Just Back (merged)

Quoted from Croxton

You are both right. I also sit in the upper and fail to understand why someone on the coaching staff does not spend time, in the first half at least, reporting back from this vantage point. The set up of the opposition, the extent to which our defence drops off and the accuracy of Macca's kicking are just a few of many aspects of the game less visible at pitch side. Ironically Taft, their goalscorer, looked shaky early on and vulnerable on the deck. We failed to probe this potential weakness after the first 10 minutes.

The distance in McKeown's kicks has improved dramatically this season but they are not accurate. Their two centre halves must have thought Christmas had come early when we resorted to big punts up to our strikers, both of whom are under 6ft.

Quoted from moosey_club

But to me the players were clearly following the plan he set !!! He said as much afterwards, Embleton deep, Clifton high ..thats what they did on the day and we looked shite for it.  
He cant legislate for the terrible control and distribution of any player on the day admittedly , but the system and approach he set was wrong.

The only thing on this occasion he needs to look at is a mirror.

Hopefully he will recognise the error and go back to something a little less complicated which enables the technical players to be within passing distance of each other.

Exactly! By reviewing the game, stage by stage and seeing how the opposition reacted to and countered his format he will learn a lot. The format didn't work - he knows that and so doe we. But surely by using a style in match conditions is the only way to progress. It's all well and good trying this on the training pitch but you are playing against your own squad and they know what you are trying to achieve. The opposition are an unknown quantity and that is when you really know when something works or not.

Just one of those days were everything was wrong.  Putting a positive slant on it, if players are going to have stinkers I'd rather they all get them out the way at the same time.

McKeown in no way at any fault for the first goal.  He had already made his trademark wonder save early in the first half when their guy was through on goal.   We definitely missed Ohman and his presence, Davis didn't do much wrong but no way near as dominant and it showed.  Thought Collins had a decent game until his error for the second and then was badly exposed for pace as the guy galloped away at ease.  For those calling for Whitmore to step into his shoes, is Whitmore left-footed?  If not then it's a no for me.  You can't get away with a right footer playing on the left-hand side of a three.  As others have said, I'm a bit unsure on Ring.  He deserves time to adapt and the time for judging will be next season after a full pre-season.  

Midfield was the worst I've seen in a fair old while.  Clifton had a 'mare and he knew it, looked very frustrated with himself when he came off.  Hessenthaler tried but he didn't reach the levels of previous weeks.  Embleton needs a rest, it's that simple.  The decision to put him deeper was the wrong one, I can see the thinking behind it as we needed someone to tick things over like Woolford does. But whereas Woolford keeps the ball moving and retains possession by keeping it simple, Embleton tried too hard to play a killer pass or beat a man.  Of the three, I would have had Hessenthaler sitting the deepest.  

Up top I think someone should have introduced Thomas and Dennis to each other before the game.  They were absolute miles apart of each other all game, can't remember them linking up once.  Some pairings just click, some just don't.  Based on that performance, this is a pairing that's not well suited.  Both can count themselves very fortunate to not be subbed.  That said the service up to them was very, very poor indeed.  I understand the desire for goalscorers and ideally two guys up front banging them in would be brilliant.  But Cook brings more to the frontline than just goals, his work-rate really sets the tempo for everyone else.  

Options on the bench limited the changes we could make in midfield but I thought Jolley would have been justified in making at least one change after 30 minutes.  Either in midfield or attack, it was crying out for Cook's energy and perhaps someone like Vernam who would get the ball on the deck and try to do something.  As changes were made they appeared to be more of panic moves than something with logic behind it.  The fact we ended the game with 5 strikers on the pitch and a bit of a mis-matched midfield sort of summed the day up.

