SULLY COULDNT SHOOT
Loyal2Family+Albion!
Wrote this on the Walt Jabsco article:
Although I just about agree with Walt with giving a bit more time Im not sure I agree with his reasoning.
Lets starts with the tactics. It seems that the tactics that Sami is sticking to is 4-1-2-3-1 (two amcs who then push wider) which becomes 4-1-2-1-3 when we attack. However, he is encouraging the wing backs to move upfield which then makes the tactic 2-1-4-1-3. This seems very flexible and can play both narrow and wide but relies on four things - 1) fast CBs 2) faster WBs who can get back fast 3) Strong DMC and MCs who can drop back fast and stop the counter-attack 4) Inside forwards who can play winger or AMC equally well.
Now let's look at, on paper, what would have been the best squad for yesterday (not on form, on paper), not including those unavailable or injured... and the back ups that realistically could be used
GK - Stockdale, Ankergren
WR - Calderon, no one
WL - Bennett, Chicksen
DC - Greer, no one
DC - Hughes, Dunk
DMC - Holla, Ince
MCR - JFC, Gardner, Agustien
MCL - Crofts, Nzusi
AMC - Teixera, Colunga (?)
AMR - Baldock(?) no one
AML - Lua Lua, McCourt
SC - O' Grady
There are a few unavailables of course - Stephens, March, Bruno, CMS but even with these the squad is thin on the ground
Of course no player plays in just one position but players play best in their natural position and if we are buying them we should be buying them for their preferred position (because after all that's why we considered them good enough for this club). based on all this it seems...
1) Not only are we short at CB but with the possible exception of Dunk our CBs are too slow to cover when the WBs are upfield.
2) Without this speed at the back and considering the age of our two RWBs, we don't seem to have the back line to play the current preferred tactic.
3) We seem to be fine in CMs..... in fact we may have too many compared with other areas which could have possibly done with the money being spent.
4) We are woefully short on the wings especially RW. I think Sami knew that when he tried Bruno upfield at the beginning of the season. Its really unbelievable that we bought Baldock to play out of position there... or anyone else of that matter. Were we purely pinning our hopes on Solly?
5) Which forward fits Sami's preferred style? Perhaps O'Grady if we had bought in RWs and LWs who can put in pinpoint crosses. CMS might make a fist of it but has been injured and seems to have slipped down the order once Baldock and Colunga arrived. Colunga doesn't seem to fit the bill ... somewhere between the SC role and the AMC role and Baldock has always played with another SC so am at a loss why we bought him if we are playing this tactic.
All in all it seems that we don't have the players to play the tactics we are trying to play. Whose fault is it? Im not sure but I do feel that tactics have to fit the players so if this is what we've got shouldn't we be changing the tactics? What really worries me is how we played yesterday in the second half. We seem unable to deal with responding to leaked goals. Surely that is the role of the manager and the staff to instill in in the players belief and confidence not only at half time but also during the game.
My suspicion is that our Board knew Sami was a gamble and wanted a strong AssMan in... either the guy Sami worked with at Leverkusen or some other similar (e.g. Sammy Lee). When the Leverkusen guy decided not to come I think it threw everything askew and they thought they'd solved it with Sammy only to be let down. By that stage they ran out of options and were stuck with Nathan.... nice guy that he is and good coach but not the perfect fit with a boss who perhaps needs more support than Nathan can give him.
This is how it seems to me. I really hope Im wrong but Im beginning to lose hope with this set up. Im really fed up with the 'luck' excuse. You don't go this long without winning purely because of luck. Good teams make their own luck. Are we saying that this good team was unable to get any luck in the last eight games? Im pretty sure in the second half yesterday we were very lucky!
Play-offs were never really very practical but top half was certainly expected. Can we do this with our set up? Right now, Im not convinced but I can continue to hope, at least for another three or four games and if nothing changes then I think a decision needs to be made.
Although I just about agree with Walt with giving a bit more time Im not sure I agree with his reasoning.
Lets starts with the tactics. It seems that the tactics that Sami is sticking to is 4-1-2-3-1 (two amcs who then push wider) which becomes 4-1-2-1-3 when we attack. However, he is encouraging the wing backs to move upfield which then makes the tactic 2-1-4-1-3. This seems very flexible and can play both narrow and wide but relies on four things - 1) fast CBs 2) faster WBs who can get back fast 3) Strong DMC and MCs who can drop back fast and stop the counter-attack 4) Inside forwards who can play winger or AMC equally well.
Now let's look at, on paper, what would have been the best squad for yesterday (not on form, on paper), not including those unavailable or injured... and the back ups that realistically could be used
GK - Stockdale, Ankergren
WR - Calderon, no one
WL - Bennett, Chicksen
DC - Greer, no one
DC - Hughes, Dunk
DMC - Holla, Ince
MCR - JFC, Gardner, Agustien
MCL - Crofts, Nzusi
AMC - Teixera, Colunga (?)
AMR - Baldock(?) no one
AML - Lua Lua, McCourt
SC - O' Grady
There are a few unavailables of course - Stephens, March, Bruno, CMS but even with these the squad is thin on the ground
Of course no player plays in just one position but players play best in their natural position and if we are buying them we should be buying them for their preferred position (because after all that's why we considered them good enough for this club). based on all this it seems...
1) Not only are we short at CB but with the possible exception of Dunk our CBs are too slow to cover when the WBs are upfield.
2) Without this speed at the back and considering the age of our two RWBs, we don't seem to have the back line to play the current preferred tactic.
3) We seem to be fine in CMs..... in fact we may have too many compared with other areas which could have possibly done with the money being spent.
4) We are woefully short on the wings especially RW. I think Sami knew that when he tried Bruno upfield at the beginning of the season. Its really unbelievable that we bought Baldock to play out of position there... or anyone else of that matter. Were we purely pinning our hopes on Solly?
5) Which forward fits Sami's preferred style? Perhaps O'Grady if we had bought in RWs and LWs who can put in pinpoint crosses. CMS might make a fist of it but has been injured and seems to have slipped down the order once Baldock and Colunga arrived. Colunga doesn't seem to fit the bill ... somewhere between the SC role and the AMC role and Baldock has always played with another SC so am at a loss why we bought him if we are playing this tactic.
All in all it seems that we don't have the players to play the tactics we are trying to play. Whose fault is it? Im not sure but I do feel that tactics have to fit the players so if this is what we've got shouldn't we be changing the tactics? What really worries me is how we played yesterday in the second half. We seem unable to deal with responding to leaked goals. Surely that is the role of the manager and the staff to instill in in the players belief and confidence not only at half time but also during the game.
My suspicion is that our Board knew Sami was a gamble and wanted a strong AssMan in... either the guy Sami worked with at Leverkusen or some other similar (e.g. Sammy Lee). When the Leverkusen guy decided not to come I think it threw everything askew and they thought they'd solved it with Sammy only to be let down. By that stage they ran out of options and were stuck with Nathan.... nice guy that he is and good coach but not the perfect fit with a boss who perhaps needs more support than Nathan can give him.
This is how it seems to me. I really hope Im wrong but Im beginning to lose hope with this set up. Im really fed up with the 'luck' excuse. You don't go this long without winning purely because of luck. Good teams make their own luck. Are we saying that this good team was unable to get any luck in the last eight games? Im pretty sure in the second half yesterday we were very lucky!
Play-offs were never really very practical but top half was certainly expected. Can we do this with our set up? Right now, Im not convinced but I can continue to hope, at least for another three or four games and if nothing changes then I think a decision needs to be made.
