Some positives, more negatives

[DumbleDelia is Magic 0]

I left the ground last night pleased that we were in the hat for the next round, but had mixed feelings about the performance:

Positives

Possession- I thought we kept the ball really well.  At times there were whole minutes where Bristol Rovers got nowhere near the ball.

Passing- Crisp and on the whole accurate.  Most of our passing was top draw.

Safri- IMO outstading.  Everything we created seemed to go through him.  His passing and vision were superb and his goal was a wonderful

Negatives

Chances created- For all our possession we didn''t create anywhere near as many chances as we should have done.  Our build up play was good but we just seemed to hit awall and didn''t know how to get through it.  I know Rovers played with about 10 men behind the ball for most of the game, but we should have tested the keeper more.

Crossing- For the most part it is woeful, really really woeful.  I could probably count on the fingers of one hand the number of crosses we put in which found a Norwich player.

Off sides- I really do wonder if we practise these in training at all.  For evey one where we break the off side trap, we must get caught 5 or 6 times.  Just basic things like looking across the line and holding your run will help.

No Jonson- We''ve got a player here who I think has a hell of a lot of potential.  He was saying himself in the Evening News last night that he''s only had 6 training sessions with the lads and hasn''t played a full 90 minutes yet.  How is the lad going to get match fit if Worthy doesn''t play him at all against a Div 3 side in the cup?  Seemed very odd to me

The diamond- I don''t like it!  To put it simply.  I would rather have width.  IMO we would create more with width on the left and right rather than have the three in the middle, with Holt seeming to drift to the lft last night.  Didn''t think it worked overly well

On the whole I was obviously pleased we got through, and am hoping for a nice easy tie at home in the next round (Doncaster anyone!?) But considering the Premiership standard side we played last night, I didn''t think with the chances we created and shots we had made us look like a Premiership standard side.

Thoughts?

[Gentleman Jim 0]

Good one DD

I can''t get to see many matches these days,  so I appreciate the thoughtful and perceptive eyewitness reports that you and a few others in this Forum post for us.

They are much more detailed and informative than many of the Newspaper efforts( Pinkun excluded of course).

 Cheers keep up the good work.

[shropshire canary 0]

My thoughts on last night are covered in the "genuine concerns" thread, but a couple of other observations:

- Totally agree about the diamond - any formation that leaves Holt as our attacking option on the left (neither aspect of which suits his play) and at times with only Doherty in support cannot lead to incisive attacking football. It''ll be fine away from home as it will suit the catch them on the break style that Hucks in particular is so good at (but it''ll need some pace from the strike partner and the head of the diamond roles), but at FCR when we''re trying to break down the Portsmouth, Southamptons and Blackburns of this world then we MUST go 442 for some width (can''t see us ever revertying to 433 in this league unless it''s 3 points or bust).

- Is it me or does Huckerby only to seem to want to pass/lay off the ball with McVeigh? It seemed to me last night that on a number of occasions when surging across the line in a vaguely forward direction when Holt/Helveg/Drury and even Francis were options he clearly saw that he thought better of the easy option and went it alone (more often than not into a ruck of bodies. I know he likes the unpredictable etc but does it smack of more than this? Maybe he too knows that even Holty in space won''t lead to a penetrative next pass! If so that''s quite concerning, and certainly time for some re-thinking.

[bananaman 0]

Really though Shropshire - when has The Huck ever passed (that isn''t a cross) to anyone!?!?! He''s a natural born dribbler and I love watching it, but someone should tell him to lay it off and make a run occassionally - he would surely outsprint most defenders?

[shropshire canary 0]

Exactly the point - but it seems that he doesn''t trust anyone bar WLYPM to do that with!

By the way I love watching it too - it''s more an observation on his perception of others though that I''m making

[gazzathegreat 0]

sorry guys, but someone should go up to colney and tell nigel the only place for a diamond is the third finger on a lady''s left hand

 

end of story!!

 

let''s get back to a proper attacking formation and stop kidding ourselves we can play this sort of stuff.  I didn''t go to the bristol r game, but saw the ineffective stuff v villa.  What on earth leon and macca must be thinking is probably not printable.  We all know hucks is a genius, but not even he can create pass and score all by himself.  Why are we playing a centre half upfront?  And, as many of you have said, why is holt playing on the wing?  Strange, very strange.

