The Hour Man

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Oldsparkey

Oldsparkey

Well-Known Member
Forum Moderator
Jan 27, 2011
28,995
14,584
113
Porthcawl Riviera
As much as I admire the guy for what he's gone (going) through as well as his playing ability, from a club perspective, having to include Steve McPhail to put in a limited 1 hour shift speaks more about the squad than anything else.

His illness has been diagnosed for some time, and there must be something wrong in not addressing the issue long before now, without having to rely on his periods of adequate health to make the team tick.

For a start, it limits your options later in the game. It commits one of the 5 on the bench to replace him before we even kick off, irrespective of the state of play at the hour mark. We effectively have only two to cover for injuries and to attempt to change the game if necessary.

What does picking Steve to start in the knowledge that he wont last do for the other squad players who can't get a look in?

Players who "wont last" 90 minutes include the likes of Kevin Phillips at Blackpool (and how effective is he!) and even our own Earnie, but they are usually introduced to add something towards the end, not at the kick off.

Bringing Steve on to calm things down for the last half hour would be the better option, but that assumes we'll have got ourselves in a winning position by then. Having said that, what would we have given for that option against Watford eh?
 
Have to agree with you on this Sparkey.
Does Malky believe McPhail is that important that he cannot afford to leave him out of the starting line up? I like McPhail, he's a quality player but it does seem strange. Prhaps Malky thinks we can get a few goals then can afford to sub McPhail? Should that no hppen he's confident there's enough on the bench to be able to change formation and get the goals?
Who'd be a manager heh!
 
Good article.Was going to write something similar a couple of weeks ago Spark but couldn't think how to approach it. Quality player and calming influence yet limits substitution options later in games.Tough call for any gaffer because he is an inspiration to others around him while on the field and one of our best players.

As a team we are to easy to read before a game for opposition managers,they know well in advance how we will line up and probable changes and Steve's inclusion is another example of this.We go all guns blazing for the first fifteen minutes of virtually every game and end virtually every game on the back foot deeper than the Titanic.Far to easy to read.
 
Great minds think alike.

We certainly retain the ball better when McPhail plays but that seems to work best for the first 20 minutes of a game. As we saw on Monday, Watford adjusted their game to match our tactics so that Steve was pushed further back to get time on the ball and ended up playing almost in the middle of the back four. I also have to ask how many goal assists has he made this season as he is rarely a threat on goal himself - 1 shot v. Millwall (or was it Burnley) excepted.

In recent home games the opposition have come speeding out of the traps second half and we have been caught flat footed and unable to counter this - all adding pressure on McPhail with him being substituted after 55 minutes. This has resulted in a reorganisation of midfield, further unsettling the team.

If we want a defensive shield in front of the back four then surely Darcy is our man. Apart from our 2 cb's we are a very small side unless Rudy plays (anyone else over 6 ft and good in the air?) so struggle against opposing set pieces. I feel if Darcy had been on the pitch v. Watford we would have defended better against that free kick when they had 4 6ft + players lining up and then Nosworthy sneaked in unmarked.

Sparkey sums this up well, particularly that we are committing one sub for an early entrance before we even kick off.

With Macca playing it should free up Whitts for a more forward role to make him a greater goal threat but apart from his strikes v. Brighton and Cov we haven't seen much evidence of this and I wonder if he is actually still playing deep to aid McPhail.

Don't get me wrong I have total respect for Steve in working through his health issues and even getting back on the field is a major feat, however, apart from our possession football in the first 20 minutes of each game just how effective are we with him playing.

For Saturday I would prefer a midfield of Cowie, Gunnar, Whitts and, if fit (doubtful - I have heard the scan results yet) Conway with Mason playing between midfield and Millar and Rudy to come off the bench. If Conway is not fit then surely the youngster Harris is itching for a game so why not blood him against a poor defensive side and let him loose down the flanks? He could make a major difference.
 
Hmmmm.........so should/will Stevo start at Oakwell? I think we all agree that we need to win this one, not protect the point we start with.

So it's off the bench for Stevo for me on the hour mark to calm things down after we go one up through Mason. Then I reckon Miller or Mason will kill it with a second on the break as the Tykes go for an all out gamble to get something from the game....<whistle>

.............and the numbers for the Lottery on Saturday are................<laugh>
 
With 4 games left and being so close to securing a PO place, I just dont think Malky will start experimenting now...that moment has long passed :D
 
That may be the case H, but no time like the present either. Tailor made for young Harris to make his debut and tear the Barnsley full back a new ar$e hole.
 
Malky hasn't experimented all season. I'm not knocking Malky, I think he has done a great job with limited resources, but why bring in 2 young players to bolster the squad and then not use them?

Earnie is another one that doesn't get much game time, yet at the start of the season he scored 3 goals in six games.
 
