You Have To Feel Sorry For The Poor Sod

[Anonymous]

Who takes the team on Saturday!

[lesgeo]

Tony ‘I’m a victim’ Daws?

[Anonymous]

You have to feel sorry for the poor sod who takes the team on Saturday!

Statement not a question.

[Pat O’Cake]

I’m assuming Daws & Mussy?

[MK Iron]

Who ever the lucky duo are they are taking some persuading.

These things normally take a couple of hours or so not a couple of days or so.

[MK Iron]

Just knew we would get an announcement while I was posting that. Nelson and Daws are the lucky couple.

[Anonymous]

4-4-2
Keep it simple.

[lesgeo]

I get that but Taft has looked at his weakest under that system.
Maybe with Daniel to his left …

[Siderite]

Has Taft looked strong in any system?

[Sanfran49]

Steady the ship.Get the basics right. 442 is a must.

Tony Daws will be fine.

[Awaywego]

Saw the one and only game with Daws in charge very drab affair anyone else there? 4 managers that year, went to every managers first game in charge that year and not many did that. Great memories.

[Northumbiron]

If anyone can steady the ship it’s The Admiral!

[Iron-awe]

Been on the port again fruitcake 🤔

1 user thanked author for this post.

alcazar

[Anonymous]

Northumbiron wrote:

If anyone can steady the ship it’s The Admiral!

Captain Smith has clipped the iceberg.
International Rescue have scrambled Thunderbirds 1 & 2 to the rescue from Tracy Island.
If anyone can save us, it’s Scott & Virgil – I mean Dawsy & Muzzy.
FAB!

[WonderGoals]

I’d go 4/4/2 and keep it simple. No doubt we’ll be dodgy at the back but we could Play Daniel at LB, only problem is CB. Taft or you go for Rowe who clearly isn’t even a CB ?

Daniel Taft Boyce Ogle

O’Malley LW, Fletcher, Butterfield Apter RW

Feeney upfront with Nuttall ?

[Anonymous]

WonderGoals wrote:

I’d go 4/4/2 and keep it simple. No doubt we’ll be dodgy at the back but we could Play Daniel at LB, only problem is CB. Taft or you go for Rowe who clearly isn’t even a CB ?

Daniel Taft Boyce Ogle

O’Malley LW, Fletcher, Butterfield Apter RW

Feeney upfront with Nuttall ?

Agreed. Keep it simple 4-4-2.
Dig in, stop the rot.

[cassidystash]

WonderGoals wrote:

I’d go 4/4/2 and keep it simple. No doubt we’ll be dodgy at the back but we could Play Daniel at LB, only problem is CB. Taft or you go for Rowe who clearly isn’t even a CB ?
Daniel Taft Boyce Ogle
O’Malley LW, Fletcher, Butterfield Apter RW
Feeney upfront with Nuttall ?

Can’t go with O’Malley as a starter I’m afraid. Feeney R, Apter L and Beestin with Nuttall for as long as he can last.

[lesgeo]

O’Malley left midfield is perfectly okay – but must not be played as an LB!

3 users thanked author for this post.

Iron-awe, North Lincolnshire Irons, alcazar

[MK Iron]

I am probably on my own with this but I don’t buy into this view that O’Malley is suddenly incapable of being a left back.

Pre Hill most of us thought he was great going forward but a little naive defensively particularly his positioning.

Despite a management team of ex defenders he has not improved his positioning in fact has probably got worse. I think this is down to a consistent Hill tactic of insisting his full backs are narrow with the centre backs when the team does not have the ball.

For me that can work in a 4-4-2 when there is wide cover to stop the easy balls out to wide men but when used with Hill’s favoured 4-3-3 it simply leaves the opposition with easy out balls to wide men with the nearest defender 30 yards away.

Some have suggested opposition have targeted O’Malley. They actually target the wide free spaces on both sides of the pitch.

When a wide man gets the ball and you are 30 yards away all the options are with him. He has time to control the ball if the pass is not perfect, has time for the early diagonal cross without challenge or can take the late arriving full back on at speed.

Full backs are on a hiding to nothing with these tactics. I think they come from a lack of trust in centre backs. Let the full backs drop to cover the wide men and limit the supply and the centre backs have a much better chance to cope with a lower number of crosses with most of the ones that do get through delivered under challenge.

Hill was a tactical buffoon. Played 4-3-3 because it works for Liverpool and Man City. They have world class defenders that can play out from back and goalkeepers that could play as outfielders. We have centre backs with boots on the wrong feet to quote Nigel.

Get playing 4-4-2. Let the full backs mark their men. Give the defenders forward ball options. Wide midfielders for the measured out ball and 2 front men for when it has to be hoofed.

The final point is are we sure Daniel is better. Early days and am not writing him off but his goal against Yeovil aside he is looking to me like the classic utility player. Can play 3 positions but not actually very good at any of them.

6 users thanked author for this post.

Northumbiron, CMC, Deereyme66, Cliff Byrne's Right Peg, inspector, Pat O'Cake

[Pat O’Cake]

Great post MK, I would me more than happy for you to be in dugout.

1 user thanked author for this post.

Just Iron

[Deereyme66]

Yes, it’ll be interesting to see how things shape up over the next few games. Can’t be any worse.

[Anonymous]

Same players – same outcome.

1 user thanked author for this post.

anoldiron

[Anonymous]

If the club was an animal, you’d have it put to sleep. 🥺

1 user thanked author for this post.

vader

[Anonymous]

You have to feel even more sorrowful for the poor sod who takes over from “the poor sod”.

[Author]

Posts