What I don't understand about us ..

td53

td53

Well-known member
Various times this year I've looked at us playing and thought 'we lack the basic attributes to make that system work'

I'll give 2 examples - away at Lincoln we possessed zero creativity. Away at Leyton Orient we lacked the raw pace up front to turn their defenders round.

I don't know why we never use younger players to plug gaps. In my mind, it's better to have a lesser player with the right attributes then a greater player with the wrong ones. In those two games, we could have played for weeks and not scored.

We played young players in the tinpot cup and progressed. When we stopped that and played the first team squad shoehorned together based on who needed minutes, we were gash.

I think my point is that we're sometimes not putting tactically cohesive teams out or giving ourselves the right options within the 18 because we're terrified of giving a kid a run out.

I honestly don't get it. I'm not saying we should be making the kids first picks - but when injuries bite, we should be using the ones whose attributes best fit to make our matchday squads make sense. Just pick the next best player in the position that we have. Surely???

If the youth set up is so poor that in no circumstances we can ever use them - then why are we persevering with it? We progressed perfectly well in the tinpot cup giving kids games - then when we shoehorned a poor blend of the first team fringe players together, we looked absolutely crap.

If we're not going to adjust the tactics, you have to pick the players that fit them. Having no meaningful back up for Lavery or Kaddy or Jimbo is forcing players to play roles that expose them.

I actually feel sorry for the first team squad. Matty Virtue gets no minutes then plays as wing back. Connolly plays all over the shop. The strikers don't have the right partner when Lavs is broken (50% of the time) - the wings backs largely can't cross very well. Jimmy has to play all the time as we haven't got another left footer

Then people get on their backs and call them dog shit when actually, it's the blend of attributes that is crap cos Critch won't either use the full range of players he has or adjust the set up to suit who is available.

🤷🤷🤷
 
Agree with a lot of the op but Connolly is playing at least one possibly two divisions higher than his ability, that's the problem with him.
Most baffling thing to me is having no left footed centre back in the squad, Husband has done a fairly good job most of the time but obviously can't play every game.
Connolly coming in to plug that gap or any gap unfortunately, is not the answer.
Definitely agree that best available player in the position to fill a gap, irrespective of age,is better than using Virtue or Connolly to play out of position.
 
td53 said:
Various times this year I've looked at us playing and thought 'we lack the basic attributes to make that system work'

I'll give 2 examples - away at Lincoln we possessed zero creativity. Away at Leyton Orient we lacked the raw pace up front to turn their defenders round.

I don't know why we never use younger players to plug gaps. In my mind, it's better to have a lesser player with the right attributes then a greater player with the wrong ones. In those two games, we could have played for weeks and not scored.

We played young players in the tinpot cup and progressed. When we stopped that and played the first team squad shoehorned together based on who needed minutes, we were gash.

I think my point is that we're sometimes not putting tactically cohesive teams out or giving ourselves the right options within the 18 because we're terrified of giving a kid a run out.

I honestly don't get it. I'm not saying we should be making the kids first picks - but when injuries bite, we should be using the ones whose attributes best fit to make our matchday squads make sense. Just pick the next best player in the position that we have. Surely???

If the youth set up is so poor that in no circumstances we can ever use them - then why are we persevering with it? We progressed perfectly well in the tinpot cup giving kids games - then when we shoehorned a poor blend of the first team fringe players together, we looked absolutely crap.

If we're not going to adjust the tactics, you have to pick the players that fit them. Having no meaningful back up for Lavery or Kaddy or Jimbo is forcing players to play roles that expose them.

I actually feel sorry for the first team squad. Matty Virtue gets no minutes then plays as wing back. Connolly plays all over the shop. The strikers don't have the right partner when Lavs is broken (50% of the time) - the wings backs largely can't cross very well. Jimmy has to play all the time as we haven't got another left footer

Then people get on their backs and call them dog shit when actually, it's the blend of attributes that is crap cos Critch won't either use the full range of players he has or adjust the set up to suit who is available.