Very disappointing overall, very flat and definitely 3 points thrown away.  We made Cambridge look like Barcelona at times but really they were quite poor.  They were just better organised than us and seemed to have more energy - which has been our strength of late.   Feels like a case of 3 steps forward and then 1 step back, which is still progress and important to remember.  I don't think the blip justified some of the over-reactions I've seen, but equally so I don't think it should be ignored.   We made 3 changes and we were totally out of sorts, that's not something that can continue to happen.  We were up against a poor side in dreadful form, we should have hammered them and continued the feel good factor.  I still think we've got an outside chance of the play-offs, there's lots and lots of points that will be dropped by everyone in and around those places.  But it's next season when we'll be a real threat.

Quoted from rancido

Exactly! By reviewing the game, stage by stage and seeing how the opposition reacted to and countered his format he will learn a lot. The format didn't work - he knows that and so doe we. But surely by using a style in match conditions is the only way to progress. It's all well and good trying this on the training pitch but you are playing against your own squad and they know what you are trying to achieve. The opposition are an unknown quantity and that is when you really know when something works or not.

That's not quite right, all EFL clubs have access to every other clubs matches on video.

Quoted from diehardmariner

Just one of those days were everything was wrong.  Putting a positive slant on it, if players are going to have stinkers I'd rather they all get them out the way at the same time.

McKeown in no way at any fault for the first goal.  He had already made his trademark wonder save early in the first half when their guy was through on goal.   We definitely missed Ohman and his presence, Davis didn't do much wrong but no way near as dominant and it showed.  Thought Collins had a decent game until his error for the second and then was badly exposed for pace as the guy galloped away at ease. For those calling for Whitmore to step into his shoes, is Whitmore left-footed?  If not then it's a no for me.  You can't get away with a right footer playing on the left-hand side of a three.  As others have said, I'm a bit unsure on Ring.  He deserves time to adapt and the time for judging will be next season after a full pre-season.  

Midfield was the worst I've seen in a fair old while.  Clifton had a 'mare and he knew it, looked very frustrated with himself when he came off.  Hessenthaler tried but he didn't reach the levels of previous weeks.  Embleton needs a rest, it's that simple.  The decision to put him deeper was the wrong one, I can see the thinking behind it as we needed someone to tick things over like Woolford does. But whereas Woolford keeps the ball moving and retains possession by keeping it simple, Embleton tried too hard to play a killer pass or beat a man.  Of the three, I would have had Hessenthaler sitting the deepest.  

Up top I think someone should have introduced Thomas and Dennis to each other before the game.  They were absolute miles apart of each other all game, can't remember them linking up once.  Some pairings just click, some just don't.  Based on that performance, this is a pairing that's not well suited.  Both can count themselves very fortunate to not be subbed.  That said the service up to them was very, very poor indeed.  I understand the desire for goalscorers and ideally two guys up front banging them in would be brilliant.  But Cook brings more to the frontline than just goals, his work-rate really sets the tempo for everyone else.  

Options on the bench limited the changes we could make in midfield but I thought Jolley would have been justified in making at least one change after 30 minutes.  Either in midfield or attack, it was crying out for Cook's energy and perhaps someone like Vernam who would get the ball on the deck and try to do something.  As changes were made they appeared to be more of panic moves than something with logic behind it.  The fact we ended the game with 5 strikers on the pitch and a bit of a mis-matched midfield sort of summed the day up.

Very disappointing overall, very flat and definitely 3 points thrown away.  We made Cambridge look like Barcelona at times but really they were quite poor.  They were just better organised than us and seemed to have more energy - which has been our strength of late.   Feels like a case of 3 steps forward and then 1 step back, which is still progress and important to remember.  I don't think the blip justified some of the over-reactions I've seen, but equally so I don't think it should be ignored.   We made 3 changes and we were totally out of sorts, that's not something that can continue to happen.  We were up against a poor side in dreadful form, we should have hammered them and continued the feel good factor.  I still think we've got an outside chance of the play-offs, there's lots and lots of points that will be dropped by everyone in and around those places.  But it's next season when we'll be a real threat.

