for anyone who did watch, would they agree that Trae Coyle was MOM by a long way. He just needs to show the same form in league matches now.
I didn't watch the game last night, I think you all know my thoughts on the Prem U21's, but thanks for posting grumpygit. Anyway to the topic and in particular Trae Coyle, I had heard he played well, so it got me thinking about our set-up again. Have we got stuck in a way that we always do, our fear or failure to change a team. We went on a run of something like five consecutive defeats, mainly due to our inability to score and some other areas I'm not going to cover here. So when we fail to score, why do we persist with the same set-up, week in, week out. The balls were getting in the box, so what was going wrong. For me, our forwards are too slow, but against Woking, Samuel at least demonstrated how clinical his finishing can be. So it's a fine line between giving the guys opportunity to grow in confidence, and getting some luck on their side OR switching it around. Who would I list as our vital players, no particular order or position, Jackson, Graham, Dempsey, O'gilvie, Tucker, for me these five players start every time, then against Woking we had two potential players for development Coyle and Medley, my question having followed on the back of five defeats and before knowing the Woking score, why were they on the bench? I think we need a team that can move quickly and play at pace, two players in our team do not match that criteria....you know who they are. REGARDLESS of the Woking result.
brb - Coward ! .... I'm not afraid to name & shame.. Jackson is definitely one of the two to whom you refer.... Not only a lack of pace -but no sense of spatial awareness - and too lazy to back track - there !....... ...... it doesn't help that he has the same name as my nutty neighbour --- she 'cranked' things up a couple of days ago -- accusing me of blocking her plumbing (( my premises are separate to hers )).... This is not the first time she has made such a claim............. but , yesterday, I got an apology .... Her plumber came and 'flushed' her problem -- which, he told her, was because of the horizontal 6' waste pipe from her shower to the 'trap' connections of her bidet and hand basin --- the shower water doesn't drain properly - and she got a build up of slimy soap ----- which still moves quicker than Ryan Jackson. !
Wrong! You clearly missed this line, where I said... 'Who would I list as our vital players, no particular order or position, Jackson, Graham, Dempsey, O'gilvie, Tucker, for me these five players start every time'
I don't disagree that we have players who could be quicker -- I happen to think that the question of speed is not exclusive to movement of feet ! I believe that ( not exclusively, but in particular ), Jackson is so 'mentally slow.' In my opinion he shows a lack of awareness, coupled with slow engagement of feet - which means that he just doesn't cover the attacks down our right hand side.... and on top of this, his feeble effort to 'trackback' is probably my main criticism ---- certainly nowhere near good enough...... If one player is not totally committed, especially a defender, it places a lot of strain on the others - and - if I can spot the 'weak-link', it will ( and is ), often exploited by the opposition.
I think the conclusion I'm coming to this season, is we are playing players in positions or applying tactics they are really not suited to. This as you all know is not my area of expertise, but it's just an opinion, that I look for debate on. I suppose my first question would be, should Jackson even be playing at RB. Why are our front two, bigger than our two CB's. Why was Medley ever played at CB, that just seemed criminal to me and setting the guy up for a fall. Why don't we play Graham in a Dack role, and get the front two to protect him, if we are going too insist on playing two man mountains up front. Have we got a better keeper, who has Tucker got to guide his development.....shall I go on? @grumpygit am I right or am I wrong, hit me with it bro. I would ask @The Gills PegLeg, but he never admits my judgement is right and perfectly sane.
It isn't being right or wrong, it's just opinions, Jackson clearly has instruction to get forward when we attack, in so doing someone should be tasked with covering the right back position. The cover could be one of the CBs move across and the DM drop back. it could just be the midfield drop back, but that would waste Graham. I think where I agree with you is that very few of our players have a footballing brain, they need to wait until they see where the ball is going, it is rare for them to know where a ball is going in advance, when a pass is made our players wait for the ball to hit them rather than position themselves to meet the ball, if it doesn't we lose possession..
grumpygit - a good point you make -- about opinions. Today, Mrs. A and I have shared drinks with very good friends... We also shared very different opinion on a conversation topic-- but were still able to give 'virtual' kisses at the end... and that is how 'mature' dialogue should be. On Not606, we have individual opinions ( dependent on personal criteria ), on a host of subjects...... Occasionally people will agree with me ! My main criteria, as far as it concerns GFC, has always been 100% commitment. With regards to players who may not be in their correct positions - or who venture from their intended position, is that when others are expected to cover the 'absent' player, it pulls the team out of shape - and when we invariably lose possession, we then have at least two players who are not in their intended position.......... OK - this scenario is NOT going to stop ( until we can keep 100% possession ) -- but -- with the average skill level of Gills players, we struggle to repel the opposition when the defence are '' in place.'' ... When we get caught out of position, we look like a pub team........ and the problem very quickly exposes our defensive frailties when Jackson ventures upfield - and Tucker moves to cover -- and leaves the centre very exposed.... .... Like I said - that's football at our level -- and I can 'accept' it --- what my personal criteria cannot accept is a lackaisical attitude - of which - in my opinion, he ( Jackson ), is guilty.
Always we play with wingbacks on the left and right, that will be coming from the management team. I'm sure that in training, SE will instruct the players on who goes where and when. The system also relies on defending from the front to give the defense time to get in position. Our players follow the managers instructions as best they can within their limited abilities, if it goes wrong SE has to take the blame, if it goes right he can take the credit.
grumpygit - 'Obviously', I am aware that Evans is in charge of the tactics - which aren't necessarily wrong - it's that we haven't got very good players to deploy the tactics ((in my opinion )) but & and my only real criticism is when players (( in my opinion ), are not giving 100% effort....... ....... maybe I'm spending too much time studying and analysing the 'performance' of players when they haven't got the ball --- but -- I 've got to do something whilst the bloody ball is spending so much time in the sky !
Jackson is a quandary. I've only seen a handful of games this season (Franchise, Fleetwood & Crewe) and from what I've seen, Jackson doesn't quite emulate his former self. It could be now he's the wrong side of 30 he's lost a yard of pace too but positionally, he seems to be worse than under JED. I don't know if Evans has over forced the point about him attacking that he just doesn't fancy coming back to defend or what, but on more than one occasion he doesn't really seem to be anywhere near the ball that he could have been. Perhaps I'm being sentimental but we had Fuller contracted for another year, why didn't we just keep him in the squad so he could push Jackson? If anything I think I'd prefer the warhorse Barry than Jacko at Right Back.
