Round holes, square pegs

[Red Nose]

So I dragged along a mate from work (West Ham fan) for the game last and at the start he asked me to talk him through the team. So I went on to explain that Oakley a central midfielder was at centre back, Davies a wide midfielder was at wing back, Butterfield a right back was at centre back, McAllister a left back was in midfield, Nicholls a striker was in midfield and Harley a midfielder was up front. Meanwhile Ribeiro a natural wing back is on the bench, along with our most potent attacking threat - Wheeler. My mate thought I was making it up.

For what it’s worth I think either Oakley or Butterfield alongside JMT would work, but certainly not both and Nicholls does a decent job on the left, but really needs 2 strikers ahead of him.

Can we just go back to 4-4-2 and play players in the position they’re most comfortable at please?

 

[tjcrid82]

Some valid points, but don't get too focused on fixed positions for players, most players can play in a number of positions and don't see themselves only as one or another because they started their career there or played a lot of it there. Sometimes they develop into different positions. Remember Matt Taylor, he was a goalkeeper...turned centre back and higher up the leagues of course Ryan Giggs, winger turned centre midfield.

Given their age and therefore legs Oakley and Butterfield are probably best suited to centre back, they just shouldn't play there together.

 

[On the up]

Very sensible observation. A simple 442 will help make us stronger and more difficult to play against. If we want to play 352 successfully we need more CBs with pace And quick wing backs. Think we can only accommodate one of the slower ageing players in defence and one in the centre 3. Just need to bring some momentum to the team.

 

[CREDYGRECIAN]

We're over complicating things IMO

The best teams in league 2 have 2 quick lads on the wing & 2 strikers through the middle

Added to that they normally have somebody in the middle of the park who isn't shy of mixing it when required & two 6ft centre halfs who head the ball away and clear it when required

We continue to persist with a formation which

A) doesn't work especially at home the majority of the time

B) Is easy for away teams to be able to squeeze up the pitch and stop us playing

C) is over complicating the game for players at a level where keeping it simple works best

Tisdale will continue to play this way & results will continue will go up and down

The home form 18 wins in 62 games over the last 3 seasons at this level shows the you that it works once every 3.5 games ish

If that's good enough that so be it

 

[Antony Moxey]

So I dragged along a mate from work (West Ham fan) for the game last and at the start he asked me to talk him through the team. So I went on to explain that Oakley a central midfielder was at centre back, Davies a wide midfielder was at wing back, Butterfield a right back was at centre back, McAllister a left back was in midfield, Nicholls a striker was in midfield and Harley a midfielder was up front. Meanwhile Ribeiro a natural wing back is on the bench, along with our most potent attacking threat - Wheeler. My mate thought I was making it up.

For what it’s worth I think either Oakley or Butterfield alongside JMT would work, but certainly not both and Nicholls does a decent job on the left, but really needs 2 strikers ahead of him.

Can we just go back to 4-4-2 and play players in the position they’re most comfortable at please?

Harley wasn't up front. It was 6-3-1 with three central defenders and two wing backs who were 5% wing and 95% back with McAllister playing about a foot or two in front of the central defenders. Occasionally Butterfield would step up to join him. In midfield it was Nicholls, Harley and Sercombe with Tom Nichols on his own up front.

So we had a keeper in goal, one central defender in defence, a left back at left back, three midfielders in midfield and a striker up front.

But we were sh*te anyway, and still conceded two stupid goals despite the negative and defensive line up.

 

[Antony Moxey]

The home form 18 wins in 62 games over the last 3 seasons.

Creds is that true? Not doubting you but is that really all we've won? Surely that's got to be the worst home record of any professional team in the country.

 

[Jason H]

Creds is that true? Not doubting you but is that really all we've won? Surely that's got to be the worst home record of any professional team in the country.

It's shockingly poor, obviously, but within a couple of minutes I've already dug up a couple of Prem teams with worse records in Villa and Sunderland. Birmingham have 14 wins in 61.

 

[CREDYGRECIAN]

Creds is that true? Not doubting you but is that really all we've won? Surely that's got to be the worst home record of any professional team in the country.

Yeap that's the form in the last 3 seasons at home in league 2

 

[CREDYGRECIAN]

Home form - league 2

2012-13 season - 19th

2013-14 season - 21st

2014-15 season - 18th

Away form - league 2

2012-13 season - 3rd

2013-14 season - 10th

2014-15 season - 5th

The way Tisdale sets the team up is always gonna suit playing away from home

Teams have to come at us and then we can counter attack and win games in the 2nd half - last half hour

At Home when it's Tisdale job to send a team out to take on the opposition , start quickly and try and score in the first 15-20 mins he's not got much idea

The stats don't lie

 

[Red Nose]

Harley wasn't up front. It was 6-3-1 with three central defenders and two wing backs who were 5% wing and 95% back with McAllister playing about a foot or two in front of the central defenders. Occasionally Butterfield would step up to join him. In midfield it was Nicholls, Harley and Sercombe with Tom Nichols on his own up front.

So we had a keeper in goal, one central defender in defence, a left back at left back, three midfielders in midfield and a striker up front.

But we were sh*te anyway, and still conceded two stupid goals despite the negative and defensive line up.

At kick off we definitely lined up 5-3-2 as described in the OP. You are right though, players were dragged all over the place and probably gravitated towards the comfort zone of their usual positions. I suggest this all contributed to our general sh*te-ness.