Quote:
Originally Posted by Revived Red
Is this the same person who wrote on 15/10/07 :
|
That was after the Shrewsbury game, where their forward line was not particulary quick or intellegent.
That was the sort of game where a strong midfield pressing game would have had more success IMO - instead we backed off them.
Yesterday against peterborough - we needed to change the style of play.
We needed to frustrate the home crowd, the players (and some of the posh players have short fuses) and make the play them at their own game.
On a boggy pitch which soon filled with water, a short neat passing game was never going to work.
4-4-2 playing with pacey forwards and wingers would have been alot more successfull with balls over the top - rather than the predictable mullin knock down to craney, who often had 2 men around him.
it would be nice to suprise teams once in a while. Roscoe with mcgivern would have caused them alot more problems with balls over the top and into the channels.
A deep central midfield would have worked a treat. It would have soaked up their midfield runs and provided a protective barrier from direct through balls.
If the opposition players on the whole are better than yours, then you adapt your tactics to suit. You certainly adapt them for the ground conditions. We didnt at Stockport whos pitch was poor, nor did we against the posh.
Has Craney had written into his contract that he will start every game? Coleman for the benefit the whole team would be wise to drop some of the 'first on the team sheet players' once in a while, especially when it makes tactical sense.
To me, Coleman has never been bold enough. He can talk a good game but lacks clear understanding of what is required at this level.
But, we should give him more time to learn.
We are still only 14 points of relegation.