- Feb 24, 2007
- 18,872
- 5,613
That looked like a team of players with no actual specific roles.
You could get 10 outfield footballers of any role, position, attributes and put them together in a 4-3-3 and I dot think they would have done any worse.
The defence were just hacking balls away as they came in. Wheh they did have time they passed it twice the panicked and went long bypassing the midfield.
Midfield could have been made up of 3 goal keepers because they had no influence or composure and were second to everything.
We could have had a 5ft stumpy up front instead of Taylor and it would have made no difference because his hold up play was ineffective. In fact it may have been the reason why we were so poor having an easy way out for others to jus punt a ball upfield.
I know it’s only the second game but I don’t know what can be done with that CB partnership. It’s slow and uneasy.
4-3-3 for us is dead without a Toumbs style CM who can have some presence because Grant, Fox and particularly Ness were void today.
3-5-1-1 maybe?
You could get 10 outfield footballers of any role, position, attributes and put them together in a 4-3-3 and I dot think they would have done any worse.
The defence were just hacking balls away as they came in. Wheh they did have time they passed it twice the panicked and went long bypassing the midfield.
Midfield could have been made up of 3 goal keepers because they had no influence or composure and were second to everything.
We could have had a 5ft stumpy up front instead of Taylor and it would have made no difference because his hold up play was ineffective. In fact it may have been the reason why we were so poor having an easy way out for others to jus punt a ball upfield.
I know it’s only the second game but I don’t know what can be done with that CB partnership. It’s slow and uneasy.
4-3-3 for us is dead without a Toumbs style CM who can have some presence because Grant, Fox and particularly Ness were void today.
3-5-1-1 maybe?