🤷🤷🤷
Click to expand...
As a rule the wingers are inverted and are very 'one-footed' which makes crossing that bit more difficult. I'd argue pace isn't our worst attribute, it's movement, ability to play a forward pass or doing so quickly enough to trouble the opposition. The formation doesn't work with the players we have, when it makes the likes of Norburn and Byers look poor, it can't be anything else. I've been critical of Norburn but he's a lot better than what he is showing. Connolly is a victim of his versatility but has gone massively down hill. Previously we could rely on him to be OK, now he's just a disaster waiting to happen, I suspect confidence has a lot to do with that. Tuesday was just another example of how easy we are to play against, LO won pretty much every 2nd ball. Just think about that for a second and realise that both the system and players desire just isn't what it should be. Am I expecting a reaction today? Possibly, until they score and the players will no doubt disappear again. When your manager continually plays the wrong system and the players have such fragile mentality, it's hardly a surprise we are so poor away from home.
 
td53 said:
Various times this year I've looked at us playing and thought 'we lack the basic attributes to make that system work'

I'll give 2 examples - away at Lincoln we possessed zero creativity. Away at Leyton Orient we lacked the raw pace up front to turn their defenders round.

I don't know why we never use younger players to plug gaps. In my mind, it's better to have a lesser player with the right attributes then a greater player with the wrong ones. In those two games, we could have played for weeks and not scored.

We played young players in the tinpot cup and progressed. When we stopped that and played the first team squad shoehorned together based on who needed minutes, we were gash.

I think my point is that we're sometimes not putting tactically cohesive teams out or giving ourselves the right options within the 18 because we're terrified of giving a kid a run out.

I honestly don't get it. I'm not saying we should be making the kids first picks - but when injuries bite, we should be using the ones whose attributes best fit to make our matchday squads make sense. Just pick the next best player in the position that we have. Surely???

If the youth set up is so poor that in no circumstances we can ever use them - then why are we persevering with it? We progressed perfectly well in the tinpot cup giving kids games - then when we shoehorned a poor blend of the first team fringe players together, we looked absolutely crap.

If we're not going to adjust the tactics, you have to pick the players that fit them. Having no meaningful back up for Lavery or Kaddy or Jimbo is forcing players to play roles that expose them.

I actually feel sorry for the first team squad. Matty Virtue gets no minutes then plays as wing back. Connolly plays all over the shop. The strikers don't have the right partner when Lavs is broken (50% of the time) - the wings backs largely can't cross very well. Jimmy has to play all the time as we haven't got another left footer

Then people get on their backs and call them dog shit when actually, it's the blend of attributes that is crap cos Critch won't either use the full range of players he has or adjust the set up to suit who is available.

🤷🤷🤷
Click to expand...
Interesting post TD but obviously we all have our opinions as to what the key problem is, although a lot will say it’s Critch
Why not play a lesser player with attributes rather than a greater player with none?
You’ve answered your own question there, because a greater player is better.
Strikers don’t have the right partners?
Beesley and Joseph are a perfect match and for me should be regular starters
Lavery runs his socks off (like Jerry did) but where is the end product?
You fail to mention the good performances, Portsmouth away and Bolton last week, the first cup game against Forest.
If the players can play like that then why not week in week out because they are predominantly playing the same “system”
As for the lesser players, can you imagine the furore if he played them and we got beat?
I agree Critch is enigmatic with his selections but sometimes we need to look at the performances of our players because there is no consistency at all.
Not a criticism of your post TD, just my take on things.
 
NewburyOne said:
As rule the wingers are inverted and are very 'one-footed' which makes crossing that bit more difficult. I'd argue pace isn't our worst attribute, it's movement, ability to play a forward pass or doing so quickly enough to trouble the opposition. The formation doesn't work with the players we have, when it makes the likes of Norburn and Byers look poor, it can't be anything else. I've been critical of Norburn but he's a lot better than what he is showing. Connolly is a victim of his versatility but has gone massively down hill. Previously we could rely on him to be OK, now he's just a disaster waiting to happen, I suspect confidence has a lot to do with that. Tuesday was just another example of how easy we are to play against, LO won pretty much every 2nd ball. Just think about that for a second and realise that the both the system and players desire just isn't what it should be. Am I expecting a reaction today? Possibly, until they score and the players will no doubt disappear again. When your manager continually plays the wrong system and the players have such fragile mentality, it's hardly a surprise we are so poor away from home.
Click to expand...

I agree with much of that, though with Gabriel and Coulson he seems to have finally realised wing back on right feet work better if players aren't next level gifted.

