2 ponts dropped that

voyeur said:
We need a goalscorer. My optimism is based on the stats for the last ten games. We had a period of bedding in, and then we came good. As I and others said we would.
Click to expand...
We do need a goalscorer and to tie down Ballard for the rest of the season. We've improved enough to push us up to mid table and will need to do it all again to threaten the play off positions.
 
Martonmosser said:
There’s 46 games in a season. We have played 16. We are only just a third through the season and recent form shows we are the team that are flying up the division. Have faith in Simon, Critch and the team....... we’re going up automatically my friend 😉👍🏼
Click to expand...
I see Pool have advertised for a Head of Recruitment, has Johnson gone? If we manage to bring in a goalscorer in January then the play offs could be within reach.
 
62years&counting said:
We do need a goalscorer and to tie down Ballard for the rest of the season. We've improved enough to push us up to mid table and will need to do it all again to threaten the play off positions.
Click to expand...
Absolutely spot on - although, as I've always said about January transfer windows, who gives up a decent goalscorer halfway through the season? James Beattie case in point.
 
We can have any goalscorer we like, but he won't score if we don't get the ball to him. Notice Oxford gave CJ plenty of space to run but had 4 men boxing him in when he got to the danger zone so he found the pull back hard to make. When he did get one in, Kaikai slipped. We need to do better getting the final pass right. Kemp seems to know what to do.
 
NAPMer said:
Absolutely spot on - although, as I've always said about January transfer windows, who gives up a decent goalscorer halfway through the season? James Beattie case in point.
Click to expand...
Definitely not easy to find goalscorers in January. Doesn't rule it out though, especially as there are clubs that would struggle to turn down a fee at the moment, in Leagues One and Two. And there's the loan option from the higher leagues, which is a bit needle in a haystack but Critchley knows these squads very well. And we only need to find one! 😀
 
The truth is that whilst we dont appear to have any "natural" free scoring strikers, we also dont have enough service to them either. We simply do not create enough goal scoring opportunities and we dont get nearly enough efforts on target. If we can win games 1-0 then that wont be too big a problem but when we start drawing and losing the problem will be further highlighted. I cannot be bothered to work it out but I would say we average 5-6 shots on target per match in the league of which 2-3 are decent chances...that simply isnt anywhere near enough.
 
TANGERINETOWERPOWER said:
The truth is that whilst we dont appear to have any "natural" free scoring strikers, we also dont have enough service to them either. We simply do not create enough goal scoring opportunities and we dont get nearly enough efforts on target. If we can win games 1-0 then that wont be too big a problem but when we start drawing and losing the problem will be further highlighted. I cannot be bothered to work it out but I would say we average 5-6 shots on target per match in the league of which 2-3 are decent chances...that simply isnt anywhere near enough.
Click to expand...
I can’t remember who above on the thread commented about CJ being boxed in by 4 players on Saturday. But that was painfully true, I just kept thinking well if CJ has 4 players around him there must be loads of space somewhere else on the pitch.

Like you say TTP if we can tweak things to have a bit of service into 2 or 3 ‘goal scorers’ we’d really be on to something.

The defending is light years ahead of where it was and there’s still a lot of points to play for this year.
 
TANGERINETOWERPOWER said:
The truth is that whilst we dont appear to have any "natural" free scoring strikers, we also dont have enough service to them either. We simply do not create enough goal scoring opportunities and we dont get nearly enough efforts on target. If we can win games 1-0 then that wont be too big a problem but when we start drawing and losing the problem will be further highlighted. I cannot be bothered to work it out but I would say we average 5-6 shots on target per match in the league of which 2-3 are decent chances...that simply isnt anywhere near enough.
Click to expand...
This is a very good point we are not creating or missing loads of chances per game. CJ had two shots that hit the framework and the slip by KaiKai. Although we played well their goalkeeper had very little to do and it was Maxwell who had to pull off a fantastic save. We need to do more with our set-piece delivery into the box this is where Garbutt has a role to play.
 
