Just Back

I don't think he's been that much different from last season , he's been ok for me in the main .

He has a lot better goal output from the left , but we have our most effective playet there, so he's not getting a game there unless Eisa gets injured  - he's never looked consistently brilliant in CM when he's played there ever really has he .

Ironically Glennon and Clifton was the 2 positions I thought were boxed off at the end of last season as I thought it was a decent combination with Clifton's ability to protect Glennon's obvious defensive deficiency .

But we signed Eisa who has been great , and Glennon got torched at Notts .

Quoted from MuddyWaters

Serious question. Are you going 4-4-2 or 3-5-2?

Wrexham away showed that Waterfall isn’t right in a 3. If you go 4-4-2, where do Eisa and Khan fit as I don’t really trust either to cover a full back.

I firmly believe that we intended to play 4-2-3-1 but the 3 have failed to support the 1 and neither of our left back options are good enough so the three end up too deep. Rose has been pretty isolated every time we play and, but for some Eisa worldies, we would be in a worse position than we are now.

That’s not angry or entitled or pant wetting, it’s what’s happening.

Tough one. Home to Barrow Tuesday night so I’d like to see us go with two up front, especially as they often go 5-3-2. If we matched them up it would be hard to say who we should sacrifice. I don’t really like going 5 at the back in the home games like this so I might go 4-3-1-2/4-3-3. Amos would be left back. Mullarkey right. I’d have Conteh, Holahan and Clifton as the 3 with Eisa cutting in off either wing and Rose and Wilson if he’s fit enough. Obviously that’s an opinion that’s not worth much given all the factors I know nothing about.

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

I would play him out wide. He is not the type of player you would expect out there but he is strangely effective and has both created and scored goals from that position before.

The midfield balance isn't right at all as we are both too open and not creating enough. Hope to see Wilson with Rose tomorrow night to give the midfield half a chance of finding a pass to hurt the opposition and to give the two wide players greater options.

Totally agree. At LM, in that not-quite-a-proper-winger role that Hurst made for him, he was able to fully exploit his greatest asset (his energy) and often managed to pop up in really dangerous positions through sheer hard running. Ok, his finishing leaves a little to be desired but if he gets himself in and around the six-yard box enough he might chip in 8-9 goals a season, which is nothing to be sniffed at.  

On paper, with his running, defensive reliability and ability to chip in with the odd goal, he's an ideal Hurst-type wide man in a 4-4-2/4-2-3-1-type formation. In a 4-3-3 it doesn't feel like he's a natural fit.

Quoted from AncientExiledMariner

On the topic of Clifton. He's clearly not in form. Hurst has to decide whether the other options are better. Ultimately, he doesn't feel that is the case and the off the ball work give more than the on the ball errors. Harry is still the same player, and he'll get back to last seasons quality. He just needs time and encouragement.

Do we really think he wants to miss those opportunities? He'll be mortified.

The thing about Clifton, is he gets these chances because he doesn't stop running, doesn't stop moving and he's the guy who made it into the box to get that opportunity. Maybe other players might execute it better, but they gotta get on the end of it first.

i havent watched it back but from where i was sat centrally in the pontoon the glaring miss people have commented on in the last home game from clifton was to me a much harder chance than what people made out at the time. He  wasnt one on one with the keeper straight on. The trajectory of the ball and the defender coming across to cover the angle was sharper than that and he only had a small window to get his shot through and avoid the keeper. its a shot id expect a league 2 midfielder not to score from more times than they put it away

Clifton’s end-product would be better if he played down the right because he isn’t good enough on his left foot, both shooting and especially crossing. Watch the extended highlights from Saturday for one perfect example - he gets played in down the left, got half an option on in the middle but smashes it high & wide when on his right foot that goes across the 6-yard box. Been the same for about 3 years now.

I think he gets used more on the left because of what he offers defensively to protect what is proving to be a weaker side of ours.

I've always previously thought he needs to played centrally and I do still think that is his best position (current form, which is what I'm certain it is, accepted).  But for the protection of the flank and the overload he gives you when he drifts inside a bit, I certainly can see why he has found himself shunted out wide for so much especially in a 4-4-2.  I also think he'll be there for Saturday too with a return to two strikers.

I'm just wondering what the issue was with Amos and Glennon being on the bench on Saturday. They are our only two left sided full backs, and I've been fairly comfortable certainly with how Amos has played this season. Has there been any mention anywhere at all, that one or both of them weren't fully fit?

I'm just a fan of having round pegs in round holes, and I think it is noticeable that often when getting forward down the left, Miche has to stop and bring the ball back or inside, because he's limited with not having a strong left foot cross or pass.

