It surprised me that he seemed to be played as the deeper of the two CMs. He grew into the game and looked safe. Hopefully he gains the confidence to express himself more as time goes on.
The thing I struggle with, and the thing that *is* a bit (lot) Martiny, is that we're still much more content to safely pass the ball around the back five/six players. That's where the initial intensity is missing. There's no urgency to get things moving forwards, which allows opposing teams to organise themselves for whenever we deign to move towards their goal. That's what was belatedly happening at the start of the second half, and it made a huge difference. The problem then moves toward the attacking side, where we're getting the ball wide, but are then really passive in attacking crosses coming in. Again, intensity and aggression. Even if you're not going to win the ball, do a McBurnie and hassle/bully defenders to make them nervous.
Cut him some slack mate. It's his first game in the country, and I'm not sure what the protocol differences might be. I'm pretty sure he wasn't there thinking "I'm scared".
Isn't the lack of turn and thinking forwards something WS covered in the press conference as what was missing from a number of players? He specifically picked out Downes as only being able to see a pass in a small specific area. So when he gets them back in at half time and repeats himself they start to do it?
Oh I was just joking. Tom made a post about him going straight down the tunnel at full time or something calling him a coward. Thought him and Charles both did ok today, ultimately our slow tempo was the reason we created **** all
Our only convincing performance was with 3 at the back & it didn’t include Stephens or THB.. If he does revert to back 3 for next few games, he’s defo gone to full Martin level of tactical anxiety
I don't know if we've looked worse, but we definitely haven't looked better. Either way though, I don't think switching systems helps. Take the second goal yesterday: yes it was an awful pass by THB (and yes he then gets beaten in the air), but at the time he plays it I don't think either FB is even in shot. It's just the two CBs and Charles, despite there being over half an hour still to play. It's fine for them both to go forward if playing as WBs, but not as FBs. One of them should have been back. If Still prefers to play with a back four, then I would have done that from the start. I get that we didn't yet have the players to play 4-2-3-1, but I don't buy that our only alternative option was to change the entire defence into a back three with WBs.
So the votes individually are: Jack 17 Quarshie 15 Wood 14 THB 3 Edwards 3 Looks like the majority of us would be fine with Jack partnering either Wood or Quarshie. and Wood partnering Quarshie.
I'd take Quarshie and Wood but I think that's more a testament to how we've gotten to this point where that's the preferred pairing. We've had Jack Stephens for 7 odd years add our defence has looked shaky for 7 odd years, move him on.
I wouldn't pair those two together personally. See them both as the initial ball winners so think it'd be better to have one of them with one of Jack/Edwards. I've gone Jack and Wood in this poll but not sure if Wood will look so good in a back four.
It’s interesting that Wood was signed as a cultured ball player for Martin, but we now see him as a good old ball winning brute!
Completely agree, unfortunately I think this whole conversation is more a testament to yet again how terrible our recruitment is. The list of Centerbacks we've had and let go over the last 5/6 years is insane.