This goes back to the signings we made last summer. Critchley didn't want an out and out goalscorer, he wanted a fluid front three who he thought would score enough goals between them to do the business. It hasn't worked.
 
62years&counting said:
This goes back to the signings we made last summer. Critchley didn't want an out and out goalscorer, he wanted a fluid front three who he thought would score enough goals between them to do the business. It hasn't worked.
Click to expand...
I think your point is a very valid one. I wouldn't go as far to say it hasn't worked but to date it's not worked as well as it could have done. To the extent that it's not really a fluid front three now is it. Said it before, that at the start of the season Critchley tried to adopt the Liverpool style but that just doesn't work in L1 with L1 players. But credit to him because he does seem to have recognised that.
 
62years&counting said:
4-3-3 hasn't worked and if you're truthful you know it hasn't and won't.
Click to expand...
Being truthful, we beat Portsmouth in our best performance of the season with 433, if I remember correctly. And even if we hadn't, we've only had 16 games so far and half of them were 442, so I wouldn't be consigning 433 to history, it's barely had a chance yet, has it? And those games were with a set of players who didn't know each other, apart from a couple- which produced a win and a draw. And I don't think Critchley will ditch it. And I don't think Calderwood will either. And neither should they. We should be able to play 442, 433, 352 etc to suit. Eventually.
 
voyeur said:
Being truthful, we beat Portsmouth in our best performance of the season with 433, if I remember correctly. And even if we hadn't, we've only had 16 games so far and half of them were 442, so I wouldn't be consigning 433 to history, it's barely had a chance yet, has it? And those games were with a set of players who didn't know each other, apart from a couple- which produced a win and a draw. And I don't think Critchley will ditch it. And I don't think Calderwood will either. And neither should they. We should be able to play 442, 433, 352 etc to suit. Eventually.
Click to expand...
....and the 4-4-2 produced the points as you well know.
 
20togo said:
I think your point is a very valid one. I wouldn't go as far to say it hasn't worked but to date it's not worked as well as it could have done. To the extent that it's not really a fluid front three now is it. Said it before, that at the start of the season Critchley tried to adopt the Liverpool style but that just doesn't work in L1 with L1 players. But credit to him because he does seem to have recognised that.
Click to expand...
....let's hope he recognises that our best results and most of our points were accumulated playing 4-4-2. Big test tonight against Hull.
 
62years&counting said:
I won't be preached to. It's you that doesn't listen because of your love affair with Critchley. Face facts for once or as you say leave it and don't respond to my comments in future.
Click to expand...
There is not a love affair. And I'm not preaching, I just disagree with you. The better results came after a period of adjustment and the signings of Dougall, Ballard and Gretarsson, which addressed some key weaknesses in a very significant way, wouldn't you say? So it think the belief that 442 was the reason for the better results is a bit flawed, We still score very few but the new players tightened us up at the back. With 433 we have beaten Portsmouth and kept a clean sheet against Oxford in recent games. If you decide that we have to play 442, you close down the options and I think that is unwise, personally. You are ignoring the other factors that led to better results - new players and more games together, and playing a bit more direct, as we have done with both 442 and 433 recently.
 
voyeur said:
There is not a love affair. And I'm not preaching, I just disagree with you. The better results came after a period of adjustment and the signings of Dougall, Ballard and Gretarsson, which addressed some key weaknesses in a very significant way, wouldn't you say? So it think the belief that 442 was the reason for the better results is a bit flawed, We still score very few but the new players tightened us up at the back. With 433 we have beaten Portsmouth and kept a clean sheet against Oxford in recent games. If you decide that we have to play 442, you close down the options and I think that is unwise, personally. You are ignoring the other factors that led to better results - new players and more games together, and playing a bit more direct, as we have done with both 442 and 433 recently.
Click to expand...
I'm happy to ignore you. Too sanctimonious by half. Goodbye.
 
