Hurst the tinkerman.

Quoted from sam gy

Ok, but on this occasion, our gameplan worked better than theirs.

Err, I don't think so, once again, we lost.

Quoted from jamesgtfc

A couple of stinkers on Saturday, so should Hurst tinker or not for tomorrow?

Suspect we will see Green for Hunt plus whatever he decides to do at left back and the rest will be no change

Remind me where we were in October of AB’s first season of his second stint?
This team will take 10 - 12 games to gel. I’d be really interested to see where we are then and where we are after the next ten after that. I’d say we’ll be 0.5 to 1 point a game better by then.

Quoted from 123614

Err, I don't think so, once again, we lost.

Yes, but I would imagine losing 5-1 is a lot more demoralising to the squad than losing 3-2. Also a goal difference of -4 , as opposed to -1 , at the end of the season could make a big difference to the final league placing. Nobody likes to lose but the greater the loss, the more the psychological damage.

If you take the title of this thread and then the main arguments within it I can't help but feel you're at a contradiction.

Hurst is a tinkerman and it's affecting our performance because players don't understand one another - Certain players weren't good enough and so they need dropping.

Hurst is a tinkerman and we're not progressing because he's signed 60 players - We need to sign better players if we're going to progress through the leagues.

The call to play the same team every week because that's how players gel is then met with so and so wasn't good enough and so and so should be in. That contradicts the argument of keeping the same team AND the ability for players to gel. It seems that some are expecting an entire squad to be match sharp, gelled and flowing before the first competitive game which my personal opinion is unrealistic.

Quoted from rancido

Yes, but I would imagine losing 5-1 is a lot more demoralising to the squad than losing 3-2. Also a goal difference of -4 , as opposed to -1 , at the end of the season could make a big difference to the final league placing. Nobody likes to lose but the greater the loss, the more the psychological damage.

I get what you are saying, but a goal difference of -4 after just 2 games is irrelevant.  

Quoted from chaos33

This is like two bald men squabbling over a comb. It was a cr@p original point, swiftly punctured.

However….we do need to be bolder and more attacking in home games, starting tomorrow.

My point exactly!

Quoted from gtfc_chris

If you take the title of this thread and then the main arguments within it I can't help but feel you're at a contradiction.

Hurst is a tinkerman and it's affecting our performance because players don't understand one another - Certain players weren't good enough and so they need dropping.

Hurst is a tinkerman and we're not progressing because he's signed 60 players - We need to sign better players if we're going to progress through the leagues.

The call to play the same team every week because that's how players gel is then met with so and so wasn't good enough and so and so should be in. That contradicts the argument of keeping the same team AND the ability for players to gel. It seems that some are expecting an entire squad to be match sharp, gelled and flowing before the first competitive game which my personal opinion is unrealistic.

Quite.

Most were generally happy with the Wimbledon performance and only really disappointed by the result on Saturday. The only thing that would disappoint me is if we revert to the turgid football served up at BP for most of last season. We need to get on the front foot and fire up the fans.

I would go with the same eleven that started the first two games but just tweak the set-up.  Midfield 3 with Hunt and Clifton pressing ahead of Conteh.  Vernam and Eisa wide cutting in, not central and drifting out to the wings.  

I don't think it's the XI selected that necessarily prevented us from picking up more than 1 point, but the way we've set up to play.

Obviously big question marks over Glennon after the last two games.  He doesn't fancy Amos though, clearly.  Efete did ok on Saturday when he came on but he's not a natural down there.  In the absence of a natural left-footer further forward, I think there's some definite merit in having something to resemble balance.    If it's a definite no-go on Glennon and Amos I would be half tempted to put Khouri there.  Did ok a few seasons back when asked to do a job there, not ideal but options are limited.

I've a feeling he'll bring Green into the midfield to add some steel, which I'm ok with but that means you've got to let Conteh go further forward.  Otherwise it's 2 guys sat in front of the back four.  Conteh driving forward could be a bit Jay Matete like.

Quoted from 123614

I get what you are saying, but a goal difference of -4 after just 2 games is irrelevant.  

It isn't if that -4 is maintained and still there at the end of their season. Playing a gung-ho style of football and getting beaten with a large negative goal difference can be the difference between promotion or a play- off place - or a play- off place or being an also ran. It can also be the difference between league survival and relegation.