or two changes would be the max for me.

Well I might be keen to avoid that !
But for me it all depends what exact changes they were...  
Think I'd either go with our best team (which may or may not include changes e.g. up front) or a worst one.
Just personally would run a mile away from taking arguably bigger risks making only 1 or 2 key changes here and there like we did in the cup. (but obviously accept the proof is always in the pudding).
Put it this way, I wouldn't pick a strongest team except to e.g. replace SPearson with Ford or Wood with Hatton !  

One other thing I'll say is it's very easy for me to put forward the prospect of playing what looks a much weakened side but I'm not the manager of GTFC ! (and tbf my selections never gets to play either (not that I'm expecting them to win of course)).

So perhaps it's just better to "keep the faith" so to speak and try to bag the 3 points. (presuming another team can't)

Most probably being negative here but if we lose then to come back to your good point

Quoted from chaos33

That leaves the debate about to what extent we should be making changes after a defeat.

then would say it's not unthinkable we could have some even tougher decisions to make v Hyde.
Unless perhaps there's a new left sided player in the building by then (if not before).

Quoted from chaos33

A similar conundrum applies with Soares, although he's not here at present - he hasn't had as many chances as Artus to impress.

Agree with that !
Though suppose to some extent you've got to trust the managers eyes and judgement because if he's not been given the chance they must have had (or still have) their reasons for it.