Garbage..

Before the game, I was very concerned about the Wigan mid-field 4. I thought that we had to over-match them and the formation I thought most appropriate was 4-5-1. This formation would allow Mellis to play behind O'Grady by sacrificing Dagnall, who I have never thought works well with O'Grady.

Having said all that, Wigan looked much sharper than us, and it seemed to me that we were a couple of weeks away from being ready for the season.

Much has been made on here about M'Voto being the big man that we have needed for years. That may well be true if Flicker and co can work their magic. However, at the moment he loses concentration and ball watches. I got fed up of watching Holt drop off him into the space between our defense and midfield, turn and have the time to pick a pass through our defense to Wigan midfield runners, whilst M'Voto is holding his position 10 yards away. On at least 2 occasions, we had a perfect defensive line across the back four other than M'Voto who was not concentrating and 5 yards behind the rest.

I find it hard to find any redeeming feature about today's game, but above all, the 10 minutes we played with Mellis in the centre of midfield left me in the depths of despair. In my opinion, Neil Redfern was the best player ever to play in midfield for my team. He earned this honour because, not only did he score goals for us from that position, he was also unafraid of the hard work when his team did not have the ball. For this reason, he ranks higher for me than Glavin and Hignett. Mellis is a carbon copy of Butterfield, good on the ball, but because they do not want to do the hard yards, they cannot play in a four man midfield. In that 10 minutes just after half time, Mellis twice lost the ball and stood and watched as Wigan carved out two chances that they wasted. Frankly, if Flicker had left him there for the whole of the second half, Wigan would have been able to declare.

 

Red Rain:

I wasn't at the game today, but strictly on a tactical basis if the CF (Holt) drops back into the space between defence and midfield, the centre half does not track him but simply asks the defensive midfield player to pick him up. Whether M'voto is playing in a back 3 or a back 4, it is not his job to come out of defence to pick up Holt.

Obviously I cannot comment on M'voto's game otherwise, but let us appreciate that each player has his own job to do.

 

When Jennings went through in that tackle, I was muttering to myself. 'why couldn't that have been Dawson' and there is your problem, we will struggle game in game out accommodating him coz he's Flickers favourite. They probably have snarling and looking hard contests, arm wrestles and bromance man hugs together. We need to play 352 against classier sides like Wigan, probably in a more 532 system with the wing backs venturing forward with caution. Play 2 in central midfield or nobody in front of the back four and we won't see enough of the ball to do anything. We aren't as good as most teams in this league, so we have to nullify their play and make things difficult for them. Not make a present of the midfield and gift them goals. Hard work and graft is great, but we need to be set up right. Today we weren't.

 

Agreed.

 

I have difficulty in arguing the point with someone who did not attend the game. Whether the CH marks the CF who drops deep is entirely dependent upon where on the pitch it happens, and at what stage of an attack. On the occasions that I observed this to be happening, the CH was marking the CF at the edge of our box. The CF dropped off the CH in order to find space to receive the ball. In these circumstances the CH follows the CF because he is in the marking zone close to our goal. In this area, it is the job of the CH to deny the CF space. You are right that there are areas of the field that it is more important to maintain the defensive line, than it is to put pressure on the CF. Since you were not at the game, you will just have to take on trust that I know the difference.

 

What you said!

 

I do not think that Dawson is Flicker's favourite. Dawson played in that position because Digby and Etuhu were not fit.

 

I didn't want Mellis to play in a two man pairing. I wanted him in the hole, where he's quality. As was Butterfield.

Dawson's distribution is appalling. And Perkins is no Iniesta. So we had nobody to dictate our own play.

But on the rare occasions Mellis got central he found a man, and caused them issues.


You mention Redders, but would he have been as influential if asked to play wide right?

Hignett however, was quality wherever he played. As is Bobby Hassell...

 

Why do you think that Steele and the defence opt for the long ball/pass up to O'Grady pulling wide or a flick on so often? It's because they know if they give it to our outnumbered midfielders they'll more often than not get it back! and this time they won't have so much time. Second thoughts, perhaps not Steele, he just can't help himself no matter how many we have in midfield.

 

Thought Steele handled the ball well and distributed it quickly out wide quite a bit in the first half not so much in the second but it seemed to be a one dimensional tactic today to clog it to O`Grady and see what happens.

 

Catching us on posts from the weekends game & got to say this sum's up nearly all of my thoughts, especially about the formation & playing Mellis wide.

The only thing I'd disagree on is Wigan been average, I think they played well but the reason they couldn't break through in the 1st half was that Dawson & Perkins ran themselves ragged to cope with Wigan's midfield 3 which they couldn't sustain the longer the game went on