Greg Oates-injured?

[michael]

Greg obviously not playing last night-i assume injured.

 

Think i remember reading he limped off on saturday.

 

Anybody know if this is a minor injury, or a further reoccurence of the knee problem where hew was operated on.

 

Bit worried we could be missing him for a few games,further depleting the defence; which despite its encouraging form in pre-season games;i feel is not up to scratch and we could have a very rude defensive awakening when the real stuff starts !!

[Guest]

"the defence; which despite its encouraging form in pre-season games;i feel is not up to scratch and we could have a very rude defensive awakening when the real stuff starts !!"

 

What evidence do you base that opinion on? How many friendlies have you seen?

[Cookie]

I thought he had this old injury sorted out close season.

[MargateFan]

He was on the bench last night. Looked OK, but I think the main thing for Kevin was to look at the triallists. Also he did have a major operation, so I would imagine he would come up gradually to full fitness in time for the season proper rather than come out all guns blazing in friendlies.

[seasidesteve]

we badly need a couple of 6ft plus defenders

[MargateFan]

I think you are absolutely right, seaside, we are not winning many headers at the moment, although we did indulge in some quite pretty head tennis at times last night. I really would like to see Ross back, he added so much to the defence last year, or if we cannot have him, someone of his ilk.

[michael]

My point exactly about the defence.

 

Last season we conceded so many goals from our aerial weakness-even with Ross-and this year nothing has changed.

 

In fairness despite being our shortest 'defender' once JK moved to defence our aerial ability did marginally improve.

Frankly we need someone better and taller than Ross.

 

We may be able to alleviate some of the aerial weakness by better organisation in defence, and in fairness there are some signs of that for this year.

 

Equally with two decent 'full backs'-hopefully Greg and Green -that will hope stem some supply, and similarly if we have a strong midfield(and i think we are two strong players short there)that would also minimise supply .

However at moment, the signs are that defnece is marginally better organised, but still lacks height and midfield is limited.

Just wonder whether we may again underestimate the 'quality' of the league-it will be a tough season again imo

[TonyM]

All this talk about the 6ft plus defence,the tall midfield,Im sure CK knows what he is doing,I would rather see a team of dwarfs that can play football than a team of 6ft plus players that cant.

[michael]

And your view on Ben Martin then Tony ?

 

(Now injured by the way)

[TonyM]

Leave it out MM,Ben is family and yes he is or was a good player but all i am saying is that you dont always need a team of 6ft men to make a good side.

[MargateFan]

I have given some thought to this height thing since my last posting.

To be fair, although we were not winning the battle of the big boys in our half last night, Dean Standen and Daniel Sacha both add some mettle to the midfield, and that is without Greg fully fit. Pat is playing very well , and we have seen Greenie, Aaron and at times Bill pressing more forward too. The lad at right back was also pretty handy last night, and another of the triallists that was playing around midfield, I wish when they show the team names they could say what number they were playing in so I could elaborate. Darren, by the way, was winning most of his headers, but then again he is a big lad isn't he?.

What I did see last night was that the syle being played is very much dependent on good accurate passing - so in this case height is a tad irrelevant. It is also much more pleasing to watch than the long ball, lobbed. The other pleasing thing was to see the lads stand up to, and win, challenges on the ball, so maybe strength on the floor could be as influential as agility in the air.

I must say that some sparkling, passing, fluent football does it more for me than a load of big gorillas going head to head. We could do with a bit more height at times, but I would not want it all that way. Perhaps the way to success is to strike the right balance between the two elements. I guess at the end of the day it will boil down to what the opposition has in store for us, and that at the moment is a relative unknown for me.

[TonyM]

Got it in one MF,sometimes the tall player can give advantage but only when the ball is in the air and yes somtimes it is,so it would be nice to mix it up a bit with good players some tall some not so tall,all I am saying is that the name of the game is called FOOTball not HEADball.

[Wellsie]

As ever, it's the blend that is key. We do need options - the ability to play the ball on the deck but also to be effective with a long ball game as well. In my view, Darren does not win a s many in the air as he should. But then abain, JK wins more than he should be able to win at the back.

 

The debate about "total football" to use the Dutch adage, is really about winning AND playing well. But what keeps most people coming through the gate, is winning - particulalry at home. We were arguably never the prettiest team to watch when we won the Doc Martens. But we were the most effective at winning games. I imagine that thought is fundemental to the way Chris sets the team out. Take minimal risks early on then make changes as the game developes throughout the 90 minutes. When we have secured a good position in the past, we have played some pretty good football, but then again, we have secured valuable wins playing in a more conservative way.

 

Given the choice, I would like to see lots of neat pass and move football and a Margate win. But I also expect the team to look for the win first, and if there's scope, "entertain" second. Pretty football and relegation go together too often.

[zhukov]

Whether players are short or tall we do need players that are accomplished at heading.

We need them for defensive purposes, in preventing the opposition from scoring and also in attacking positions such as corners, free kicks and crosses. We need all round capabilities to be successful.

[TonyM]

Know and agree just what you are saying but IMO,corners against us thats down to the keeper,just like set free kicks,yes banging the ball in from mid,a tall front man who can hold the ball or score from this is worth his weight in gold but a player like that is very hard to find,yes in a perfect world we would get all round capabilites but can we afford it,I think not,if we are just talking about big players here not one player is bigger than JK.

[michael]

Great to have a footballing debate at long last.

 

Everyone has good points to make.

Encouraged by your post MF that we do seem to have a bit of a midfield developing ,which means maybe that JK can stay in defence where he is playing like a superstar.

Defence starts in midfield where if you stem the number of attacks you ,whether its aerial attack or ground attack(sounds like war) there are fewer of them to defend.

 

First to admit that my post advocating 'big boys' is simplistic,but if you are up against it, and at this level, a decent big one will always beat a good little'un;and its about results, and if it takes brute force and bullying to achieve that, then great-i think most of us want positive results.

We played quite well on a few occasions last year, but lost too many -often through aerial attacks and corners.

 

I seem to recall Gravesend being very successful in second half of 2004 and start of last season by' bullying ' the opposition out of the game (they did over christmas against mfc),and down my way Forest Green rovers have had a change of manager-brought in tall players for this season and look reasonably effective.

 

Its not pretty, but its effective for a few months and does win additional points