One Striker Up Front At Home.

I though this Saturday was a great opportunity for 3 points and a push for the playoffs.
How wrong was I, one up front at home again against next bottom of the league.
Score first you win that match easily, they where not on a great run.
One shot on target in 90 minutes and they could of had 4 goals.
A decent crowd yesterday not much incentive to return anytime soon unfortunately.
We are now looking down and not up with 2 tough games to come,

We do need hight in the side I know people will harp on about this leading to the big hoof but to combat that I would say we still looked to hit Thomas with that sort of ball and he was hopelessly surrounded by big defenders that gave him no chance.

A mix of play needs to be used but just pumping the ball into channels where nobody is or has the pace to matter did not work at all. Most were overhit and either sailed out for a goal kick or fed the keeper.

Must agree, we had Thomas on his own isolated and the ball just kept coming back at us.

Unfortunately I'll say this, someone needs to tell macca to stop banging the ball up needlessly, so I'm afraid for as good as macca is, and my god I think we'd be lower in the league without his form this season, it's his distribution that lets us down in those sort of games..
He needs to pull the defenders closer to him rather than telling them to push up the field .. we need play from the back through then Hess we look more of a threat...

Didn't hear any moans about playing one striker when we were on the run of 5 wins in 7 or whatever it was.

Playing 1 striker doesn't make you defensive just like playing 3 up top doesn't make you a more effective attacking team. Its no good having 2 up top if we can't build controlled possession up the pitch and get the ball to the forward players.

Its just an easy/lazy criticism to make from people (I'm not singling yoda out on this point) that always demand we revert to the 442 of years gone by. The game's moved on.

We switched to 2 up front just before their goal.....

Quoted from Tommy

Didn't hear any moans about playing one striker when we were on the run of 5 wins in 7 or whatever it was.

Playing 1 striker doesn't make you defensive just like playing 3 up top doesn't make you a more effective attacking team. Its no good having 2 up top if we can't build controlled possession up the pitch and get the ball to the forward players.

Its just an easy/lazy criticism to make from people (I'm not singling yoda out on this point) that always demand we revert to the 442 of years gone by. The game's moved on.

Partly agree --if you have 1 striker you don't just welly the ball in the air hoping he can outjump 10 ft defenders. If he somehow does there is nobody to run onto his flicks etc.The way forward is obviously down the wings which enables midfielders to get forward. I noticed yesterday that Pringle spent more time on the right wing and everytime he got the ball he had to cut inside in order to use his left foot. Besides being so predictable and making it easy for the fullback it just stopped us going forward. If you cut inside occasionally you create space on that wing -our fullback should be running into this space to receive the ball and then get a cross in. Don't we learn tactics anymore

A lot of good teams survive without 2 strikers. We could have 2 up front yesterday but what's the point of midfield and defence aren't stringing passes together.

I just think that Thomas would be more effective if he had a partner and we were playing more to his strengths. He's doing a Stirling job up there on his own, but I bet he ain't really enjoying it and wiould far rather have a strike partner to take the pressure off

For me I’d personally like to see two up front home and away. I know the game has changed but think that 2 forwards can pull defenders around bit more and arguably break down the opposition.

Yesterday I get why we played that way but Wes was just two isolated and the mid field sat too deep, was this our lack of savvy or Mac’s set up? Who knows but we created hardly anything and their keeper had a relatively easy day.

We lost yesterday due to a number of factors but I’m not sure 1 up front was the key one.

Easy to say 2 upfront but who of the central midfield 3 do you drop to accommodate? I think those 3 (Hess, Clifton, embleton) have been amongst  our better players. However not sure a cm partnership of say embleton and Hess would be anything like strong enough due to  being too lightweight. Or any 2 from the 3 really. Hess and Clifton would have the energy but probably not creative enough for me and perhaps a bit lightweight when  only 2 of them. Replace hess with embleton and you increase creativity but maybe a drop in energy and definitely lose a bit of bite and defensiveness and still lightweight. Might not be so bad when we have a proper defence back but as it's their first game back after time off and its away to Lincoln might be a risk.
Unless you go 3 at the back and drop a defender, but people didn't like us with that formation either.
Who were you thinking of dropping Yoda?

