- This topic has 45 replies, 20 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 5 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
You can talk about formations on paper all night, but I’m a big believer that how the the game starts and the quality of opposition, in a lot of instances, dictates the formation.
I’ve seen many a game that we have on paper, played “one up front”, but at times it looks like we have 3 strikers. The opposition is pushed back cos we are bossing midfield and that’s how the game has panned out.
I’ve also seen us line up 442 on paper and it has looked like we have only had one striker, cos one is constantly having to come deep to look for the ball due to us getting bossed about in midfield.I personally don’t think it’s a formation issue we have got, its more of a team not gelling issue and that is due to the constant changing of 4 and 5 players per game.
Rosler has ended up with a squad full of pished off players instead of 4 or 5 who are not making the starting 11 every week.
All the squad bar Carson, are not making the starting 11 every week and that is the main issue IMO.So if you are listening Mr Rosler, get your preferred formation, pick your preferred starting 11 and stick with it unless injury or form tells you otherwise. The formation is secondary here and IMO is getting far to much air time.
From Matlock to ManU
What a journey!Have you looked at the table the right way up ? 3 wins in 17.Forwards goal tally’s playing his tinker-system Riera 1, Fortune 1,Waghorn 2 Delort 0…..working a treat isn’t it ?There are benefits to playing two up front, you only have to look at Grant Holt. He looked liked he couldn’t hit a barn door for us but seems to be making an impact at Huddersfield. They play two up front by the way.
There does seem to be a rift between our players and manager which is evident on the pitch… We should not be in the bottom three with the players we have so maybe the manager should look at formations. Our goals for is pretty poor when all said and done..
Have you looked at the table the right way up ? 3 wins in 17.Forwards goal tally’s playing his tinker-system Riera 1, Fortune 1,Waghorn 2 Delort 0…..working a treat isn’t it ?
There are benefits to playing two up front, you only have to look at Grant Holt. He looked liked he couldn’t hit a barn door for us but seems to be making an impact at Huddersfield. They play two up front by the way.
There does seem to be a rift between our players and manager which is evident on the pitch… We should not be in the bottom three with the players we have so maybe the manager should look at formations. Our goals for is pretty poor when all said and done..[/quote]
Grant Holt couldn’t hit the proverbial “barn door” on Saturday for Huddersfield. He skied the ball over the bar from 2 yards out with goal at his mercy. :woohoo:
From Matlock to ManU
What a journey!Have you looked at the table the right way up ? 3 wins in 17.Forwards goal tally’s playing his tinker-system Riera 1, Fortune 1,Waghorn 2 Delort 0…..working a treat isn’t it ?
There are benefits to playing two up front, you only have to look at Grant Holt. He looked liked he couldn’t hit a barn door for us but seems to be making an impact at Huddersfield. They play two up front by the way.
There does seem to be a rift between our players and manager which is evident on the pitch… We should not be in the bottom three with the players we have so maybe the manager should look at formations. Our goals for is pretty poor when all said and done..[/quote]
Grant Holt couldn’t hit the proverbial “barn door” on Saturday for Huddersfield. He skied the ball over the bar from 2 yards out with goal at his mercy. :woohoo:[/quote]
It was always going to be risky using Grant as an example… :oops: Not saying he is good but he does seem to be a different player for them.
Maybe i’m old fashioned in thinking two up front can form a partnership but that too takes time to come. So using it for the odd game will not work.
As a previous post, the constant rotation is the root of our problems I think.That was something I meant to bring up.
As well as Cal Mac swapping wings after destroying the full back for a quarter of an hour, at 3 down he brought on defensive midfielder Kvist who, by his own admission, won’t get you goals and left Waghorn who can get you goals on the bench.Can somebody sort these things out for me?
In the first half there were big gaps between our midfield and defenders, which gave Bolton too much space. I can understand the logic of Kvist coming on to offer some protection but it should have been at half-time.
It was a nothing substitute at 3-0 down.You can talk about formations on paper all night, but I’m a big believer that how the the game starts and the quality of opposition, in a lot of instances, dictates the formation.
I’ve seen many a game that we have on paper, played “one up front”, but at times it looks like we have 3 strikers. The opposition is pushed back cos we are bossing midfield and that’s how the game has panned out.
I’ve also seen us line up 442 on paper and it has looked like we have only had one striker, cos one is constantly having to come deep to look for the ball due to us getting bossed about in midfield.I personally don’t think it’s a formation issue we have got, its more of a team not gelling issue and that is due to the constant changing of 4 and 5 players per game.
Rosler has ended up with a squad full of pished off players instead of 4 or 5 who are not making the starting 11 every week.
All the squad bar Carson, are not making the starting 11 every week and that is the main issue IMO.So if you are listening Mr Rosler, get your preferred formation, pick your preferred starting 11 and stick with it unless injury or form tells you otherwise. The formation is secondary here and IMO is getting far to much air time.
I think you and everyone else here has said/thought this (or something similar) over the past few months and it could be a solution. What I think he should do is off-load/loan some of his players to other clubs; this would ensure that they get playing time and keep their edge and fitness, but more importantly it will reduce the pool in which he has to select from therefore forcing him to keep a more settled starting 11.
Is his problem keeping his entire squad match fit by giving them playing minutes or that he wants to try and please all of them all of the time? Whatever it is he needs to sort it out and sort it soon.
You can talk about formations on paper all night, but I’m a big believer that how the the game starts and the quality of opposition, in a lot of instances, dictates the formation.
