Conor shocking Again

Connor Hourihane was at his most effective when he played on the left side of a diamond with Williams at the attacking point and when we had pace in the forward line with Winnall and Cole. There was more room to play because opposition defences had to respect the pace in our team and they dropped 10 yards deeper. William's surging runs down the centre in support of the front two, and his all round work rate meant that he attracted the midfield cover towards him.

Hourihane was able to use the additional space and time our pace afforded him because given time and space, Hourihane is a good passer and as we all know, he has an exceptionally strong shot. Compare the players around him now. Whether we pick Hemmings, Lita, Waring or indeed Oates in the forward line, there is no pace and therefore no threat. The answer to the Hourihane conundrum is actually a very easy one. Surround him with better, and especially quicker players and you will see an improvement. Send him to play out wide, especially on the right side and you will not. Send him to play wide right against a team playing 3-5-2 and it will be embarrassing.

 

But that system didn't work defensively as Bailey was isolated and couldn't cope through the middle and we conceded far too many goals.

 

If you want to witness **** then that is your perogative.
I don't give a stuff whether you listen to me or not.
I will post my opinion as and when I feel fit.

 

Simple nt it.... Play him in his best position, or don't play him.

 

How can you express an opinion about something you have no knowledge about? Actually scrub that you'd never post on that basis and you do amuse.

 

Given our front two offered nothing (although fair play to Hemmings second half, he did everything he could to influence the game) and will continue to do so because they unfortunately aren't good enough, we should definitely be playing one up front. Certainly until Winnall is fit.

Our best players are central midfielders. We need to get Hourihane in to goal scoring positions because he's shown he can consistently hit the back of the net. At the moment I'd get the team playing off of Waring's hold up play.

Special mention to Scowen yesterday. Work rate, kept it simple, gave Smith good cover, one the free kick and delivered the ball we scored from.

 

Sprinkle some breadcrumbs on the water and the biters come to the surface.

You will have fun going thru airport security with all them hooks in your mouth.

I will keep amusing you though cause I like a bite.

 

He gets played out of position to accomodate Scowen and Pearson in the same team. That's not his fault.

 

He could play further forward off Waring. I'd like to see them play 3-5-1-1 with 3 centre backs, Smith and Williams or O'Sullivan out wide, Scowen Bailey and Pearson in midfield and Hourihane off Waring. That might give Conor more time on the ball further up the field. Might not work at all but worth a try, especially away from home where we need to try something different...

 

That is also true which is why, at the time, I was exercised in finding a system where we would see the best of both worlds. That is why I started the posting with the phrase, "Connor Hourihane was most effective when", rather than "The defence was most effective when". There were still problems with the way that we played earlier in the season, but they were minor compared to the ones that the new manager will inherit, and I was a hell of a lot better entertained then than I am now.

 

We did try Hourihane behind the striker for the first half of one home game. I'm afraid I can't remember which. The tactic failed. It looked to me like he was not comfortable receiving the ball with his back to goal and his body language seemed to indicate that he was very unhappy in the role. I remember thinking prior to that game that it was a sensible way of utilising his strengths whilst covering his weaknesses, but having watched him in that half I abandoned the idea, at least until he was allowed the time to work on it in preseason training and get used to the different demands that the position makes of a player.

 

He needs a free role I reckon. However, if we're capable of getting results without him, then don't pick him. Just seems a bit of a waste not to at least employ him where he's most effective. I was actually stunned when I saw him line up on the right yesterday. At first, I assumed he thought we were attacking the away end as per most games first half... Bizarre tactic that didn't work.

 

It's weird. The lad was a holding player at Plymouth.

 

Similar to Brian Howard, went through a patch where he couldn't stop scoring and providing assists.
Then all of a sudden he has dropped bang out of form and no matter what the manager does, can't seem to pick his form up, whether that be changing his position or role.

 

Like you, I am very reluctant to just write off a player who looked great with different players around him earlier in the season, but I don't think that he is right for the free role behind the striker for the reasons given earlier. It may well be that with more pace in the team, and with Scowen behind him, the diamond would now work. The discussion hinges around finding someone with pace to play at the head of the diamond to replicate the job that Williams performed so effectively earlier in the season. I wondered if Lalkovic could be the man for the job. He has the pace, and he scored goals earlier in his career, albeit at a lower level of football.

Nevertheless, our lack of pace in the forward line will remain a problem until Winnall returns to fitness, and possibly long after. Waring has not worked as a target man. He is just not strong enough to hold off his marker, and even if he was getting better ball, I think that this would remain the case. Lita and Hemmings are just not good enough I'm afraid. So the position beside Winnall remains a problem, along with the question as to what sort of player we need for the position. A striker with pace, or a target man in the O'Grady mould.

I remember our discussions earlier in the season, when I was convinced that Winnall and Hourihane could not play in the same team because I felt that Hourhane's defensive frailty meant that we would have to play 5 in midfield and I did not think Winnall could play on his own up front. Back then our problems were miniscule compared to what they are now, without Winnall, Williams and Cole. It is a similar problem to the one that Keith Hill faced, when he had the heart ripped from his midfield, and it has led to a similar result, although the board has shown less patience on this occasion than it did with Keith Hill. I despair at times for the future of our club.

 

Football is (or should be) a simple game !


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk