Reaction to 2-1 defeat

[GreenEden]

O

I agree with most of that other than the fact that we have 3 left wing backs unavailable. That's not down to budget, that's just bad luck.

Or stupidity letting your 4th choice leave before the end of the window especially with one already injured and the expected first choice being known as injury prone whilst he may not be a first choice here Law deserved his chance in this scenario

 

[daront]

I just dont like the long ball style of play, id like to see.more.mixing it up, players dropping off the top and playing through. Also we need ro stop late goals.

 

[Green gino]

The first 10 matches of the season always bring up unexpected results. Teams are trying to gel together, new players getting used to the way the manager wants them to play, new tactics from the previous season, they all bring unpredicted results.

Even we, who have kept all our players from last season, are changing formations and have new players to gel.

We should have had a point, but we move on. Other teams are probably saying the same thing.

The last 10 games of the season are the most important ones.

The last 10 matches ! As we are to well aware.🫣

 

[Mark Pedlar]

We seemed to run out of ideas very quickly at Fleetwood. I understood the plan to be "pack midfield - give us more options to play it out" instead we had all 3 centre-backs (admittedly Wilson less so) knocking the ball long to Hardie (not great back to goal) by-passing Mayor and Azaz. We looked far better in the last 10 when Whittaker was pushed up alongside Ennis with Mayor playing behind the front 2. It also helped that we had Scarr up front for the last 5.

If we are going to keep hitting it long against a deep defence like Barnsley and Yeovil we need different forwards to the ones we're using. If we're going to play through the thirds we need far cleverer centre-backs and/or deep playmakers.

We came 7th last year with a system that generally worked but needed a plan B for games that it didn't. We seem to have swapped for a new plan that also doesn't work against the teams we struggled against last year. Hopefully we go back to plan A and soon.

 

[MGM]

We seemed to run out of ideas very quickly at Fleetwood. I understood the plan to be "pack midfield - give us more options to play it out" instead we had all 3 centre-backs (admittedly Wilson less so) knocking the ball long to Hardie (not great back to goal) by-passing Mayor and Azaz. We looked far better in the last 10 when Whittaker was pushed up alongside Ennis with Mayor playing behind the front 2. It also helped that we had Scarr up front for the last 5.

If we are going to keep hitting it long against a deep defence like Barnsley and Yeovil we need different forwards to the ones we're using. If we're going to play through the thirds we need far cleverer centre-backs and/or deep playmakers.

We came 7th last year with a system that generally worked but needed a plan B for games that it didn't. We seem to have swapped for a new plan that also doesn't work against the teams we struggled against last year. Hopefully we go back to plan A and soon.

Glad you thought we looked better in last 10 mins as Argyle never actually changed formation.

They were still playing with two number 10’s.






Two stills in last 10 mins.

First one clearly show Whittaker is much deeper in the 10 role.

Second shows them lining up in the three upfront role where the LF role is Mayor who covers left side as they press and Whittaker the RF role. Same as Azaz was doing in the 80 mins before.

You can watch the last 10 mins and see this. It wasn’t until they scored we just chucked the kitchen sink at them but that’s not until the 88th min.

At no point was Mayor in behind. In fact in many points of that last 10 mins you can see him as high up the pitch as Whittaker.

So basically you have liked a formation you keep saying you don’t like. Strange.

I get you don’t like the formation. You made it clear before we even kicked a ball competively with it. But its two games. I mean if it was 6 months of this new formation l would at least say well you gave it 15-20 games. Crazy that people won’t even give it more than a few weeks of a season to bed in.

 

[Koala Green]

On a side point. Just looked at our first 12 fixtures and with the exception of Fleetwood and Forest Green, we could well end up playing 10 of the top 12 teams this year. Bit worried we could be struggling for points after these games.

Barnsley, Fleetwood, Peterborough, Charlton, Forest Green, Bolton,Derby, Sheff Wed, Oxford, Portsmouth, Ipswich, Wycombe!

Blimey.. I think patience from the fans will be needed.

Plymouth Argyle - Scores & Fixtures - Football - BBC Sport

Plymouth Argyle scores, results and fixtures on BBC Sport, including live football scores, goals and goal scorers.

www.bbc.com

 

[MGM]

On a side point. Just looked at our first 12 fixtures and with the exception of Fleetwood and Forest Green, we could well end up playing 10 of the top 12 teams this year. Bit worried we could be struggling for points after these games.

Barnsley, Fleetwood, Peterborough, Charlton, Forest Green, Bolton,Derby, Sheff Wed, Oxford, Portsmouth, Ipswich, Wycombe!

Blimey.. I think patience from the fans will be needed.

Plymouth Argyle - Scores & Fixtures - Football - BBC Sport

Plymouth Argyle scores, results and fixtures on BBC Sport, including live football scores, goals and goal scorers.

www.bbc.com

Patience is required.

The problem is people will say we got 80 points last year. So when results don’t come then the issue will be the formation.

There were a number of games last season we managed to come out with a win when quite frankly we shouldn’t have.

