Defence options

  • 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
29,024
14,685
113
Porthcawl Riviera
Now Simpson's on board and up to speed, should Morison stick with a back 3 rather than just the 2 in Kipre and Ng? It worked well against Boro until we sat in and invited them on in the second half - asking for trouble.

Ng's game means he's far better playing out from the back in that role and leave Kipre and Simpson to look after the shop - the evidence is there with his well taken goal at Boro. Despite his lack of height and physicality, Ng is part of this "revolution" and too good on the ground to leave out because of his stature - the boy can create as well as defend.

We have enough back up CB's with Denham and Nelson to continue playing that 3CB formation. Romeo can get forward as a wingback and on the other side, although Nkounkou looks a bit of a loose cannon at the moment, an extra CB can cover for him defensively when he charges up the pitch - in a back 4 we'd be vulnerable.

I'm not sure that O'Dowda is in his best position playing that far back. He's played many times with Robinson for Ireland and can create and get on the end of things as demonstrated on Tuesday before he was forced off.

So is it revert to a back 4 or stick with a winning 3CB setup?
 
Oldsparkey said:
Now Simpson's on board and up to speed, should Morison stick with a back 3 rather than just the 2 in Kipre and Ng? It worked well against Boro until we sat in and invited them on in the second half - asking for trouble.

Ng's game means he's far better playing out from the back in that role and leave Kipre and Simpson to look after the shop - the evidence is there with his well taken goal at Boro. Despite his lack of height and physicality, Ng is part of this "revolution" and too good on the ground to leave out because of his stature - the boy can create as well as defend.

We have enough back up CB's with Denham and Nelson to continue playing that 3CB formation. Romeo can get forward as a wingback and on the other side, although Nkounkou looks a bit of a loose cannon at the moment, an extra CB can cover for him defensively when he charges up the pitch - in a back 4 we'd be vulnerable.

I'm not sure that O'Dowda is in his best position playing that far back. He's played many times with Robinson for Ireland and can create and get on the end of things as demonstrated on Tuesday before he was forced off.

So is it revert to a back 4 or stick with a winning 3CB setup?
Click to expand...
Really tough question to answer, and why we pay SM whatever it is we pay him.

We definitely looked more solid for the most part, however, we still got done by a high ball into the box for their second goal, so is there actually a bit of a false sense of security being taken from the back 5 approach?

As good as O'Dowda is, and I'm sure he'd fulfill the wingback role to the utmost of his ability, I still prefer seeing him higher up the pitch to start with, as he's been very instrumental for us at that end so far.

Shut outs v Norwich and Brum show that we can be solid with a 4 too, so maybe it has to be horses for courses and use either/or depending on the opposition and their likely approach?

Of course, we could use Bagan instead of O'Dowda at wingback and then use O'Dowda as part of our attacking midfield or second striker instead?
He appears to have a decent leap on him and would probably link well with our other Callum.

In saying all this, the answer is crystal clear.......

5 center backs is the obvious way to go!!! :emoticon-0142-happy
 
Its an interesting dilemma. Might be a case of horses for courses.

It also changes who you can fit into the side.
If you play a back 3, but not use O'D as a wing back, where do you play him?
He naturally has an attacking role in a 4231.
In a 352, he'd need to be in the middle 3 of the 5 or as the 2nd striker. Not sure he's best suited to either of those.

I'd like us to flex our approach, even mid game.
I think a 4231 2nd half at 'brough would have given us more stability, especially with no real striker on the bench.

I'd like plan A to be 4231 with 352 as plan B when needed.

That flexibility might mean SM would need to alter his thinking for the bench.
We have enough players that are comfortable in more than one position to allow him to do that.

I agree that Nkounkou isnt sound defensively. Might work with a back 3 if we hold a higher line, but as I said elsewhere, I think he was caught out for 'brough's first goal on Tuesday.

More work as a team needed on the training ground to ensure others cover if a defender 'goes walkabout'.
 
I think he'll stick with a back 5 away at Huddersfield on Saturday - the only personel question to be sorted is at left wingback.
 
ninian opinion said:
I think it’ll be decided on a game by game basis.
Click to expand...

The problem with chopping and changing systems to suit the opposition can show too much respect for them rather than doing what suits yourself best. Flexibility is a good option but a settled side and system instills confidence - especially when you win.

That doesn't mean that individual players within the system shouldn't be rotated through injury or performance levels, but sticking to a starting setup is key - it can always be changed during the game as circumstances dictate.
 
Oldsparkey said:
The problem with chopping and changing systems to suit the opposition can show too much respect for them rather than doing what suits yourself best.
Click to expand...
The reason we saw 3/5 at the back on Tuesday was because SM said he wanted to match them.
Maybe that's whats needed.

I think the compromise is making sure you have the bench selected to give you that flexibility.
Simpson has given SM a nudge that he should be a regular starter.
 
Oldsparkey said:
The problem with chopping and changing systems to suit the opposition can show too much respect for them rather than doing what suits yourself best. Flexibility is a good option but a settled side and system instills confidence - especially when you win.

That doesn't mean that individual players within the system shouldn't be rotated through injury or performance levels, but sticking to a starting setup is key - it can always be changed during the game as circumstances dictate.
Click to expand...
Appreciate all that but I think this is what’ll he do.
A real concern is conceding from crosses both in the air and in the corridor.
Stopping them coming in from source is the key, as opposing managers will have seen the goals Bristol, Luton & Boro have scored from wide balls in.
 
All I know is Nelson shouldn't have been on the pitch in the last game and should never be in the team again, liability we could do without.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaiJones
I like the 3 at the back with 2 wing backs but please no 5 centre halves.
 