I very much agree on confidence and that when they might look to him to change it or inspire a different approach, they get nothing.
 
td53 said:
I agree with much of that, though with Gabriel and Coulson he seems to have finally realised wing back on right feet work better if players aren't next level gifted.

I very much agree on confidence and that when they might look to him to change it or inspire a different approach, they get nothing.
Click to expand...
It only took 2/3s of the season, I guess that tells us all we need to know about the value of that elite coaching certificate! It's not all on Critchley though, when you have Marv passing straight to the opposition, your 2 midfielders giving away possession or unable to win a single 2nd ball, any team would be in trouble. Maybe NC should be looking at how the likes of Portsmouth, Peterborough win so many away, how did Plymouth and Ipswich did it last season? I'd wager it wasn't setting up like we do.
 
Eternaloptimist said:
Interesting post TD but obviously we all have our opinions as to what the key problem is, although a lot will say it’s Critch
Why not play a lesser player with attributes rather than a greater player with none?
You’ve answered your own question there, because a greater player is better.
Strikers don’t have the right partners?
Beesley and Joseph are a perfect match and for me should be regular starters
Lavery runs his socks off (like Jerry did) but where is the end product?
You fail to mention the good performances, Portsmouth away and Bolton last week, the first cup game against Forest.
If the players can play like that then why not week in week out because they are predominantly playing the same “system”
As for the lesser players, can you imagine the furore if he played them and we got beat?
I agree Critch is enigmatic with his selections but sometimes we need to look at the performances of our players because there is no consistency at all.
Not a criticism of your post TD, just my take on things.
Click to expand...
At an extreme level, Messi is a infinitely better player than Hubby.

I wouldn't play Messi at centre back in a league 1 game.

It isn't as simple as 'player good/bad' - it's how they fit together and are utilised.

Take Lavery. He's a menace on form and he stretches play. He helps make the way we play make sense. Kouassi can't do that. He can win headers that Lavs can't though.

When Lavs is out, I'd look for the next striker with explosive pace, not automatically 'the next striker if any description' - loosely speaking, we had three target men (of varying kinds) in the squad against Orient and no one to run off them.

Every Messi needs a water carrier. It's about a blend for me and he won't change the shape or move outside of a fixed idea of who is 'worthy' and palpably, sometimes the blend isn't right.
 
gjr said:
Agree with a lot of the op but Connolly is playing at least one possibly two divisions higher than his ability, that's the problem with him.
Most baffling thing to me is having no left footed centre back in the squad, Husband has done a fairly good job most of the time but obviously can't play every game.
Connolly coming in to plug that gap or any gap unfortunately, is not the answer.
Definitely agree that best available player in the position to fill a gap, irrespective of age,is better than using Virtue or Connolly to play out of position.
Click to expand...
Get some work done 😉
 
  • Like
Reactions: gjr
NewburyOne said:
It only took 2/3s of the season, I guess that tells us all we need to know about the value of that elite coaching certificate! It's not all on Critchley though, when you have Marv passing straight to the opposition, your 2 midfielders giving away possession or unable to win a single 2nd ball, any team would be in trouble. Maybe NC should be looking at how the likes of Portsmouth, Peterborough win so many away, how did Plymouth and Ipswich did it last season? I'd wager it wasn't setting up like we do.
Click to expand...

That's partly the point innit. Marv is a great defender but not a footballing one. So expecting him to be the lynchpin of a footballing back 5 is a bit weird.

Especially as he knows Marv as well as any player. Nothing Marv does is a surprise to him surely? He signed him and built a defence around him. He even made him captain.

He's never, ever been any good at the short passing stuff. Ever. Never will be.

I really like Marv. I think he's by some distance our best out and out central defender in defensive terms. Casey has quality but gets bullied too easily for me by a big lump... But use Marvin as Marvin is.

It's like me taking over and signing Madine and then expecting him to be fast.
 
td53 said:
That's partly the point innit. Marv is a great defender but not a footballing one. So expecting him to be the lynchpin of a footballing back 5 is a bit weird.

Especially as he knows Marv as well as any player. Nothing Marv does is a surprise to him surely? He signed him and built a defence around him. He even made him captain.

He's never, ever been any good at the short passing stuff. Ever. Never will be.