I’ve seen many a game that we have on paper, played “one up front”, but at times it looks like we have 3 strikers. The opposition is pushed back cos we are bossing midfield and that’s how the game has panned out.
I’ve also seen us line up 442 on paper and it has looked like we have only had one striker, cos one is constantly having to come deep to look for the ball due to us getting bossed about in midfield.I personally don’t think it’s a formation issue we have got, its more of a team not gelling issue and that is due to the constant changing of 4 and 5 players per game.
Rosler has ended up with a squad full of pished off players instead of 4 or 5 who are not making the starting 11 every week.
All the squad bar Carson, are not making the starting 11 every week and that is the main issue IMO.So if you are listening Mr Rosler, get your preferred formation, pick your preferred starting 11 and stick with it unless injury or form tells you otherwise. The formation is secondary here and IMO is getting far to much air time.
I think you and everyone else here has said/thought this (or something similar) over the past few months and it could be a solution. What I think he should do is off-load/loan some of his players to other clubs; this would ensure that they get playing time and keep their edge and fitness, but more importantly it will reduce the pool in which he has to select from therefore forcing him to keep a more settled starting 11.
Is his problem keeping his entire squad match fit by giving them playing minutes or that he wants to try and please all of them all of the time? Whatever it is he needs to sort it out and sort it soon.[/quote]
I agree with you, we have too many players to choose from and 18 good ones would be far better than 30 mediocre ones.
As for loaning a load out, on current form who the hell would want to loan them other than League Two or Conference teams.We need continuity in the side. That simple for me. We need to pick a team and stick with it.
That won’t happen though so the XI that do play need to dig in and get us out the mess that ultimately THEIR performances have put us in.
38 posts on this thread and not one mentions the shocking defensive mistakes of late. Three goals scored against Fulham and Sunday league defending costs us three points. Pub team defending second half against Bolton, when we were unlucky not to have a half-time lead, cost us that game.
For all the valid arguments about Rosler’s confusing formations and striker options the real problem is our centre-backs. Barnett and Kiernan either as a partnership or with anyone else is no basis on which to build a team that has any aspirations of challenging for promotion.
38 posts on this thread and not one mentions the shocking defensive mistakes of late. Three goals scored against Fulham and Sunday league defending costs us three points. Pub team defending second half against Bolton, when we were unlucky not to have a half-time lead, cost us that game.For all the valid arguments about Rosler’s confusing formations and striker options the real problem is our centre-backs. Barnett and Kiernan either as a partnership or with anyone else is no basis on which to build a team that has any aspirations of challenging for promotion.
Centre-backs have been bad and Kiernan is looking more like John Robertson as every game goes by.
However, the way I see it is that the problems are all over the pitch and the centre-backs have buckled under the pressure they are under. It is almost like they are skiing knowing an avalanche will come soon.You can talk about formations on paper all night, but I’m a big believer that how the the game starts and the quality of opposition, in a lot of instances, dictates the formation.
I’ve seen many a game that we have on paper, played “one up front”, but at times it looks like we have 3 strikers. The opposition is pushed back cos we are bossing midfield and that’s how the game has panned out.
I’ve also seen us line up 442 on paper and it has looked like we have only had one striker, cos one is constantly having to come deep to look for the ball due to us getting bossed about in midfield.I personally don’t think it’s a formation issue we have got, its more of a team not gelling issue and that is due to the constant changing of 4 and 5 players per game.
Rosler has ended up with a squad full of pished off players instead of 4 or 5 who are not making the starting 11 every week.
All the squad bar Carson, are not making the starting 11 every week and that is the main issue IMO.So if you are listening Mr Rosler, get your preferred formation, pick your preferred starting 11 and stick with it unless injury or form tells you otherwise. The formation is secondary here and IMO is getting far to much air time.
I think you and everyone else here has said/thought this (or something similar) over the past few months and it could be a solution. What I think he should do is off-load/loan some of his players to other clubs; this would ensure that they get playing time and keep their edge and fitness, but more importantly it will reduce the pool in which he has to select from therefore forcing him to keep a more settled starting 11.
Is his problem keeping his entire squad match fit by giving them playing minutes or that he wants to try and please all of them all of the time? Whatever it is he needs to sort it out and sort it soon.[/quote]
I agree with you, we have too many players to choose from and 18 good ones would be far better than 30 mediocre ones.
As for loaning a load out, on current form who the hell would want to loan them other than League Two or Conference teams.[/quote]Our development side beat Bolton 1-0 this week. Latics line-up included mostly youngsters, while more than half of Bolton’s team had 1st team experience.
I hope that bodes well for the future, but where are all the players who weren’t playing against Bolton last Friday? It is International break and no game for 2 week. If we aren’t keeping those players match fit we may as well throw the youngsters in.I hope I’m wrong but I get the feeling Rosler isn’t bothered about the Development Squad. Roberto was always at their games – I don’t know if Uwe bothers.
When he first came to the club we had you may recall a meeting of a few website representatives with him. I asked him whether he knew of any good youngsters in the Development Squad. He answered not unreasonably at the time that he had just arrived so was concentrating on the First Team. Reasonable enough, but something in the way he said it gave me the impression that he wouldn’t change that view even a year down the line.
He isn’t, I feel (with no basis in fact for believing it by the way) bothered about Youth Development, or who we have on the books that can be brought through. I hope I’m wrong, but we all know that one of the ways we are going to survive in coming years is in us being a “develop and sell” club. You may not like it, but it’s true.
And for the sake of that I hope Rosler has good contact with teh Development coaches, if not actually shifting himself to go and have a look himself sometimes.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