I'd be interested to know if it's been discussed anywhere in terms of fitness of the LBs

Quoted from lew chaterleys lover

I would play him out wide. He is not the type of player you would expect out there but he is strangely effective and has both created and scored goals from that position before.

The midfield balance isn't right at all as we are both too open and not creating enough. Hope to see Wilson with Rose tomorrow night to give the midfield half a chance of finding a pass to hurt the opposition and to give the two wide players greater options.

I don't often agree with you, but on Harry I was nodding my head reading this. Thought the best I saw from HC was when he was left midfield. Incidentally the 2 times I've seen Harry this season I haven't noticed much difference to what I saw last year, bar he hasn't scored. It maybe he's 5 or 10% below last season's standards, but I didn't see him do too much wrong on Saturday

FAO DALE H - Hurst said that their right winger was a handful, and he felt that Michee was the most athletic of his options and the best person to deal with that threat. He did well, I thought

Quoted from MuddyWaters

Struggling to accept that we should be accepting of another defeat. We’ve won two of thirteen and that’s simply not good enough. I’m grateful for what Hurst has done but we’re in virtually the same league position as when he took over. Enough is enough.

https://www.11v11.com/teams/mansfield-town/tab/leagueTables/05-october-2021/

https://www.11v11.com/teams/mansfield-town/tab/leagueTables/19-may-2022/

https://theathletic.com/football/game/grimsby-town-vs-swindon-town/uNnah983wc2pvsC6/ - Grimsby have 13 shots as opposed to Swindons 8, with 9 chances created to the home sides 8.

https://theathletic.com/football/game/crawley-town-vs-grimsby-town/AsZFPNFcrDbLhdg4/  - Grimsby have 18 shots compared to Crawleys 13, with 13 chances created to the away sides 9.

https://theathletic.com/football/game/grimsby-town-vs-wrexham/c8rwv9vhFXJCubjl/ - Wrexham dominate the chances/shots stats as Grimsby dominate possession.

https://theathletic.com/football/game/bradford-city-vs-grimsby-town/D1SX9SCHXSa7VfHh/ - Bradford surprisingly have more possession & more shots, Grimsby more chances on target. Grimsby win on xG

https://theathletic.com/football/game/gillingham-vs-grimsby-town/YHQvWg3no6u1Qucl/ - Grimsby dominate everything against Gillingham.

https://theathletic.com/football/game/grimsby-town-vs-walsall/FNq4ItHBCOUkdLx6/ - Walsall take the attacking stats, Grimsby dominate possession.

https://theathletic.com/football/game/grimsby-town-vs-mansfield-town/5b8N2Ig3xb9nnJ55/ - Grimsby outclassed in every department against Mansfield.

https://theathletic.com/football/game/grimsby-town-vs-salford-city/fqpMsmfo5dACZC1r/ - Grimsby shade all stats bar chances created, creating 5 more than Salford.

https://theathletic.com/football/game/grimsby-town-vs-notts-county/CaNySw9xAtAd3aek/ - Notts Co dominate possession and shots on target, with shots and chances created slightly more.

https://theathletic.com/football/game/afc-wimbledon-vs-grimsby-town/vH5xC3htZWMP42rY/ - Grimsby dominate possession and lead on attacking stats, with a penalty upping Wimbledons xG to beat Towns.

We have had 113 shots this season with 34 of them being on target giving us a 30% accuracy rate. Compare this to 118 shots against with 42 on target, giving a 33.05% overall accuracy rating for our combined opponents. Clearly behind but not by a substantial margin. We've created 85 chances compared to 86 chances against so again no difference. We've won 51 corners and conceded 61 corners. Our possession on average is 50.73%.

We sit 17th for total shots over the season with 113. Wrexham and Mansfield (181) lead the way with Barrow (84) sat bottom. Of the teams in the top twelve for shots, we've played six of them, drawing two and losing four. Of the teams we've played in the bottom twelve we haven't lost, winning two and drawing two. The top four for shots are Wrexham, Mansfield, Wimbledon & Crawley with Swindon and Notts Co sitting 9th and 10th respectively.

When you look more closely at Shots on Target (SOT), We've played seven of the top twelve. In order; Wrexham (71), Mansfield (54), Wimbledon (53), Swindon (53), Crawley (50), Colchester (48 ), Notts Co (48 ), Crewe (46), Accrington (44), Doncaster (44), Newport (43), Bradford (42). Our own record is a bit more bleak for SOT, sitting 20th in the table on 34  with only Salford (33), Morecambe (33) and Barrow (27) behind us.

We sit 8th in the league for goals per shots on target with 0.35 goals per SOT, but 12th for goals per shots. So despite not having a great deal of shots on target, we tend to score more from them than other teams.

