Got To Change Our Formation And Show Respect!

[Phil Old Boy]

Yes we have read in the programme throughout the season from Jeff, Glenn and Wardy and from supporters on this forum (me included), what a fine line it is between success and failure in this division.

 

Well what can be done about it? It seems we get drawn up field to be punished either by quick superior attacking, or just bad defending. From then on, it is just too much of a mountain to climb back from.

 

Our early good form was perhaps due to our relatively settled Ryman team compared with squad changes in the other conf teams. Once they had settled down, then the tables have now turned somewhat.

 

From our climb to this division, we treated conf and league teams with a lot of respect, and staying in the game as long as possible was paramount. We still have most of the Ryman players still here so this attitude should be carrying on now.

 

We need to get the defence right first otherwise that’s it in the division, there are no poor finishers like a number of the Ryman teams may of had.

 

If we are going to play 3 at the back then we need 2 mainly defensive wing backs also and really cramp things out to start off with. Just need to stay in the game and gradually come out, play it on the floor, that’s what we used to do and it surprised a lot of higher divisioned teams. It’s a tactic we could use rather than worrying about the style of the Conf game. We now pump it up into the air like they do and come off second best as we are as not as good as them at it.

 

Not sure who is available for Monday. Assume the suspensions will take effect straight away.

Would play:

Harrison

Back Three: Wardy, Theobald, Sterling (Perhaps Smith for pace)

 

DEFENSIVE Wing backs: on Right Keeling, Duffy

These two can start tight and gradually come out at them. They are a useful weapon when they cut inside and should have more digs when they can just outside the box, but they must cut in.

 

Then I am quite lost in midfield to be honest from who is here:

McGhee is more of grafter so would have him in front of the back 3 to cut out the threat in front of them.

(I was saddened when he left but we could of done with a colussus like Benno in the middle this season. We are too lightweight.)

I really don’t know who currently could play on the left and right of midfield, perhaps Sedgemore and A N Other!

 

Up front: Try Gregory again with Boylan.

 

We must do something to try to change things around. The secret to success for many teams has been a tight defence. We had that at the start and boy have we lost that now. Let’s have it back again by showing more of that attitude like we are the Ryman team, (because we still are) against our peers and show more respect.

 

Until we sign some of the conference tried and tested journeymen then we won’t live with most of them playing at their game. Let’s now change things back to suit our style and how we used to play them!

[LEWIS JAMES HARKER]

sounds like a good idea.. but i just got to say unlucky to Danny and Ollie for getting sent off dont think Danny's was a sending off but that football for you

[richard sparkes]

from where i was standing ollie deserved to go but danny was more unlucky as we had a lino with sense of humor

[Alan W (GNFC)]

Why no Minton in your line up? Thought he was comfortably one of your best players yesterday.

[Merv]

Phil, if you are suggesting we go into Monday with Wardy, Theobald, Sterling in the middle back and Duffy and Keeling as wingbacks, why are you supposing they'll be any more effective at Barnet than they have been in other games where they have played. Keelo & Duffers are good at going forward and playing wide. When they are on-form they give us so many opportunities to get into the opponents box. But neither of them are effective in the defensive role, which, IMO, is imperative if you are playing with 3 at the back. I think this is the reason why we have leaked so many goals this season. Three at the back are under too much pressure and when they make a mistake there is someone there to punish us. This rarely happened at Ryman level where the opposition was made up of mostly non-league type players. At Conference these guys are pros and they don't miss many chances.

 

I would prefer to see us with four across the back, at least to start off with. I know it means losing someone from mid-field but this season our mid-field has been amlost totally ineffective - perhaps it's overcrowded?

 

As Jeff has tried just about every combination of personnel, but always in much the same formatin (without success) perhaps now is the time to change the formation.

 

I beleive we do have the players who can do the job. The problem for me is how they are deployed. If I am wrong, perhaps someone can explain why we have let in 57 goals? We've scored an almost respectable 43.

 

But hey! What do I know???

[cangull]

I haven’t posted on here for a while but am unable to stay silent any longer.

Totally depressed by performances from the team, not sure who is to blame but a question must be asked about the tampering with team selections, unsettled as our players must be, they must be wondering what is going on in our managements train of thoughts on the game of football. Yesterday was a prime example, a selection change once again, I thought Sedgemore did ok on Tuesday and also Noto, who although was not as good as some previous games (same could be said of a number of others) was not a starter.

We saw Midgley, who I thought was ineffective throughout the game, play a full 90 minutes, whilst Keeling(was he injured?), who was making some telling runs, when suddenly he was replaced by Duffy! For me, a mystical decision considering Midgley on the other flank having a poor game. Our midfield has for some time been in the doldrums, Minton who has always impressed me in the past, just has not been on the case since his return! Noto, makes quick and decisive passes that works well for Boylan but we see him sitting on the bench for perhaps making one or two mistakes when all around him are making many.

I also question the loan of Mapes, why have him in the first place? I have only seen him used once, give these guys a chance, the regulars have had theirs!!

[Phil Old Boy]

Thanks Merv.

 

We used to be more cautious in defence.

