Winter transfer window

[LD19SAFC]

Some excellent debate on Sky earlier about the TAA contract situation and the Real Madrid bid

His performance against Man U was shocking though, he’s definitely been affected by the bid/contract talk

Fully agreed with Jamie Carragher and I don’t do that very often! Interesting to see what develops in the next couple of weeks with that one

 

[Prehab26]

Some excellent debate on Sky earlier about the TAA contract situation and the Real Madrid bid

His performance against Man U was shocking though, he’s definitely been affected by the bid/contract talk

Fully agreed with Jamie Carragher and I don’t do that very often! Interesting to see what develops in the next couple of weeks with that one

Should move him on now. If yesterday performance is the standard as his head is turned, might as well cash in. He was absolutely horrendous yday, not even grafting, jogging back etc.

 

[CR17]

You must log in or register to see media

 

[Scout73]

You must log in or register to see media

I think as soon as we agree a deal with a striker he will be off

Was worth the risk but hasn't worked out so far

 

[CR17]

I think as soon as we agree a deal with a striker he will be off

Was worth the risk but hasn't worked out so far

Agree, he just doesn't suit the profile of a RLB centre-forward unfortunately. Would suit being somewhere where he can be a pure poacher

 

[Hudson92]

Shame it’s not worked out, he’s never sulked and looks to be well in the group in all the behind the scenes stuff but if he’s not going to play selfishly he needs to get his career on track so probably best for both of us if he does move on

 

[SourPatch2]

Connolly and Rusyn leaving makes room for us to add a striker. Nothing against either of them but we need another viable option in that area, especially if we persist with the 442.

 

[Frazier the Lion]

I think as soon as we agree a deal with a striker he will be off

Was worth the risk but hasn't worked out so far

Fairly certain we wouldn't have bothered signing him if we'd got away with the Abdellahi injury without surgery. Low risk signing and he's contributed a bit (the goal down Millwall and a few stints seeing out games). We've got a bit of a logjam with strikers in truth. Getting them all minutes will be a challenge - one that gets even more difficult with another signing.

 

[CR17]

Fairly certain we wouldn't have bothered signing him if we'd got away with the Abdellahi injury without surgery. Low risk signing and he's contributed a bit (the goal down Millwall and a few stints seeing out games). We've got a bit of a logjam with strikers in truth. Getting them all minutes will be a challenge - one that gets even more difficult with another signing.

Abdullahi will go into the 21s, I'd imagine. I think we might start seeing a bit less of Mayenda unless we stick with the 442. But it seems we do want another CF who is ready to come in and challenge Isidor.

I love Mayenda and think he is class, but if Isidor gets injured, a lot of pressure goes on Mayenda's shoulders. He is still nowhere near comfortable in front of goal. He doesn't need that pressure, especially in a race for autos.

 

[rooch 3]

Graeme Bailey has said Jack Clarke isn’t going out on loan and doesn’t want to

Graeme Bailey! in other words Jack Clarke has asked to go out on loan.

 

[Scout73]

Connolly and Rusyn leaving makes room for us to add a striker. Nothing against either of them but we need another viable option in that area, especially if we persist with the 442.

I can't see us sticking with the 442. We will use it in the odd game but I reckon an AM will come back in once we get some bodies back from injury

Nice to have another option to cause teams problems

 

[MadMackem77]

I can't see us sticking with the 442. We will use it in the odd game but I reckon an AM will come back in once we get some bodies back from injury

Nice to have another option to cause teams problems

442 isn’t sustainable in football these days to play consistently

well have a third midfielder in there when we can

I wasn’t a fan of yesterday because of the formation and lack of control

 

[williebeams]

Can someone clarify this 442

I thought that even with rigg in the side we’d also used 442, at least out of possession, that’s how the shape looked

difference is the characteristics of the player playing in the front 2 with isidor

 

[Frazier the Lion]

442 isn’t sustainable in football these days to play consistently

well have a third midfielder in there when we can

I wasn’t a fan of yesterday because of the formation and lack of control

Didn't think we had a lack of control. TBH it was more that we had too much control - and the players were finding it too easy and trying to be too intricate. Shots, possession, touches in the box. Massively dominated them on xG. The late panic was just a case of tiredness and a bit of agricultural football. We probably will go back to three in midfield at some point, but that 4-4-2 with that pair up top is a viable way of us playing.

 

[MadMackem77]

Can someone clarify this 442

I thought that even with rigg in the side we’d also used 442, at least out of possession, that’s how the shape looked

difference is the characteristics of the player playing in the front 2 with isidor

Yes but in position it plays as a 433 jobe and Rigg push in to support.
Makes a massive difference

 

[Roseee]

Can someone clarify this 442

I thought that even with rigg in the side we’d also used 442, at least out of possession, that’s how the shape looked

difference is the characteristics of the player playing in the front 2 with isidor

We've been playing 442 in possession as well recently, Mayenda has stuck up top alongside with Isidor whereas Rigg would have dropped off or went out wide to help Roberts. It changes the role of Jobe as well as he would have previously mirrored Rigg's role but is now more central and doesn't go to help out wide as much as we'd be left too open with the one midfielder. At least that's how it looks to me

 

[Frazier the Lion]

Can someone clarify this 442

I thought that even with rigg in the side we’d also used 442, at least out of possession, that’s how the shape looked

difference is the characteristics of the player playing in the front 2 with isidor

Yeah it's about natural inclination a bit. Out of possession is identical. It's just in possession that it changes. Rigg would tend to naturally play deeper. What's interesting to me is how we can alternate who is doing what when Mayenda and Isidor are up top together. Sometimes it was one as furthest forward. Sometimes the other. Isidor would tend to drop deeper centrally, while Mayenda would pull wide right. Must be a pain for the opposition to work out how to respond. It has the potential to be more fluid than when we play the other way - albeit the triangles that RLB likes so much are far less obvious.

 

[Southern A]

The benefit of us using 4-4-2 out of possession consistently, is that it should in principle be really easy to switch between the 4-3-3 to 4-4-2 in possession during games. I’d like to see this happen if / when we are chasing games

 

[CR17]

Can someone clarify this 442

I thought that even with rigg in the side we’d also used 442, at least out of possession, that’s how the shape looked

difference is the characteristics of the player playing in the front 2 with isidor

We just use it out of possession, Rigg drops deeper usually when we are in possession and links up with Hume and Roberts. Gives us more control of the ball and posession where yesterday and sheff utd we played purely a 442 which saw Neil and jobe as the only midfielders in the middle with Mayenda and Isidor ahead of them.

 

[WorkyTicketFTM]

Didn't think we had a lack of control. TBH it was more that we had too much control - and the players were finding it too easy and trying to be too intricate. Shots, possession, touches in the box. Massively dominated them on xG. The late panic was just a case of tiredness and a bit of agricultural football. We probably will go back to three in midfield at some point, but that 4-4-2 with that pair up top is a viable way of us playing.

Better front 3 would’ve scored a few against us yesterday imo. They were getting through the midfield far too easily but they were hopeless in the final third. They didn’t create a lot in comparison to us by any means but they did have a few very good opportunities that they fluffed. I think it’s difficult to control games as a traditional 4-4-2 these days because you’re generally going to be light in midfield. I’m not saying it can’t work just think there’s a reason the best teams have all moved away from that and play 3 in the middle. Nice to see different ideas and formations for different games though, better than watching us throw the same gameplan out every week then have no idea what to do when it fails