Defensively we sit 8th on goals conceded (13) with Gillingham, Mansfield and Barrow out in front on eight. We also sit 8th in terms of shots against (118 ) with Wrexham on top (95) and Crewe bottom (161). The other eleven teams in the top twelve are (in order); Wrexham, Wimbledon, Bradford, Mansfield, Crawley, Gillingham, Barrow - US - Newport, Notts Co, Swindon, MK Dons. Despite having the lowest shots against, Wrexham have the second worst goals conceded column, conceding 23 goals from 39 SOT.

SOT(Against) per 90 we sit 10th in the table with 4.20 per game with Bradford (2.60) on top and FGR (5.80) bottom. Similar to above, we've played seven of the other top eleven teams, with Crawley dropping to 17th for SOT(A). Barrow are 4th in the table for SOT(A), with 3.33 per game.

In terms of possession, we sit 9th, with 50.7% on average. The top 12 consists of: Notts Co (63.9), Swindon, Mansfield, Crawley, Salford, Bradford, Stockport, FGR, Grimsby, Doncaster, Wrexham, Crewe.

Let's place this into some focus. Wimbledon, Wrexham, Bradford, Mansfield, Crawley, Notts Co and Swindon all feature in the top 12 teams defensively, offensively and for possession statistics. So seven of our opening ten fixtures have been against teams that are proficient at both ends of the pitch and - with the exception of Wrexham (49.7) average over 50% possession. The remaining three games against sides who don't feature in all three fields - Gillingham, Salford and Walsall - we haven't lost against.

Our lowest possession statistics have come against the three teams sitting top of that list.

We're in the top 10 defensively even with three games in which we've conceded 3 goals. 11 of our 14 goals conceded came in the four games in which we've played the sides to have scored 20+ goals this season.

Attacking wise we've only failed to score twice, against Wimbledon (second best defensive record) and Wrexham (second worst defensive record). The Wrexham game for me is the biggest outlier in terms of trends and was the game we missed Danny Rose and I think it showed. That isn't to suggest I think we'd have won or drawn with Rose in the team but his industry up front would - in my opinion - been more beneficial for us than what Pyke offered.

Why would I consider this important and post-worthy? There's a growing voice that says PH should be sacked because we're not doing well enough. Yet no-one is looking at the facts of the opening 10 games and how teams are doing and placing things into context. I'd seen a comment somewhere that the more we drop down, every team will be above us, which of course is true and therefore isn't an argument you can really use about the difficulty of our fixtures.

We watch each game in isolation and get frustrated that we don't win. Understandable, we all want to and that's what the game is about. But seven of our 10 fixtures are against statistically the better teams of the opening 10 games. That doesn't just look at us v them, it looks at our opposition and their other games too. The league and the stats prove that we have played 7 of the most competent teams in the league.

It also offers an argument against the one that says PH plays negative football. We've had better attacking stats compared to our opposition in half our games, some of which are against sides in the top 6.

With the exception of Mansfield for their dominance in all areas of the game, and Wrexham purely on the scoreline, I don't believe there has been a game since that has shown us to be poor and we are on the fine margins in many cases. People keep citing defensive lapses in concentration, not tracking a man etc, but then call for PH head.

It's incredibly frustrating to be 'nearly' there and the wrong side of margins, seeing us miss good chances etc but everything tells us we're not far. The top 6 - of which we've played all of - we haven't lost by more than 1 in the cases we have lost.

After the Barrow game - which will be tough, expect a lack of goals from both teams and few shots - we have a run that although not 'easy' will give us a much better opportunity to see what we have and build momentum.

Patience was the most important thing we needed this season as referenced when the fixtures came out and acknowledging the difficult start we had. The games that we thought would be 'easy' (Crawley, Wimbledon) have proven to not be the case and they're doing incredibly well. Now that that run of fixtures is coming to an end we need a little further patience to see how we perform against sides that have not yet performed to the same standard as the sides we've faced so far. If in ten games time we're still seeing the same patterns and still falling the wrong side of the fine margins then I'd much more understand the desire for that particular conversation and much as I wouldn't be contributing to the request for his dismissal I know you'd be providing an argument based on faith rather than evidence for his continuance.

For now though, I think context is needed in the grand scheme of the opening 10 games and not just judge purely on each game as an individual result.

Lastly, the first two links; the first shows Mansfields position on 05 October 2022 and the second shows it at the end of the season. If you think we need to hit panic stations give that a look first.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

So what constitutes a crisis? I’d say two wins in 13 games is a cause for concern. I’m no more entertained now than I was last year.

Isn't that somewhere in the region of the mid-season form in NL? Remind me what happened during the 18 months after that......