by Wycombe Royal » 12 Sep 2011 09:55
by North Somerset Royal » 12 Sep 2011 10:09
leicsRoyalCypryNorth Somerset Royal Agree with what you say. However the scope for meaningful substitutions was limited from the outset by the make up of the bench which in turn is a product of having a small squad once we discount youngsters not yet up to Championship standard. At the end of the day it comes back to money.
I'm not convinced by that argument - with 5 subs, the bench is limited anyway effectively to four outfield players.....we have 30 players with squad numbers.....sorry but "having a small squad" is a myth....
I believe that Burnley won promotion a couple of seasons ago with the smallest squad in the championship and no reserve team.
by glass half full » 12 Sep 2011 10:14
by Maguire » 12 Sep 2011 10:33
by muddyfeet » 12 Sep 2011 11:53
by Maguire » 12 Sep 2011 12:03
by brendywendy » 12 Sep 2011 12:04
by muddyfeet » 12 Sep 2011 12:08
Maguire Isn't it the managers job to motiv8 the players and get them putting some effort in?
.
by who are ya? » 12 Sep 2011 12:16
by roadrunner » 12 Sep 2011 12:28
by savage 4 england » 12 Sep 2011 12:41
Ian Royalsavage 4 englandhandbags_harris
Well please forgive me for pointing this out, but you clearly have absolutely no clue what a diamond formation is. A diamond formation is a narrow, solid unit which utilises central midfielders with differing qualities. You have a base "Makelele" player protecting the back four, you have two typical English up and down players defending and attacking, and you have an attacking midfielder at the fulcrum, just behind the front two. It is not a wide, expansive formation that looks to exploit wingers, it is a narrow formation with any width provided by forward-thinking full backs.
Your idea mirrors mine however, so at least you're thinking along the right lines
Thanks for your insightful tactical knowledge.
I was using the diamond in a loose way. I was simply emphasising the change from two box-to-box midfielders. I sincerely apologise.
Essentially what you are asking for is to have our midfield even more wide open than it is already with just one player to look after the defence and cover runners. A diamond with genuine wingers is a horrendus idea.
by Ian Royal » 12 Sep 2011 17:28
Elmer Park When results are poor the Manager has to take some of the blame and after each game it is very easy to pick holes in his team selection.
However, certainly on Saturday, the players let him down. We all have views about individuals in the team and might have one or two different preferences in specific positions but at the end of the day the team McDermott fielded should have been good enough to be able to win a home game against Watford (with due respect).
The Captaincy issue is a red herring and people are becoming too obsessed with it. We don't have the sort of leader people seem to want in our team anyway and if we did they would be showing it anyway even without the armband. What's more to strip someone of the Captaincy is a pretty insulting step so it isn't going to happen, nor should it.
As for team selection, without the benefit of hindsight, McDermott has made selections so far this season which are perfectly logical. He found himself in a situation where he lost three regular members of the team from last season and felt that was upheaval enough and has tried to stick as near as possible to the rest of the regular line up that played most of the games last season which up to this early stage in the season seems perfectly logical to me.
In the last home match we created a lot of chances and two bits of sloppy defending and two penalty misses cost us the points. It's perfectly understandable that McDermott would have thought the introduction of Gorkss might eliminate the sloppy defending and that Le Fondre would be able to convert some of the chances the same midfield who played on Saturday created against Barnsley. The established players let him down so he has a right to question almost every player's place in the side now and the team selection for the Doncaster game is going to be a difficult one and a test of McDermott's management skills.
by Sarah Star » 12 Sep 2011 19:41
by leicsRoyal » 12 Sep 2011 23:43
Maguire Isn't it the managers job to motiv8 the players and get them putting some effort in?
by The Real Sandhurst Royal » 13 Sep 2011 07:14
wycombe royal wrote: So far from McD we are only seeing a plan A. When we are losing very little changes except they might try and up the tempo a bit (like against Barnsley). Where is the plan B when things aren't working?
by Woodcote Royal » 13 Sep 2011 14:43
by brendywendy » 13 Sep 2011 14:52
by Terminal Boardom » 13 Sep 2011 15:26
Woodcote Royal As ever, it's so typical of many who thought the sun shone out of Coppell's backside to once again blame the Chairman at the first sign of trouble.
What makes Brian so unique in losing a striker who was clearly ready to play at a higher level? He went on to score against Man U and Chelsea in his first 2 games for WBA, FFS, thus making fools of many who slagged him off last season Good players, that would be the type required to challenge for promotion, move on to better clubs and those they leave behind have to find replacements...................go ask some Rotherham fans.
I can't comment on individual performances this season but I know why Shane Long isn't playing in the top flight with us............................because McDermott signed 2 left backs who were not up to the task and insisted on playing his favourite right back and goalkeeper having dropped better alternatives to make way for them. All of the afore mentioned were culpable in yet another poor defensive display that resulted in defeat in the play off final.
Coppell threw away our Premier status and a golden opportunity to return at the first attempt.
Now (and I'm truly saddened to say this) Brian seems to be heading off down that same dark alley.
I'm praying with every bone in my body that I'm wrong because Coppell's last 2 seasons were like watching a car crash in slow motion and I'm not sure I can stand a repeat performance.
by Woodcote Royal » 13 Sep 2011 16:12
Terminal Boardom
Can't say that the first half of Coppell's last season was like watching a car crash. Sure, our home form in 2009 was dire but we still finished third - having thrown away a fairly impressive position. And, we did beat Wolves twice that season and they went up as Champions.
by DOYLERSAROYALER » 13 Sep 2011 16:30
Woodcote RoyalTerminal Boardom
Can't say that the first half of Coppell's last season was like watching a car crash. Sure, our home form in 2009 was dire but we still finished third - having thrown away a fairly impressive position. And, we did beat Wolves twice that season and they went up as Champions.
The away win was a rare trip for me and an excellant performance. A Harperless central midfield of Brynn and Gem holding everything together as we thoroughly deserved our victory and looked like promotion certs but once Harps was fit Gem was "Coppelled" within a few games and it all went down hill from there..................
Users browsing this forum: Keysfield, Royals and Racers, Snowflake Royal, windermereROYAL and 230 guests