Re: Hull match thread
 

Good point about Rodgers, i also thought he's been missed and we seem to have lost our shape since he's been left out.

Re: Hull match thread
 

didn,t think rodgers played particularly that well but we had a much better shape and looked more of a team with him there. have we gone to create a problem of playing the best 11 and not the best team.

Re: Hull match thread
 

He wasn't left out he is injured.

Re: Hull match thread
 

Think he goes under the radar the defencive headers he got in in his last few games have been a joy plus he has had to mark some decent opponents.

Re: Hull match thread
 

Yes you're right about his opponents.....much better than League 2. Also because his background is defensive....he is a better defender and does the simple stuff going forward. Definately a miss. We have better balance with him in. This may be controvertial...but I also like it when Charles plays wing-back on the right, usually to fill in......he's the opposite of Rogers......naturally better going forward...plays excellent crosses into the box, has pace...but not as good defensively......if he could work on this side of his game...I would play jhim there. Of course we just need to stumble accross a 20 goal striker in the window that we can afford......we would only need one player then ...never mind the 2 or 3 that Coley is after.......::D.....anythoughts Stanley Josh? or Twenty Eight?

Re: Hull match thread
 

Strikers not scoring enough goals has been magnified by our Midfielders not contributing as much as usual. Would normally expect Pritchard and Sean to be hitting close to 10-15 between them for the season.
A 20 goal a season striker, gold dust across the world for football clubs!
I'd rather have a non league prospect on a permanent deal than a Premier League academy loan.
Harvey is hit and miss but has improved over the last few games he was involved with... sometimes he does the simple stuff poorly but the hard stuff well.
I'm not a fan of the system we are playing with the 5-3-2 , I love a good old 4-4-2 and it has served us well over the years.
To give you an idea of our creativity, Cameron Burgess has made over 900 passes but only just over 500 have been succesful. (under 60%)
I'd much rather see a 4 man midfield of McConville, Conneely, Butcher and Pritchard, with Sean and Pritch as widemen.
I also don't have 4 promotions and over 20 years of management to my name.

Re: Hull match thread
 

Good point on systems played 3 at the back is good when you have possession and retain the ball if committed forward a decent counter attacking side can expose you, wing backs have to be fit up and down Rodgers and Pritchard have done this. Playing 4-4-2 you need a couple of top midfielder,s Conneelly fits the present system better to me than 4-4-2 don't think Coley will panic much and hope to get a fully fit squad and a couple of decent incoming, I,m with you on a permanent striker rather than loaned but they are gold dust as you say.

Re: Hull match thread
 

Impossible question Crown Grounder.
Budget for fee and wages ?
That will narrow it.
I'm sure Coley has his little list.

Re: Hull match thread
 

No need to panic, we have some of the best players we have ever had as well as good young prospects getting opportunities.
A friend mentioned to me recently that we never seemed to change systems or formations against the better teams. I remembered what my old football coach told me when I was at Norwich;
"We don't want to be a team trying to match other teams. We want to be the team that other teams try and adapt to and match"

Re: Hull match thread
 

Wonder if we could revive Will Grigg,s carreer on less money of course gone horribly wrong at Sunderland but so have a lot of others thier.

Re: Hull match thread
 

not a bad un but doubt if we could revive his wages.

Re: Hull match thread
 

Coming back to systems we have played 18 of the 23 teams in league 1 games this season and only 2 employed 4-4-2 Swindon who we beat 3-0 and Blackpool which ended up 0-0 seems to be a bit out of fashion, plus these days most keepers play like a sweeper using thier feet a lot more becoming the extra defender.

Re: Hull match thread
 

Gentlemen,
There seems little point dreaming of signing a proven striker if he's going to get the same service our existing 2 boys receive... which is pretty much nothing!
I doubt even Harry Kane would hit the net playing for Stanley.
Eight goals conceded & zero scored in the last 3 games sums it up.
I'm no expert, nor do I possess any coaching badges, but I can see the difference between good & bad.
Every player has his own role to perform in the team.
The keeper's job is to stop goals, the strikers to bang them in the other end.
The crucial element that prevents the former and enables the latter, is the midfield.
In simple terms, their role is to a: stop the opposition reaching our last line of defence,
b: create opportunities for the strikers to score.
Is our current 5 man midfield achieving either of these essential roles?
andyd referred earlier to the midfield's tendency to pass back & this is where I feel our problem lies.
Teams have learned that if they press us, we will PANIC!.
It's unfair to blame the back 3 for long balls to nobody when they're put under intense pressure by our own players.
If all we can expect of our 5-man midfield is negative backward play then the future looks bleak.
Personally, I hate the back-pass. It's the last resort of the fearful. The panic stricken act of the artless.
You see it all the time from the also-rans in the PL. The constant sideways passing between midfield & defence, followed by the back-pass to the goalie at the slightest hint of an opponent coming within 5 yards.
It often goes on for minutes on end - Yawn! & it's killing the game.
The best form of defence - ATTACK! becomes sacrificed to the dogma that possession is everything.
Successful teams are those with a positive attitude. Who's players first & only thought is forward movement - and the quicker the better.
Please, let's not be too quick to blame our 2 forwards for our lack of goals, both of whom are more than capable.
Neither should we criticise our back 3, or keeper, for the rising goals against tally.
We don't need a million pound striker or a flat-back four. Ye Gods! Just give me a midfield playmaker.
Someone who's got an eye for the main chance & can place an accurate forward pass to Prince Charles or a cross onto the noggin of the Bishop of Wham.
Oh Brother, Where Art Thou?

Re: Hull match thread
 

personally i think mlord has got it in one. our 2 strikers have had very little this season for some reason and it dont take a degree to see it.

Re: Hull match thread
 

I think this goes back to the system we are playing.
We have creative midfielders in McConville & Pritchard and to some extent Uwakwe, Sangare (injure) and Roberts.

Personally I’d play a flat 4 at the back, Seamus and Butcher as holding midfielders with a 3 behind Colby of Sean and Dion out wide and Pritchard in the middle.

Baxter
Rodgers Sykes Hughes Burgess
Butcher Conneely
Charles Pritchard McConville
Bishop

Players can be interchanged in the sense that Nottingham could replace either Rodgers or Sykes, Uwakwe or Gary Roberts could fill in any of the 3 A/M rolls, Russell for Butcher, Conneely or Pritchard, Barclay for either holding midfielder etc etc.

So in that sense we really need cover at LB (possibly looking ahead when Hughes not a starter slot Cam into CB) and a striker.