If we'd have signed two strikers before the season started, and only got Craig and Gent in on transfer deadline day, would the fan base have been any happier? I doubt it.
The lack of new striker is a massive elephant in the room.. However, if we hadn't signed a specialist left back that would have been just as negligent.
We have but we either don’t play him or we sub him off at the earliest opportunity. Maybe if we signed one with a bit more experience at this level it would have helped.
Gent acquitted himself well in the friendly against a strong Roma side and hasn't done owt wrong in his appearances since. I assume his substitutions were purely tactical.
Have you not considered that an experienced League 1 left back will be just that - a League 1 left back? As a club whose medium term aim is to get back to the Championship and stay there, signings like Gent are exactly what we need - someone who's not got as much experience as some at this level because of his age, but is potentially going to be a much better player than a League 1 left back longer term. Which is what we need if we want to progress. O'Keeffe is an experienced League 1 full back (right-sided I know but I'm using him to illustrate a point) and while he's capable of some good things, he's got so many deficiencies in his game that the idea of him playing regularly in the Championship is absolutely ludicrous.
Not knocking Gent but it seems like DC doesn’t have much faith in him at this point. Seems bizarre that we signed a LB then have given just him 25 and 45 minutes in our two home games and picked a CH in his position ahead of him at Lincoln.
Someone on Lincoln forum said we were a typical Clarke side with lots of height and physicality. I don’t know enough about him to say that’s true or not, but it might explain his liking for Earl at left back.
It's a bit to do with the player. Or a lot. Against Mansfield, after 25 minutes, Clarke changed the formation from 3-5-2 to 4-4-2. He brought Russell on to play in midfield, so we had to sacrifice a central defender. The formation we started the game with utilises three, 4-4-2 only requires two. But he didn't, he removed Gent and shifted a centre half over to left back. At Lincoln he played 3-5-2. He brought Pines, another centre half, into the team, but he didn't drop any of the three centre halves from the first game, he dropped Gent and played one of the centre halves as a wing back. At home to Northampton we again started with 3-5-2 with Gent back in the team. He was removed at half time, but I didn't see any change of formation. We continued playing 3-5-2 adding an additional centre half and again moving Earl to the left wing back position. It was from that position that Earl lost the ball which led directly to Northampton's first goal. Clarke has made some changes tactically when he's removed Gent, but not always, and even when he has, Gent hasn't been the obvious candidate to be removed. It's required a reshuffle to accommodate that change.
Agree with a lot of that. I'll be honest I haven't always understood why he's sacrificed Gent in particular, especially as Earl looks slightly awkward as an out and out left back (although I think he's played very well in the last two games in general). I simply put it down to Darrell Clarke knowing a lot more about football than I do. I think Gent will prove to be an excellent signing. He's spoken of in the highest regard by both fans and people in the game. Maybe lack of experience is an issue, but I'm pretty sure it's not lack of ability.
What we need to remember is Gent came in late (early by striker standards) no pre season as such with us. The Lincoln one when he didn't play I think Clarke wanted height and lots of it and watching it you could see why. Maybe as he gets fitter and learns the two ways he wants him to play he will stay on.
Don't think he's been great has he.. Lofthouse has looked far superior even in it not being his natural position. Not saying he won't come good, but like Craig hasn't lived up to the hype on arrival. But at least they're in and around the first team squad unlike Jackson Smith who we brought in on a permanent and is now third choice behind Killip and a loan (albeit a decent loan).. seems a strange signing to me. So once again our recruitment is being questioned, by me anyway..And will have to pull it's finger out over the next 3 days to redeem itself. Living in hope rather than expectation.. not holding my breath tho after that 20 weeks of failure and frustration. So not exactly expecting the last 3 days to be edge of seat stuff.. But hope to be proven wrong..
That’s our problem. We’re forever signing players to develop which is ok to a point but some plug and play signings too would help. I’m with you, my expectations over the next four days are pretty low. Prove me wrong please BFC….
Regarding Lofthouse he has come on when we have been playing 4231 as a leftsided forward player not a LWB. We can't say he has played well as LWB, I'm sure if Gent played in the left side forward 3 he may have done OK. Clarke needs to play Gent in a back 4 at left back or buy a left back or stick to 5 at the back and keep him at LWB. Earl is left side of 3 centre halves not a left back or a LWB. Play players in their positions. It's great to have flexibility in formations but only if the players are up to playing multi positions.