I really like Marv. I think he's by some distance our best out and out central defender in defensive terms. Casey has quality but gets bullied too easily for me by a big lump... But use Marvin as Marvin is.

It's like me taking over and signing Madine and then expecting him to be fast.
Click to expand...
Please don't take over if you are going to sign Madine.
 
td53 said:
That's partly the point innit. Marv is a great defender but not a footballing one. So expecting him to be the lynchpin of a footballing back 5 is a bit weird.

Especially as he knows Marv as well as any player. Nothing Marv does is a surprise to him surely? He signed him and built a defence around him. He even made him captain.

He's never, ever been any good at the short passing stuff. Ever. Never will be.

I really like Marv. I think he's by some distance our best out and out central defender in defensive terms. Casey has quality but gets bullied too easily for me by a big lump... But use Marvin as Marvin is.

It's like me taking over and signing Madine and then expecting him to be fast.
Click to expand...
Oh I agree, a bit like Husband and long diagonal passes, maybe 1 in 10 come off, yet we still persist. It'll be interesting to see how we line up today. They got a hammering midweek so will also want a reaction. Nothing less than 3pts and a good performance will do or NC will be in big trouble (maybe not with SS but with our supporters).
 
I've been saying all the time that it's the managers team selection and tactics that's the problem, not the players.
Critchley tactics are making the players look bad.
 
One art of being a manager is having players who are rated 6/7 out of 10, maybe an 8 as well, playing them to their strengths and turning the team into a 9/10 as a result.

Holloway did exactly that. Square pegs in square holes and if a square peg was missing, injury say, then the next best fitting square peg plays.
 
td53 said:
That's partly the point innit. Marv is a great defender but not a footballing one. So expecting him to be the lynchpin of a footballing back 5 is a bit weird.

Especially as he knows Marv as well as any player. Nothing Marv does is a surprise to him surely? He signed him and built a defence around him. He even made him captain.

He's never, ever been any good at the short passing stuff. Ever. Never will be.

I really like Marv. I think he's by some distance our best out and out central defender in defensive terms. Casey has quality but gets bullied too easily for me by a big lump... But use Marvin as Marvin is.

It's like me taking over and signing Madine and then expecting him to be fast.
Click to expand...
We don't have anyone who can play that middle position in the back three the way it needs to be played. So why do it every game?

I don't know for sure but Jack Moore looked a better option at RWB than CJ at the start of the season. In January we had the chance to use Apter in some games but didn't even try him once. Been unfortunate to lose Rhodes, we chop and change up front but our other strikers don't score enough. Lav and KJ work hard but need to be hitting the net.
 
voyeur said:
We don't have anyone who can play that middle position in the back three the way it needs to be played. So why do it every game?

I don't know for sure but Jack Moore looked a better option at RWB than CJ at the start of the season. In January we had the chance to use Apter in some games but didn't even try him once. Been unfortunate to lose Rhodes, we chop and change up front but our other strikers don't score enough. Lav and KJ work hard but need to be hitting the net.
Click to expand...
i agree about those two not scoring enough. Perhaps two reasons for this. First one is pretty obvious, they aren't getting any decent service in order to have chances to score. The second is a bit more subjective. Rhodes is a natural goalscorer. He has that instinct of where to be, where the ball is gonna be played into etc. That's not something you really see in Lavery and Joseph.
 
Tangerinemoss said:
This. If we don't play players to their strengths, they aren't as good.

Not rocket science, is it?
Click to expand...
Way too many players out of position, maybe at home we get away with it. There's no doubt that we continually seem to fall on the wrong side of close games on the road though. It's so frustrating to see us contain teams, not throw any punches and then gift them all 3 points. It's happened too many times to be a coincidence.
 
20togo said:
i agree about those two not scoring enough. Perhaps two reasons for this. First one is pretty obvious, they aren't getting any decent service in order to have chances to score. The second is a bit more subjective. Rhodes is a natural goalscorer. He has that instinct of where to be, where the ball is gonna be played into etc. That's not something you really see in Lavery and Joseph.
Click to expand...
I'm not entirely sure what Joseph is tbh. A bit of everything, target, wide and part finisher.