Looking back at the Lincoln game, Whitmore passed more than adequately with his left foot, which surprised me because I thought he may struggle playing on the left of three. I think it's more important that we have a mobile back three that plays higher up and on the front foot more rather than selecting personnel on how good they are with their left foot. Don't care how the three is made up from Ohman, Davis, RHJ and Whitmore, it's time to thank DC for his services and push on without him. DC's left foot wasn't very good with the pass straight to the opposition for their second goal, and as you say, very easily outpaced too. He's been a good servant for us but it's time to look to the future. Not meant to be an anti DC comment, more of a realistic pro progression of the team point of view. I don't see how him playing the last ten games is going to help us next season or the players who are most likely going to be with us getting splinters on the bench..

I was thinking more we need to look at someone who will be here next season and can fill in that role on a permanent basis, by that I'm thinking Grayson - if Jolley views him as someone he could bring in for the whole of next season.

I suppose what Collins does bring is experience, which we generally lack otherwise.  Ring is still adapting to the English game so it's important he does have someone who can guide him through the first few months.  You say about Whitmore's passing against Lincoln, it was fine but whenever play went across to that side he had to come inside (naturally so and on his stronger foot) it slowed us down if we tried to move the play across at the back.  The left sided centre-back also has to more or less play full-back when his wing-back has bombed on, I believe Collins played left -back quite a bit for Stoke and Sunderland.  That I'm aware of Whitmore hasn't played full-back at all, certainly not on his weaker foot.    

I did actually think Whitmore would have been the better option to replace Ohman as he appears more dominant in the air than Davis.  

Quoted from diehardmariner

I was thinking more we need to look at someone who will be here next season and can fill in that role on a permanent basis, by that I'm thinking Grayson - if Jolley views him as someone he could bring in for the whole of next season.

I suppose what Collins does bring is experience, which we generally lack otherwise.  Ring is still adapting to the English game so it's important he does have someone who can guide him through the first few months.  You say about Whitmore's passing against Lincoln, it was fine but whenever play went across to that side he had to come inside (naturally so and on his stronger foot) it slowed us down if we tried to move the play across at the back.  The left sided centre-back also has to more or less play full-back when his wing-back has bombed on, I believe Collins played left -back quite a bit for Stoke and Sunderland.  That I'm aware of Whitmore hasn't played full-back at all, certainly not on his weaker foot.    

I did actually think Whitmore would have been the better option to replace Ohman as he appears more dominant in the air than Davis.  

Because I was concerned about his selection on the left, I specifically watched him Diehard, and he passed accurately with his left foot without coming back inside. Surprised me because I thought he couldn't, but he could and did..

We're far too deep when we're defending and MJ needs a rethink and possibly go back to a higher pressing game from the back to help the midfield. I don't like how we are setting up to play at all.

As for Grayson. Looks like he's down the pecking order at CB. He's played wide before so wouldn't mind having a look at him at left wing back as he seems more athletic than Ring.

Time for MJ to experiment and learn more about the squad rather than tried and trusted, but not to the extent that Bignot went to..

Quoted from Croxton

You are both right. I also sit in the upper and fail to understand why someone on the coaching staff does not spend time, in the first half at least, reporting back from this vantage point. The set up of the opposition, the extent to which our defence drops off and the accuracy of Macca's kicking are just a few of many aspects of the game less visible at pitch side. Ironically Taft, their goalscorer, looked shaky early on and vulnerable on the deck. We failed to probe this potential weakness after the first 10 minutes.

There's normally someone up on the camera gantry doing analytics stuff. Would have thought they'd be in contact with the bench during the match.

Would anyone be suprised if Whitmore isn't here next season..seems to be 5th choice defender now that RHJ has performed so well there.  I think he's done ok when asked though does tend to dive in a bit much.

Quoted from Sigone

Would anyone be suprised if Whitmore isn't here next season..seems to be 5th choice defender now that RHJ has performed so well there.  I think he's done ok when asked though does tend to dive in a bit much.

If we're planning on playing with 3 centre backs we'd need a minimum of 5 and it's not so bad being 5th choice if three are starting. He's still young, worked with MJ before so might want to stay here and develop.