Quoted from toontown

Easy to say 2 upfront but who of the central midfield 3 do you drop to accommodate? I think those 3 (Hess, Clifton, embleton) have been amongst  our better players. However not sure a cm partnership of say embleton and Hess would be anything like strong enough due to  being too lightweight. Or any 2 from the 3 really. Hess and Clifton would have the energy but probably not creative enough for me and perhaps a bit lightweight when  only 2 of them. Replace hess with embleton and you increase creativity but maybe a drop in energy and definitely lose a bit of bite and defensiveness and still lightweight. Might not be so bad when we have a proper defence back but as it's their first game back after time off and its away to Lincoln might be a risk.
Unless you go 3 at the back and drop a defender, but people didn't like us with that formation either.
Who were you thinking of dropping Yoda?

If you are agreeing with 5 in midfield then considering we were up against the second from bottom team we looked poor and overrun so it didn't work on Saturday and we only really created one worthwhile effort on goal.

Quoted from toontown

Easy to say 2 upfront but who of the central midfield 3 do you drop to accommodate? I think those 3 (Hess, Clifton, embleton) have been amongst  our better players. However not sure a cm partnership of say embleton and Hess would be anything like strong enough due to  being too lightweight. Or any 2 from the 3 really. Hess and Clifton would have the energy but probably not creative enough for me and perhaps a bit lightweight when  only 2 of them. Replace hess with embleton and you increase creativity but maybe a drop in energy and definitely lose a bit of bite and defensiveness and still lightweight. Might not be so bad when we have a proper defence back but as it's their first game back after time off and its away to Lincoln might be a risk.
Unless you go 3 at the back and drop a defender, but people didn't like us with that formation either.
Who were you thinking of dropping Yoda?

Got a feeling MJ might trial three at the back before the end of the season with Hendrie on the right and possibly Ring or Fox if he stays on the left which will help the midfield three more defensively and have the option of playing someone off Thomas. Wide areas aren't working for us at the minute probably due to lack of personnel and by pushing the full backs into being wing backs it may do the trick. Make us more solid and add an attacking threat at the same time with an extra man up front..

Quoted from Bigdog

Got a feeling MJ might trial three at the back before the end of the season with Hendrie on the right and possibly Ring or Fox if he stays on the left which will help the midfield three more defensively and have the option of playing someone off Thomas. Wide areas aren't working for us at the minute probably due to lack of personnel and by pushing the full backs into being wing backs it may do the trick. Make us more solid and add an attacking threat at the same time with an extra man up front..

I’d agree with this as clearly Hendrie is good enough to go forward and on yesterday’s early showing Ring isn’t shy either. MJ has dabbled a bit with this in the past if I recall right.

one up front could work if the striker is the right one....Thomas has performed pretty well in that role but has looked a bit not at it of late IMO. Yesterday his off the ball positioning and movement wasnt really there for me..i think apart from one run where he peeled off towards the back post in the first half he doesnt move the opposition enough. Never seems to be on the move before the ball is passed and often stood in the wrong channel when we were defending.

Yesterday was difficult for him as support and service was pretty poor but could help himself with improved movement as i think that would help the service find him.

I’d like a 4-1-4-1 formation with Thomas on his own up top. What he needs is support and runners from midfield, the way we play at the moment he’s far to isolated.

Quoted from wiggers

I’d like a 4-1-4-1 formation with Thomas on his own up top. What he needs is support and runners from midfield, the way we play at the moment he’s far to isolated.

We effectively play a 4-1-4-1 now with Clifton and Embleton supporting centrally. The problem is we don't get enough defensive support from wide areas and it isn't offset with effective pacy attacking down the flanks other than when Vernam's on his game. Wide areas need improving or a rethink in formation is needed to make us more effective and pacy going forward. Our ball retention, movement and passing improvement needs to be more consistent and for longer periods in games. We'll have to be patient until players return in the short term and the young side develops and gels in the medium term I guess. After the hindrance of injuries and suspensions, MJ's got the luxury of nearly twenty games to refine the side, formation and tactical options in readiness for next season..

Still, reassuring to know that we've got you, who's one step ahead of him mate.  

Quoted from forza ivano

I just think that Thomas would be more effective if he had a partner and we were playing more to his strengths. He's doing a Stirling job up there on his own, but I bet he ain't really enjoying it and wiould far rather have a strike partner to take the pressure off

Are you saying Wes is doing a great job, as good as Sterling silver, or do you mean he's performing a role similar to that wee fellah that plays for City?  