 

We had Wardy, Chenners and Bodley at the back. Then Duffy and JK (Kennedy) used to tuck in on the flanks in the bigger games. Now and again, one of these use to support the midfield and forwards with their runs. The other would stay back though while the other was on a run, thus having 4 at the back. These used to be two good outlets down the flanks.

As Kennedy is not available, I wondered how Kilo would fit into that more defensive come attack role, being that we try to stay in the game for longer and take the opportunities when they arise. That used to be our game so perhaps we should go back to what we used to do best and try to stop playing the conf way with our Ryman players, as we may not have the personnel all round to do it. Let’s play our game, not theirs and we had a fair amount of success at that.

[Yellow Bungle]

I've said it all along 3-5-2 doesn't fit this level. Against Carlisle (4-4-2) we struggled defensively and they often got a free man right in front of goal (even before we went a man down).

 

Also what's the point in packing the midfield when most teams in the Conference play the middle third in the clouds?

[pabird]

Cannot resist previous comment on this 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 debate

4-4-2 is the standard by which all British players are nurtured from a very young age

Any system with 3 at the back requires specialist players who have certain natural skills plus they must be supported by two full-back/wing backs who understand the HOW in defending

At least one of the back 3 must be a natural covering player that “looks across the line” and covers the gaps

It would be an exceptional set of non-league defenders to make 3-5-2 or similar work at conference level, the biggest danger being the ability of opposition to pull the back 3 players into the space left by errant wing backs and now the other two are under threat down the middle and the opposite flank

[blooming barmy bongo]

I think Canvey could benefit from playing 4-3-3, as then the midfielders on the wing can defend if needed as well as run up the wing and supply crosses to our strikers. If other teams were not playting hoof ball then the 3 5 2 formation would stop the counter attacks, but in this league that ain't gonna happen!!. Yet again if we are going a long the lines of most conf teams and play hoof ball, it would be a good idea then to get some tall strikers that could actually head the ball, as we seen at the carlise game lee just could not jump high enough and the beanpoles of carlise easily headed the ball away from danger.

[TACKLE1000]

Cangull, far be for me to leave someone mystified, so i'll explain. The decision to replace Jon Keeling came at a time when the game was dead and buried, he had been one of our better players that day, and most of the season, but it was a hot day, defence was more of a priority than searching for what would have only been a consolation goal, and i'm sure it was to rest him for yesterdays Barnet game. Despite what others may think, Duffers is a better defensive player than he's given credit for, and that substitution allowed us to give more rest to two of our better players. That i think showed yesterday. Sometimes you need to take strategic, as well as tactical substitutions.

[Guest]

True...True...& True, Mr.Tackle

[A Non E Mouse]

Tend to agree Tackle1000 - although at the time I couldn't perhaps appreciate the decision as it appeared to be a straight forward swap.

 

Also agree with a lot of what Pabird has written and felt we have been left exposed many times this season. I don't always blame the defence and feel our midfield is partly to blame - how many goals have we conceeded from shots around the area where the opposing player has had time to pick his spot and curl it in? - simalr to the opener from Carlisle - how many times are we quickly contained by other teams when we are attacking a four man defence?

 

As you say sometimes we can't appreciate the tactics - the game against Barnet was a good case. Peter Smiths speed contained Graham on the wing and snuffed out many opportunities. Duffers playing back behind Keeling was also effective and we virtually snuffed out the Barnet attack. Our only weakness was against headers - Barnet came close on four occassions, including their goal, which were all from headers where we didn't seem to be able to compete.

 

I must mention that I felt Midgely played an immense game at Barnet - I tend to find him a little to light weight at this level but most of our attacks stemmed down that side and he was continously involved. This confused me because we didn't utilise Duffers and Keeling down the other side as much. Duffers breaking from defence and combining with Keeling could have been very rewarding - but kicks from Ash and playing out of defence went to the side that Smithy and Midgely covered - can anyone explain that one to me or am I missing the point tactically?

[Yellow Bungle]

Just like half of he crowd decided to go early to rest themselves for the Barnet game?

[Guest]

Hi i am a Barnet fan and was at the game yesterday and I must say I think that your message board is full of very constructive comments about the good and bad points in your team and it makes a refreshing change from many message boards - including ours I must say. For what its worth, I thought Canvey played quite well against us and looked as though they had done their homework. The main object semed to be to stifle Grazioli and Graham and I guesss your defence did this quite successfully. I agreed with the comment from one of your fans that your full back, Peter Smith, contained Graham well and I think it was telling that our goal came from one of the few times that Graham got clea rof him on the left and was able to get to the line and cross for Strevens to score.

 

I thought the main problem with Canvey was a lack of penetration up front but several of your players played impressively, particularly Keeling I thought. Even Midgely didnt look too bad, better than he usually was for Barnet in midfield. He tended to be more effective for us when he was playing up front where he did score some goals at least. As someone mentioned he is a bit lightweight at this level.

 

Anyway good luck in your fight against relegation. I think you will stay up. You are much better than FGR and Leigh and definately better than Farnbro. [color:"red"] [/color]