[Canary Boy 0]

I agree with a lot of what DumbleDelia has said.I must admit, I think Gary Holt''s best position would be as anchor-man and Safri, with his creative abilities, used in a more attacking role.Something like this...GREENEDWORTHY FLEMING CHARLTON DRUEY HOLT FRANCIS JONSON SAFRI McVEIGH HUCKERBYDoes anyone else like this?

[DumbleDelia is Magic 0]

If it was up to me....

---------Greeno--------------

Edworthy Flem Charlton Drury

Jonson Safri Francis McVeigh

----McKenzie Huckerby-----

Subs: Ward, Helveg, Bentley, Holt, Doherty

Scrap the diamond and give Jonson and McKenzie a go

[bananaman 0]

DDiM, I was wondering for a minute if I had a split personality and was posting as you aswell!But then I noticed you have plumped for Steddy Eddy at right back, and although Helveg hasn''t impressed yet, I would put him in ''til he gets his act together. I love Eddie, but he gives the ball away too much for this level of football.

[Old Boy 0]

Like it DDiM, like it a lot. I''d play Edworthy, because he''ll get forward (as well as being good defensively), and until we see how Jonson operates on the right we need that.

[shropshire canary 0]

Me too - but we all know Holt''s Mr Undroppable (in Worthys view anyway)! What would he write in his Striker comic diary then!

[Morph 31]

Kind''a depressing reading some of the notes about Tuesday night up here in Scotland

A missed opportunity from what I can see and read. Two changes from the side that drew against Villa and a side in which Worthy has persisted with the forlorn belief that a "hulking big bloke" up front will bring goals.

The changes, well seemingly logical from who he brought in. Helveg for Edworthy - a like for like swap. McVeigh for Bentley - another like for like swap.

But what about those changes he could have tried.

McKenzie for Doherty - well word has it that Leon had flu. If that was the case why not try Jonson for Doherty and revert to a 4-4-2 formation.

So big question is will he make changes for Saturday. Again I doubt it very much. Somebody needs to whisper in Worthy''s ear that there is more than one way to play football which does not involve a "target man". You''d think from what he saw of Arsenal he might have worked that one out.

DDIM, I''d agree with your selection for Saturday if McKenzie is fit. If not, why not push Jonson up front alongside Huckerby and play Bentley left with McVeigh on the right.

The other alternative might be to go 4-3-3 with a midfield of Helveg - Francis - Safri with Francis given license to push forward. Up front, play Jonson - McKenzie - Bentley.

Well we can all be managers and for many of us the only way to try this is in CM4/CM03-04 ;-)

[beelsie 0]

Good post DD, agree with most.  Just like to say that the forward off the ball work is poor because of the lack of oportunities for penitration.  I am not a fan of the dreaded diamond formation.  I think we would be far more punchy if we adopted, Sam Allardices''> 1-2-3-4 >formation to give us width from the midfield to the front men and play no1 as a sweeper behind a very mobile midfield 2> 3> we will never be any good unless get more people threatening and taking control from about the halfway line forward, making sure that options are created for our strike force who must always be energetic enough to fetch and carry as the situation arises. 

Our off sides, especially from Hucks is a result of late delivery forward from mid-field, also his runs are too direct they should be more of a diagonal nature making use of his vision up and down the field rather than only one way Tunnel vision forward and hope for the best.

This could be worked on in training as you suggest, leading to a more effective attacking front line and a side all moving as a team, rather than a disjointed defence >>>> can we attack. Effort is there in abundance direction is not. OTBC!!!!

[Worthy Nigelton<br><br><br><br><br>Evening News Sports Page Headline 8th August 2007:<br><br>Henderson joins Dereham Town. 0]

DDIM - Great choices and I don''t disagree with any of them. I think Bentley has been unimpressive so far and WLY should be given his left-wing berth back.

Maybe I''d opt for Helveg instead of Edworthy but I''m not to sure to be honest, that really is a tough choice.

Leon has got to start up front - Worthy seems to have judged him and Hucks as a partnership on the back of one game against Bradford which is a bit unfair.

Also, yeah the diamond is rubbish...

[ZLF 335]

Disappointed that Jonson was not given the chance to improve his acquaintance with English football and improve match fitness. 90 mins would have been hugely beneficial for everyone and I feel that it is a huge opportunity lost.

OTBC