I'd play a proper 433, three strikers in Thomas, Vernam and Cardwell (or another striker to hold up the ball), you keep the midfield three and our wingbacks can bomb up and down, Thomas and Vernam can track back if needed to cover oppositions full backs if they move forward with play.

There is always the fine balancing act of keeping tight at the back whilst ensuring you have a goal threat.

Yesterday was the first game in a long time where we didn't have our backs to the wall and it told. As MJ alluded to post match, we are a very good counter attacking team. The rest will come with time I am sure.  Any chance of getting back into the game was lost yesterday once the second went in.

I wouldn't be surprised to see 3-5-2 tried again before the season is over. Ohman, Davies and RHJ for his pace maybe with Hendrie and Ring wide.

McKeown
RHJ Davis Ohman
Hendrie Embleton Hess Clifton Ring
Vernam Thomas

When you consider how we were plummeting this time last year, progress has been made. We have a tough few weeks ahead but with players coming back from injury and only the league to concentrate on I am sure we will be fine.

The worrying thing again is that we have appeared to be struggling for goals again 0 in 3 games now and Thomas seems a little out of sorts so 2 up front should give him the help he needs.
Unfortunately Cardwells injured, A.Rose for me is not ready to be thrown in yet and Vernam is more effective from wide so i woukd either go with Cook or look to bring someone in.

With Hooper and Robles gone I’m hopeful Jolley has someone in mind who he can bring in during this window

I don't think it's surprising that managers err on the side of caution. In modern football management, the most important thing is not to lose as that's what gets you the sack. A 1-0 win ranks above a 4-4 draw. MJ knows success this season is a top 10 or even a top half finish. If we don't lose very often then he's got a good chance of being judged a success.

Other than the obvious that we were miles off the pace on Saturday, our problem wasn't the formation but more the constant and usually aimless punts up front.  

Thomas isn't a traditional target man in the sense that he'll win every single header, nor is he the LJL style who will chase every single lost cause down and through sheer persistence get a degree of success.  One of my favourite target men of recent years as Padraig Amond, he dictated where the ball went and made sure he was there before it arrived.  He led the line superbly and made sure he brought others into play, often to get the return ball for a chance on goal.  This side of his game was often overlooked just because of how many goals he scored for us.  Thomas isn't an Amond either.  He's more of a Tony Rees, better with the ball around his chest than at his head.  Backs in a lot, can win free-kicks, dangerous when the defender gets too close to him.  

It was just lazy from Town to hit it long and hope he would get on the end of it.  

In terms of the formation, our best approach is getting Embleton running at teams from a bit of a free-role.  If we go 4-4-2 we don't get that at all.

4-2-3-1 or whatever we're calling it is by far our best formation.

If we could play 4-4-4-2, we'd probably do quite a bit better.  

I have to say the worrying thing for me with having 5 in midfield and one up top is how few chances the midfield seem to create, i mean with 5 in mid we should be stronger against a 4 surely?
I think we are missing a solid defensive mid, Welsh probably was brought in for that purpose but seems to be plagued by injury im told.
We do seem to have a lot of attacking players in the mid but seem to create very little at times. just think the base or spine is missing, something like a derrick Niven type but that can pass to someone.

Quoted from Maringer

If we could play 4-4-4-2, we'd probably do quite a bit better.  

Whaaaat???

We hardly have enough players available to play 4-4-4-2 😀

I thought when akheem rose came on he was exactly the partner thomas needed up front. He had the energy and pace to go left and right and drag their defenders and give thomas alot more space.

I understand people saying its too soon because you can see he’s quite raw but how do you develop without playing? I guess its more of a gamble than bringing someone in but if theres no one immenent i’d like to see him given the chance to be honest, I think thomas would soon let him know what he needs from him.

I think there is probably a lot which young strikers can learn on the training field as opposed to the pitch. You could see Rose was getting exasperated by the little niggly fouls and pushes (not given by the referee) which were putting him off balance when he was trying to receive and shield the ball. He'll hopefully be able to learn how to deal with this a little better - get his shove in first, so to speak. That's where you'd hope an experienced striker such as Thomas would be able to give advice - they are a similar size so he ought to be able to pass on some pertinent knowledge.