There are, I think, some sacred cows on this BBS and within the club as a whole. I know because I’ve advocated some of them until last night: 1. 4-4-2. It is not working. Few teams still use it. 2. Playing with out and out wingers. 3. Tom Bradshaw, who is too often forgiven extremely poor performances on the imaginary basis that he ‘works hard and gets no support’. 4. Adam Hammill, a superb player for the club once, but no assists or goals this year. Yet remains an automatic name on the team sheet. 5. Brad Potts, we saw last night that the lad can play, surely deserves a run in the team over Hammil, Gardener or Isgrove. 6. Isgrove. I don’t think he will ‘come good’ anymore, works hard but never threatens a final product. The first half last night, the Wednesday game too, demonstrated where we are losing matches. We cannot go toe to toe for possession with even the worst championship teams in midfield. There is no physicality in that ‘best 11’ 4-4-2. This means we lose possession easily, struggle to gain it back, and on the ball move it sideways. The wingers drift out leaving us outnumbered in the centre. Neither centre mid has any presence which worsens this. When our wingers get the ball they either run into trouble or end up in shocking positions from which no cross or dangerous pass can be made. The two centre forwards are forced deeper for the ball then find themselves outnumbered or in no goal scoring position I wonder if last night was one final throw by the new man, to ask if the ‘best 11’ was capable of beating the bottom team in the division. The changes made at half time support this perhaps. For me we need physicality and attacking threat over potential or past glory. I would leave the defence alone, but go for Mallan and Potts to operate either side of Williams in midfield. Keiffer front and centre as a target man, McBurnie and even Thiam either side of him. We should stay fairly narrow and only move into flanks if space opens up. I think this could work. Keiffer could come deep, hold up the ball and recycle it to one of 4 attacking players that should be near him, and we make a move from there. What would everyone else change? Does anyone stand by 442 after last night? If so who would they play?
When flicker took over and saved us...we did so with commitment....pace and hard press when we didnt havw the ball (just what burton did to us for 45 mins last night ). We also did the same before we sold our 9/10 best players .....we now seen to have little pace or hard press....not sure why this has been abandoned but i think the results speak for themselves.
No system will work If you’re players aren’t up to standard. The second half taught us nothing Burton defending and had no interest in attacking us. Not that I’d play 4-4-2 mind. I’d go 5-3-2 or 3-5-2. Poor team selection doomed us from the start last night.
I think regarding Potts that as good as he looked, his comparison was the awful Isgrove or the poor Hammill - and he was playing against a poor poor side.
Willing to remain open to be convinced about Potts but I think by the time he came on last night he was being asked to play against a team who were prepared to surrender possession and space and not within a scenario we are likely to come up against in the coming weeks - particularly from the kick-off.
People think playing two wingers and two strikers equals goals but we’ve knackered that myth. We need to be more flexible going forward and midfielders who can run beyond our strikers for a change ala Hignett/Redfearn .
I cannot see why so many on here plump for Williams either. This year he as been poor, in fact I would go so far as to say that when Gardner got match fit and played without him he offered more. As a 2 they do not fit together. However, last night they worked better with Potts alongside. Clumsy bugger is Potts, but when played centrally he can be effective if not cultured.
I agree with this. 4-4-2 is so outdated in modern football. So few teams play it, and there is now scope to play without a recognised centre forward, and these teams still score goals aplenty and attack at pace. I do though think Hammill is a good player still. Two issues are he tries to do so much, partly because there is nobody else to do so. That's a huge pressure, but he's happy taking it. He needs to let that pressure go, but to do that, he needs help. And that's the other problem. Because we have such minimal threat through the middle, its easy to double up on Hammill knowing we have no other threat. The outcome, Hammill gets marked out of games, and we're nullified. I also don't buy this concept that every one of our players are useless. For months, our square midfielders have been bashed by the former coaches into trying to fit round holes. The other issue, we've had a massive playing squad this year, something that's not been mentioned. That's meant many players not playing or even being in the squad. It also means with all the chopping and changing of personnel and formations, we've not build up any familiarity. I'm not saying we have a Scowen or a Hourihane in there, but they benefitted by playing regularly and building up understanding. Our current first team squad have seldom had that luxury. I hope the new coach chalks French connection on 4-4-2 now and tries to shape a 5 man midfield that can attack through the field. Organisation and confidence play a huge part in football. At the minute, we're struggling for either.
This is true, but Isgrove and Hammil is like playing with 9 men on occasion, like the first half last night. Potts brings something, even if it is mainly his stature and even small amount of 'fight'.
This is spot on, watching Burton play was depressing because they seemed up for it in a way we have seen before in this situation, and need to be again. Part of the problem is Hammil and Isgrove is that they are at least a yard short of their best pace. Of course there is the question of how Potts solves this, but perhaps substituting Gardner for a quicker midfielder like Mallan could help.
