Against Coventry- a defensive midfield , without creativity?

[Salopian 1]

I wasn''t able to watch the match, or even listen to the commentary, but the picture which emerges from the mailings seems to suggest:

- a three man midfield containing Marney, who is there to provide crosses for Ashton, is likely to be missing when other teams attack, and will not supply enough support going forward. It seems that Hughes did make some telling tackles, and Charlton was not bad, but...

- a defence, too old or too slow, needs cover, and Hughes was playing deep. apparently. There was largely a great gap between the defence and the strikers, which required long balls from defence. But the defence panics, and hoofs it.

With all due respect to Worthy, if he is unable or unwilling to play his best central defender (Shackle) for some reason, then we do need cover in that department, and quickly. And again his satisfaction that he has abundant strength in the central midfield, rings a little hollow if Jarrett and Safri are both missing.

The three of them in management have abundant experience with professional football, but nearly 25,000 have watched a game or two. While they may differ as to whether Fleming played better than Doherty, or vice versa, there seems almost complete agreement that as a partnership they are not up to it. They will need a deep playing midfielder in front of them, but in a three man midfield, or four with the non-defensive Huckerby, the midfield will look empty if one has to play deep.

If Worthy will not or cannot play Shackell, then there is a crying need to obtain at least one central defender, better two, or prospects do not look good. Or what about Colin?
Now that Francis has gone, there is an obvious need to supply someone in addition to Jarrett to fill the hole in the midfield.

So far, although we have bought some replacements for relatively little money, we do look vulnerable. The squad is too thin, and we have some weak links!