SBFF said:
All I know is Nelson shouldn't have been on the pitch in the last game and should never be in the team again, liability we could do without.
Click to expand...
DaiJones said:
You got that one right
Click to expand...

Disagree.

He was probably the best CB overall we had through last season but was dreadful in his two earlier appearances this year - a player doesn't change that much.

He deserves another chance and it speaks volumes that Morison sent McGuinness out on loan but retained Nelson.
 
Oldsparkey said:
Disagree.

He was probably the best CB overall we had through last season but was dreadful in his two earlier appearances this year - a player doesn't change that much.

He deserves another chance and it speaks volumes that Morison sent McGuinness out on loan but retained Nelson.
Click to expand...

I hear what you say Sparks but on the basis Simpson was coming in, one of the cb's had to go and maybe there was interest in McGuinness but not Nelson.
 
BluefromBridgend said:
I hear what you say Sparks but on the basis Simpson was coming in, one of the cb's had to go and maybe there was interest in McGuinness but not Nelson.
Click to expand...

Maybe that's the case Bluey - but it's all about opinions on here. <ok>

I think Morison saw McGuinness as an accident waiting to happen and plumped for sending him out to get it out of his system.

Nelson can do a job and has proved it. He blotted his copy book early this season but he put his body on the line last year and was instrumental in keeping us up.
 
Looking at the press conference today, flexibility it is....

Did you compile squad to be flexible in formations?
We always wanted to put together a squad where full-backs could play in two positions, rightback and right wing-back. A centre-half who could play in a two or a three, you need a left footed one there because his passing options are really limited.

I wanted midfielders who could be deep-liers, box-to-box or 10s. I wanted wingers who could play inside or out.

We have that. It’s taken time to bed that in. We made a decision after Millwall that we felt away from home, we need to give a bit more respect to the other teams, try to be solid first and attack-minded after.

At home we have been really good. The Luton game, we lost but I felt we played really well and should have taken something from the game. Sheyi has to score and Jaden does. Rallsy hits the post.

We have got the ability, once everyone is fit we will have even more choice. It’s a good place to be.

Steve Morison

Hopefully as we continue to knit together we'll just keep getting better.

It's clear the team also weren't carrying out the game plan in the second half.

On Boro
It makes every journey a little bit easier! Everyone feels a bit better the day after. It is a tough place to go and I’m really pleased to get the points.

We went through it this morning. First half everything was carried out to a tee. It worked really well. Second half was grit and determination to put bodies on the line. You need both sides of the game.

We were in the lead and it’s human nature that you go into protective mode rather than do what we’ve been doing. We showed them it today and told them they could have carried on what they were doing in the first half in the second half.

Hopefully, if we are ever in that situation again, we might believe we can carry on doing it.

Them scoring two goals made it worse than it actually was. The amount of crosses they put into the box, the amount of ball they had, it was only the Jack Simpson block you thought they might score.

The only thing that matters is the result in the end. We are really pleased with the first half and we take away the positives from the second half.

Steve Morison
 
  • Like
Reactions: clingo
BrizzleBluebird said:
Looking at the press conference today, flexibility it is....

Did you compile squad to be flexible in formations?
We always wanted to put together a squad where full-backs could play in two positions, rightback and right wing-back. A centre-half who could play in a two or a three, you need a left footed one there because his passing options are really limited.

I wanted midfielders who could be deep-liers, box-to-box or 10s. I wanted wingers who could play inside or out.

We have that. It’s taken time to bed that in. We made a decision after Millwall that we felt away from home, we need to give a bit more respect to the other teams, try to be solid first and attack-minded after.

At home we have been really good. The Luton game, we lost but I felt we played really well and should have taken something from the game. Sheyi has to score and Jaden does. Rallsy hits the post.

We have got the ability, once everyone is fit we will have even more choice. It’s a good place to be.

Steve Morison

Hopefully as we continue to knit together we'll just keep getting better.

It's clear the team also weren't carrying out the game plan in the second half.

On Boro
It makes every journey a little bit easier! Everyone feels a bit better the day after. It is a tough place to go and I’m really pleased to get the points.

We went through it this morning. First half everything was carried out to a tee. It worked really well. Second half was grit and determination to put bodies on the line. You need both sides of the game.

We were in the lead and it’s human nature that you go into protective mode rather than do what we’ve been doing. We showed them it today and told them they could have carried on what they were doing in the first half in the second half.

Hopefully, if we are ever in that situation again, we might believe we can carry on doing it.

Them scoring two goals made it worse than it actually was. The amount of crosses they put into the box, the amount of ball they had, it was only the Jack Simpson block you thought they might score.

The only thing that matters is the result in the end. We are really pleased with the first half and we take away the positives from the second half.

Steve Morison
Click to expand...
I read it earlier.
Nice to hear our manager discussing the thought process.
Individuals might disagree with it, but at least we know the thinking.

The only bit that concerns me is that the team played to orders in the 2nd half at 'brough.
The back and midfield lines were so close they were almost one so there was no way we could play out of defence so adopted the Colin and MM approach of hoofball, with no one to hold the ball up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BluefromBridgend and Oldsparkey
ccfcremotesupport said:
I read it earlier.
Nice to hear our manager discussing the thought process.
Individuals might disagree with it, but at least we know the thinking.

The only bit that concerns me is that the team played to orders in the 2nd half at 'brough.
The back and midfield lines were so close they were almost one so there was no way we could play out of defence so adopted the Colin and MM approach of hoofball, with no one to hold the ball up.
Click to expand...


Exactly.

@remote - I think you'll find that Morison said the team did not play to instructions in the second half. <ok>
 
  • Like
Reactions: BluefromBridgend and BrizzleBluebird
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back