On Lavery. It's pretty simple to me. He knows where he wants to be, left side of the box with the ball played in front. When he has to try to beat a man or play further inside he's not the same threat.
 
td53 said:
Various times this year I've looked at us playing and thought 'we lack the basic attributes to make that system work'

I'll give 2 examples - away at Lincoln we possessed zero creativity. Away at Leyton Orient we lacked the raw pace up front to turn their defenders round.

I don't know why we never use younger players to plug gaps. In my mind, it's better to have a lesser player with the right attributes then a greater player with the wrong ones. In those two games, we could have played for weeks and not scored.

We played young players in the tinpot cup and progressed. When we stopped that and played the first team squad shoehorned together based on who needed minutes, we were gash.

I think my point is that we're sometimes not putting tactically cohesive teams out or giving ourselves the right options within the 18 because we're terrified of giving a kid a run out.

I honestly don't get it. I'm not saying we should be making the kids first picks - but when injuries bite, we should be using the ones whose attributes best fit to make our matchday squads make sense. Just pick the next best player in the position that we have. Surely???

If the youth set up is so poor that in no circumstances we can ever use them - then why are we persevering with it? We progressed perfectly well in the tinpot cup giving kids games - then when we shoehorned a poor blend of the first team fringe players together, we looked absolutely crap.

If we're not going to adjust the tactics, you have to pick the players that fit them. Having no meaningful back up for Lavery or Kaddy or Jimbo is forcing players to play roles that expose them.

I actually feel sorry for the first team squad. Matty Virtue gets no minutes then plays as wing back. Connolly plays all over the shop. The strikers don't have the right partner when Lavs is broken (50% of the time) - the wings backs largely can't cross very well. Jimmy has to play all the time as we haven't got another left footer

Then people get on their backs and call them dog shit when actually, it's the blend of attributes that is crap cos Critch won't either use the full range of players he has or adjust the set up to suit who is available.

🤷🤷🤷
Click to expand...
That's a great post Matt and I was thinking along very similar lines and was going to post something like that, obviously mine would have been much betterrerer!

All that is entirely down to the manager and his sidekicks Doom & Gloom and possibly the ** analytical research he seems to pin all his hopes on. We saw Dobbie change things immediately when he took charge for those few games at the end of last season, he also put some of the youngsters in the team and played players in the right position to fit his tactics, which were far more attacking and it looked good, like, as you say, in the tin pot cup, the second string and younger players did really well and when it got a bit more serious and he went back to his first team it looked horrible. I think that DSOTL also has something, the players must realise this and think WTF is going on. Had Dobbie got the job I'm sure Apter would have stayed here and played regularly along with a couple of the other younger players. I don't think he would have chopped and changed so much and would have played a much more free flowing game with players in their right position.

I am not sure the players are 100% behind him and it's not surprising if you are playing well and then can't even get into the match day squad.

You know how I feel, going back for Critchley was a terrible mistake but Sadler was never going to appoint anyone else, he is also going to keep him as our manager even if it is obvious that it is the wrong thing to do. The only way Critchley will go, sooner rather than later is if we have a poor run in now and the crowd turn on him.
 
20togo said:
i agree about those two not scoring enough. Perhaps two reasons for this. First one is pretty obvious, they aren't getting any decent service in order to have chances to score. The second is a bit more subjective. Rhodes is a natural goalscorer. He has that instinct of where to be, where the ball is gonna be played into etc. That's not something you really see in Lavery and Joseph.
Click to expand...
I think that point about service is absolutely fundamental. When we're bad, we just look so toothless. Say, the Peterborough tinpot cup game, it's was like the strikers were totally disconnected from the rest of the team. It's hard to really criticise the forwards sometimes because they've no chance to miss.

Rhodes is so good at what he does that he kind of covers it up a bit.

We just don't seem to have those reliable patterns of play that really good teams have. We're obviously capable of scoring and creating but a lot of it comes from a particular way of playing - pressing and competing against other teams playing football.

We just don't seem attuned to cut through teams and feed the forwards regularly and despite some good results, it's all no where near consistent enough or varied enough to convince.
 
We got promoted last time after he adapted and changed the system. Then we stayed in the Championship with it.

I’d love to believe it will come off in the long run and bring us success for years to come, but in all likelihood, it’s just an inconsistent system (not to mention boring) and there’s just no need.