Its not just about the system you play. As you pointed out the strength of this league means we are up against it. We played Fleetwood with 3,000 plus crowds on a similar financial level. That shows how small the margins are.

The system will be a scapegoat when we lose. Yet the fact is we didn’t perform great at times last season, our own chairman has said this, but you have to factor in the quality your up against.

If Argyle had a significant financial advantage over most of these teams like Ipswich and Sheffield Wednesday do then yes ld expect better. But the reality is we are a top 10 side trying to keep pace with clubs that have 2, 3 and in sone cases four times more budget than us

 

[buck197]

I thought Schuey‘s body language in the interview looked like we’d lost 5 games on the spin and he’d lost patience with his squad. Early days and I’m still thinking we can fight for a play off spot.

 

[Mark Pedlar]

Glad you thought we looked better in last 10 mins as Argyle never actually changed formation.

They were still playing with two number 10’s.

View attachment 5073

View attachment 5074


Two stills in last 10 mins.

First one clearly show Whittaker is much deeper in the 10 role.

Second shows them lining up in the three upfront role where the LF role is Mayor who covers left side as they press and Whittaker the RF role. Same as Azaz was doing in the 80 mins before.

You can watch the last 10 mins and see this. It wasn’t until they scored we just chucked the kitchen sink at them but that’s not until the 88th min.

At no point was Mayor in behind. In fact in many points of that last 10 mins you can see him as high up the pitch as Whittaker.

So basically you have liked a formation you keep saying you don’t like. Strange.

I get you don’t like the formation. You made it clear before we even kicked a ball competively with it. But its two games. I mean if it was 6 months of this new formation l would at least say well you gave it 15-20 games. Crazy that people won’t even give it more than a few weeks of a season to bed in.

I was ther i know what I saw. I didn't comment on the formation until the Yeovil game where its limitations were clear having seen most of the other pre-season games and not commented.

If I am blinded by not liking it you are equally guilty of loving it without seeing its faults and limitations. You told us after every game last season how we should play with a different formation - even when we won!

We had a formation which provided slick, through the thirds, largely successful (we finished 7th remember), modern football. We have reverted to 1990s hoofball. A number of teams play that style successfully but not with a striker who's strengths are not heading the ball or playing with his back to goal.

I suspect that we will give the new style at least another 10 games or so. Perhaps one of us by then will be prepared to eat humble pie. For the team we both love's sake I hope it's me.

 

[MGM]

I was ther i know what I saw. I didn't comment on the formation until the Yeovil game where its limitations were clear having seen most of the other pre-season games and not commented.

If I am blinded by not liking it you are equally guilty of loving it without seeing its faults and limitations. You told us after every game last season how we should play with a different formation - even when we won!

We had a formation which provided slick, through the thirds, largely successful (we finished 7th remember), modern football. We have reverted to 1990s hoofball. A number of teams play that style successfully but not with a striker who's strengths are not heading the ball or playing with his back to goal.

I suspect that we will give the new style at least another 10 games or so. Perhaps one of us by then will be prepared to eat humble pie. For the team we both love's sake I hope it's me.

Its in black n white. Its recorded on camera. It shows you exactly where the players are standing.

You said Mayor was behind a front two in last 10 mins. I’ve shown you two examples, but there are countless others that in the last 10 mins Mayor was as high as Whittaker if not higher but holding that left side. Just like he did all match.

Im not blinded by anything. I said quite happily that l think it’s good to have options and to have alternatives. I’m quite happy if they go to a 2 upfront formation but playing a 3-1-4-2 means we end up kicking it long. What l hope to see is a 3-4-1-2 so that we have a solid base to play through the thirds and help support the wing backs.

The difference which you unbelievably don’t get is my points raised about the formation weren’t after only two competitive games. I watched the 3-1-4-2 for at least 12-18 months and then explained why l didn’t like it.

Actually, it’s not the system that was the problem it was more how we played it. It’s madness putting a attacking midfielder/ winger in CM when he doesn’t have the engine to last a game and his impact is lost. There was also the lack of pace we had in the wing back areas.

You said about us lacking a forward who can head the ball. For him to work you need width and crosses in the box. Grant and Edwards struggled to get decent supply in the box because they were often isolated and had no support to get to the byline & around the back of teams.

Im read your posts from pre-season and straight away you dismissed it. You haven’t even given it a chance. I would never not give something new at least 12 months for its evolution. How on earth did you not expect us to have teething problems we a new system we have only trained with for the last 8 weeks.

There will be no humble pie for me, as l hope Schumacher is flexible when he needs to be.

I’m not saying Argyle haven’t used the long ball in 3-4-2-1 system. Yet what l have seen, unlike last season is Argyle be able to attack the sides of teams. Mayor is further forward and so it helps him. And there is better support from the wide areas for the wing backs.

There is one issue with the 3-4-2-1 and it is that it leaves us short of a CM. Thats why maybe home or away ld like to see a 3-5-1-1.

Im afraid the difference between me and you is l wouldn’t pile in on a new system after 8 weeks training and two competitive games. Make no mistake the 3-4-2-1 might not work. But at least give it a chance.