62years&counting said:
I'm happy to ignore you. Too sanctimonious by half. Goodbye.
Click to expand...
Blimey, how sanctimonious is that?! The irony...

Best we ignore each other I think. You seem very keen to write people and things off all the time. Maybe it is sanctimonious to point that out. Maybe not. It's just a discussion as far as I can see, Which ends with you being unpleasant, again.
 
Last edited:
voyeur said:
Blimey, how sanctimonious is that?! The irony...

Best we ignore each other I think. You seem very keen to write people and things off all the time. Maybe it is sanctimonious to point that out. Maybe not. It's just a discussion as far as I can see, Which ends with you being unpleasant, again.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t worry about it. In time he’ll only have his other profile “1950’spoolfan” to argue with. Eerily similar posts from those two if you ask me.
 
voyeur said:
Blimey, how sanctimonious is that?! The irony...

Best we ignore each other I think. You seem very keen to write people and things off all the time. Maybe it is sanctimonious to point that out. Maybe not. It's just a discussion as far as I can see, Which ends with you being unpleasant, again.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't lose any sleep over this so called Blackpool fan. I actually think he's a relative of the scum.
 
62years&counting said:
I won't be preached to. It's you that doesn't listen because of your love affair with Critchley. Face facts for once or as you say leave it and don't respond to my comments in future.
Click to expand...
But he’s putting across a well reasoned argument about it.

I happen to lean the other way from Voy and think that 442 did improve the results and we can’t seem to crack 433, but he puts his case across well, the Portsmouth game might show we can do it in 433, I’m yet to be convinced but I could very well be wrong and come the end of the season we’re humming playing 433.

Despite disagreeing with him I can see where he’s coming from and I don’t get the hostility to the points he or any others for that matter are putting across.
 
I'm in the 4-4-2 camp but I do think we could play 4-3-3 with Yates and Madine as part of the three.
 
Rektseasider said:
I can’t remember who above on the thread commented about CJ being boxed in by 4 players on Saturday. But that was painfully true, I just kept thinking well if CJ has 4 players around him there must be loads of space somewhere else on the pitch.

Like you say TTP if we can tweak things to have a bit of service into 2 or 3 ‘goal scorers’ we’d really be on to something.

The defending is light years ahead of where it was and there’s still a lot of points to play for this year.
Click to expand...
I agree but he still hit the post (twice I think) and put one on a plate for Kaikai
 
Tangerinenick said:
I agree but he still hit the post (twice I think) and put one on a plate for Kaikai
Click to expand...
There’s no criticism of CJ intended thought he was our only real outlet. I’m saying that he needed options to pass to in advance of him and help in drawing some of those four men away from him.
 
Rektseasider said:
There’s no criticism of CJ intended thought he was our only real outlet. I’m saying that he needed options to pass to in advance of him and help in drawing some of those four men away from him.
Click to expand...
Maybe Keshi (and others) will be looking to run into the holes they leave?!
 
voyeur said:
Maybe Keshi (and others) will be looking to run into the holes they leave?!
Click to expand...
Yes that was my thoughts on the tweaks we need. The problem we’ve been having in 433 is that for what ever reason the front three haven’t got that cohesive nature going yet. Might come with time.
 
Rektseasider said:
Yes that was my thoughts on the tweaks we need. The problem we’ve been having in 433 is that for what ever reason the front three haven’t got that cohesive nature going yet. Might come with time.
Click to expand...
I know and understand the clamour for Madine and Yates and I expected us to go that route tonight. But we will have to see, We managed to beat Portsmouth without them both. Let's hope it happens again.
 
voyeur said:
I know and understand the clamour for Madine and Yates and I expected us to go that route tonight. But we will have to see, We managed to beat Portsmouth without them both. Let's hope it happens again.
Click to expand...
No Madine tonight, from what I was told there’s been a bit of a bust up with him and Critch.

Big test for the players and Critch tonight. It might work against better opposition strangely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top