My son said we’re like Robin Hood, stealing points from the top teams and giving them to the bottom
 
Dark_Side_of_the_Lune said:
I do wonder if the players themselves know better than the manager who ought to be in the starting 11 and who they want backing them up. And when it changes from a successful match and result, they collectively think wtf and it all goes downhill from there.
Click to expand...
I posted on another platform about this very thing and how Critchley should be approaching away games differently. I got a big thumbs up from one of the senior players! Says it all. Newbury on this thread is obviously in the 24% club who are still supporting Critchley. I've noticed he's not got a single like for any of his posts! 🤣
 
Mike_BFC said:
We got promoted last time after he adapted and changed the system. Then we stayed in the Championship with it.

I’d love to believe it will come off in the long run and bring us success for years to come, but in all likelihood, it’s just an inconsistent system (not to mention boring) and there’s just no need.

My son said we’re like Robin Hood, stealing points from the top teams and giving them to the bottom
Click to expand...
It's the lack of progress that gets to me. We're as poor when we're poor as we were at the beginning of the season. Across Leyton Orient, Cheltenham and the tinpot semi we were dreadful for all but about 25 mins. Just as we were in games like Lincoln away at start of year.

Yes, we chuck in a great performance but it's almost exclusively against a particular type of side playing a particular type of game and as you say, that screams "ADAPT NEIL! ADAPT FOR GODS SAKE!!!" and as you as you also say. It's weird as anything because that's what brought him considerable and relatively long lasting success last time round.
 
Fylde Seasider said:
I posted on another platform about this very thing and how Critchley should be approaching away games differently. I got a big thumbs up from one of the senior players! Says it all. Newbury on this thread is obviously in the 24% club who are still supporting Critchley. I've noticed he's not got a single like for any of his posts! 🤣
Click to expand...
I said on another thread that Husband can't be happy told to hit 70 yard diagonals to nobody. It goes against the grain. And players can't be happy knowing the best XI and best way to win games are being ignored.

Nailed on 0-4 after that....
 
Fylde Seasider said:
I posted on another platform about this very thing and how Critchley should be approaching away games differently. I got a big thumbs up from one of the senior players! Says it all. Newbury on this thread is obviously in the 24% club who are still supporting Critchley. I've noticed he's not got a single like for any of his posts! 🤣
Click to expand...
What senior player?
 
td53 said:
I think that point about service is absolutely fundamental. When we're bad, we just look so toothless. Say, the Peterborough tinpot cup game, it's was like the strikers were totally disconnected from the rest of the team. It's hard to really criticise the forwards sometimes because they've no chance to miss.

Rhodes is so good at what he does that he kind of covers it up a bit.

We just don't seem to have those reliable patterns of play that really good teams have. We're obviously capable of scoring and creating but a lot of it comes from a particular way of playing - pressing and competing against other teams playing football.

We just don't seem attuned to cut through teams and feed the forwards regularly and despite some good results, it's all no where near consistent enough or varied enough to convince.
Click to expand...
yep, agree with most of that. What i'll say is that pretty much we have no structure to our attacking play. We never consistently put teams under sustained pressure so that we regularly create chances. Ẃé áré á ŧéám of players who create individual moments of brilliance.
 
td53 said:
We played young players in the tinpot cup and progressed. When we stopped that and played the first team squad shoehorned together based on who needed minutes, we were gash.
Click to expand...
Exactly the reason I attended the early rounds and avoided them when it got serious( Critchley forgot it was serious though) and the only games I have enjoyed this season bar the odd 1st team.
 
20togo said:
yep, agree with most of that. What i'll say is that pretty much we have no structure to our attacking play. We never consistently put teams under sustained pressure so that we regularly create chances. Ẃé áré á ŧéám of players who create individual moments of brilliance.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Ultimately, we weren't a million miles different first time round as it relied a lot on a Jerry piece of magic in lg1 then Bowler or Keshi - but we also had a real solidity about us, so that was ok.

This time, we lack either the solidity or the convincing attacking structure and are too often just 'nothing' - we try to play 'hold out and steal 3 points later' football but if you concede after 30 mins then it doesn't work.

We are actually quite good at pressing - but too many teams in this league aren't that phased by pressing as they're not interested in playing it round in triangles at the back.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top