H bomb said:
With 4 games left and being so close to securing a PO place, I just dont think Malky will start experimenting now...that moment has long passed :D
Click to expand...

It's hardly experimenting leaving McPhail out or on the bench. He only started a handful of games in the first half of the season when we were playing so well, and was brought on a couple of times off the bench at the death to calm things down. The Blackburn game sticks in my mind.

His qualities are not in dispute, but being unable to see out a game through health issues is a problem. His utilisation in those circumstances needs to be reviewed.

Conway being out isn't going to help, but he was never the same after the knock he took early in the season and has been benched (or worse) by Malky until the Watford game. To be honest, we did pretty well without either of them starting in the side for quite a while.

We've also got Lawrence and young Harris to consider as options out wide to start to supplement Whitts, Gunnar, Cowie, Kiss, Ralls and Blakey without needing to push Macca in there for the full 90.

Malky - put Stevo on the bench and do something different to win these last important games. It is fair to say that they've assumed such great importance now largely as a result of the lack of action before.
 
maybe experimenting was a poor choice of words. I just meant I dont see Malky trying anything new in the starting XI...such as Harris for example (though like a lot of people, I'd like to see what he can do - young, fast and fearless off the bench could pay dividends).
I take your point with Macca coming off the bench to calm things down towards the end. Its no coincidence we've fallen deeper (and ultimately conceded) recently once he's gone off.
 
Id pick either Kiss or Ralls in the centre with Gunnarson and Whitts.

Alternatively play Cowie in there and bring Taylor into midfield on the left with Darcy at full back.

We know we have no real pace in the team but the passing has now become slow and that needs to be sorted.

Ralls , Kiss and Cowie also can offer a goalscoring threat.
 
I'd rather have 55mins of Macca than 35mins of Kiss, I thought on Monday he brought nothing into the game, very often he's a yellow or red card waiting to happen.

On Monday I thought he was way off the pace and put other players in trouble because of it.

But it's only my opinion.
 
Hilts24 said:
Alternatively play Cowie in there and bring Taylor into midfield on the left with Darcy at full back.
Click to expand...

I said the same a week or two back regarding Taylor. Seems to give more in attack than in defence so why not put a defender behind him. Whitts and Ledley started as full backs but had more to offer going forward.
 
Rhondda54_DJ said:
I'd rather have 55mins of Macca than 35mins of Kiss
Click to expand...

I doubt whether many on here would disagree with your opinions regarding the qualities of the two respective players Rhondda. I'm just asking whether, given the limited game time Macca appears to be capable of, would you start Macca with a view to pulling him off (excuse the phrase) after an hour, or bring him on off the bench later on?

To me, there's a clear case for the latter. <ok>
 
As I rarely get to see the live action or a full 90 minutes on the goggle box I can't really offer a qualified opinion. But I'll offer one anyway ;)
If McPhail can free up Whitts when on the pitch and play his passing game to the full extent of his skills I'd suggest starting him every time. Miller is often tracking back looking for the ball but McPhail and Whitts should surely be able to provide the ball where Miller needs it. If McPhail isn't able to do that then yes bring him on to steady things as opposed to starting him.
 
keeping possession is important as the game goes on and the lesser players hoof it long, thats why i think mcphail is suited to being a sub rather than start and come off on 60.

you want whittingham further forwards than he is currently playing as he has a goal threat, probably more so than any strikers we have at the club, if mcphail isnt playing then whitts tends to play his role of starting the attacks rather then waiting for the ball further forwards, and that is one reason why you want him to start aswell...if only he could last 90 mins...

miller is isolated by the formation and i'd like to see more 4-4-2 at times, give the opposition something to think about, as it stands they know what to expect at the CCS and it shows, i'm not saying wholesale changes as that would be too risky, but a slight change could make the difference..
 
Oldsparkey said:
I doubt whether many on here would disagree with your opinions regarding the qualities of the two respective players Rhondda. I'm just asking whether, given the limited game time Macca appears to be capable of, would you start Macca with a view to pulling him off (excuse the phrase) after an hour, or bring him on off the bench later on?

To me, there's a clear case for the latter. <ok>
Click to expand...

Under normal circumstances I think your right there Sparkey, however because of our bad form over the last two months we need Macca on as much as we can. so as a sub do you bring him on after 60 mins and under use him or after 35mins and take the chance of him only lasting 40 mins?. If you start with Macca you can keep in on as long as he's able.
 
I think MacPhail is an important part of the first XI. We have gone on a long unbeaten run with him in the time. As pointed out, With Macca playing, Whitts should be pushing right up and scoring or creating scoring chances. If he is not doing that, then that is the problem and not the fact that Macca is starting.

Surely if we have to bring on a midfield sub on 60 minutes, that person should be coming on to be more defensive or more offensive. This should be a neat tactical sub.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back