Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

Good point Cashy, I don't know of any either to be fair ........are you thinking therefore that the formation needs to change? Do you mean 4-4-2 or a 3-5-1-1 or indeed any formation that has 2 playing further forward?

I noticed Plymouth looked more threatening on Saturday when they changed to 4-4-2 with the two subs they put on in the second half.....

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

[QUOTE=Crown Grounder;1183384]Good point Cashy, I don't know of any either to be fair ........are you thinking therefore that the formation needs to change? Do you mean 4-4-2 or a 3-5-1-1 or indeed any formation that has 2 playing further forward.

I suggest that you might ask Football 19 !.... Although when I mentioned on one occasion
( purely for comedic effect of course! ) that a 1-0-10 formation might be of some value when attempting to keep a clean sheet, he took me to task on this and stated firmly that 4-4-2 would be his chosen option in the matter !.
However, in the spirit of Christmas goodwill , I'm sure he will give you some sound advice....
Watch this space !.
Of course Cashy will respectfully respond with his usual alacrity ! , and one really should take his opinion on board....or else !.

Happy Christmas CG !.

KTF.

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

I am thinking we aint a got a player good enough to be a lone striker, although they try there damnedest to do the job,also the fact the opposition have our style well sussed and counter accordingly, to me we need 2 main strikers playing not 1.

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

The first half we were pedestrian, not getting out fast enough once the ball was kicked forward. The few runs at goal we did make failed with the last ball. For me Jordan Clark and John O'Sullivan and Romy Boco were outstanding, but we were woeful in some of the passing and support when we had possession.

The second half we performed better but as has already been mentioned we cannot play with one up front and need to have players that can either lay off the ball and run through or who are strong enough to hold the ball and then pass through.

Subs were brought on too late. You could see some of the players tiring and when Argyle brought on three pairs of fresh legs the writing was on the wall.

This home performance was overall probably one of the best so far this season but we still have some way to go

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

Now Yonmon has rattled my cage,I will reply!!
In theory,when you play with two holding midfielders,they generally don't get ahead of the ball,but last season Crooksey didn't play that way and wasn't frightened of getting forward.
Hence,teams struggled to match us.
Also Windass's pace meant one forward became two very quickly.
It's no coincidence these lads got decent moves,they were excellent.
That's the problem,the system is the same,but the pace brought by these two isn't the same.
I would definitely (at home) encourage at least one central midfielder to attack more,which in turn would allow the "three" to interchange more.
A 4-2-3-1 can soon be a 4-2-4 if the ball sticks up top.
Just need to be more positive and Billy to catch fire again

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

Love It...I just love it !. :alright:

Happy Christmas Ian to you and she who is most definitely your better half !

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

[QUOTE=Icarus;1183391]The first half we were pedestrian, not getting out fast enough once the ball was kicked forward. The few runs at goal we did make failed with the last ball. For me Jordan Clark and John O'Sullivan and Romy Boco were outstanding,

I have ask how O'Sullivan was out standing in the first half as he only got two touches on the ball, The rest of the time he was out in a big wide space on his own, Piero had the same problem, Our players never seem to pass wide often enough and directly enough. By the time Jono actually got the ball it went via three other players and Plymouth were all over him like a rash with time to spare, Even Jono could not be expected to take on three and gain anything. He did give them a good run for their money but help was lacking. No communication.

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

If we hadn't acted the way we did with Rangers last season we might have been able to try for Crooks on loan as he is doing nothing of note with the first team and needs match fitness after being out so long :D

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

To play 4-2-3-1 ideally you need 2 quick attacking wide defenders and an adroit interchangeable front 4. With a centre back at left back for example, it would be too defensive. However systems are not always key, it is more how the players apply themselves as you alluded to. The 1991 4 3 3 when Beck and Grimshaw was playing wasn't bad.

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

This sounds like a sensible idea. Lets face it, we can't afford to buy a proven striker or afford his wages, assuming he agreed to join a small provincial club in the first place.
We made effective use of O'Sullivan & Clark down the wings on Saturday but had no one big enough to win the header in the box. GTF could fulfil this role & Billy Kee (or Gornell) could finish the job off. Add Rommy Boco to the mix and I'm sure we'd have a more effective strikeforce.

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

Erm, how about we just keep the same team as last week and play like we did last week?

Why change when we are on the edge of being invincible?

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

Because we got beat, again!

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

I have said earlier in another post about O'Sullivan being out on the wing in acres of space like Piero was and nobody has the nounce to cross the ball wide to the man in the space, we insist on trying to play little triangle which are too tight and achieve nothing. We have the players but not the communication.

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread
 

Lord Stiffupperlip - that's a witty response, but surely you wouldn't want us to change things after we played so well? It was the best we've played all season.

Re: Plymouth Argyle Match Thread