• We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here

Exeter City v Stevenage Mental Health Awareness Matchday Thread

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
34,044
Location
Touring Central Java...
Why have a flat back four when three is enough, allowing an extra man in midfield?
I can see the sense in packing the midfield when we play against a strong team, but not against Stevenage.
 

grecIAN Harris

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
28,114
Location
Back home in the village
I can see the sense in packing the midfield when we play against a strong team, but not against Stevenage.
We weren't, we were packing the attack. We had two wide men in advanced positions. Two strikers, one in behind them and one of the midfielders joining in on regular intervals. One of Big Nige or Archie would sit and hold things up when they did breakdown for the rest of the midfield to filter back in.
 

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
34,044
Location
Touring Central Java...
We weren't, we were packing the attack. We had two wide men in advanced positions. Two strikers, one in behind them and one of the midfielders joining in on regular intervals. One of Big Nige or Archie would sit and hold things up when they did breakdown for the rest of the midfield to filter back in.
But the line - up was 3-5-2, theoretically.
We're getting into the realm of defining positions For example, is Williams classified as a wing back, or a midfielder, or a winger?
Anyway, the important thing is that we play well and win. But our inability to put a game to bed is a concern, and is reflected in our tight goal difference.
 
Last edited:

TSW1389

Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2019
Messages
164
Location
Lee Mill
Yes, but Martin and Parkes should have been enough to handle their strikers, with Sweeney and Dickenson as attacking full backs. Surely we can vary the system a little bit depending on the opposition?
Why change a system that has worked all season?
Three at the back suits us and how we play so why change?
 

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
34,044
Location
Touring Central Java...
Why change a system that has worked all season?
Three at the back suits us and how we play so why change?
I haven't said we should change our set-up for every game. And we've done really well to be where we are. But many of our games we've struggled to win. Also if we play against a team whose manager is smart tactically, he will know exactly how we set up every game.
I'm not rubbishing anyone or anything, just raising a topic for discussion
 

tonykellowfan

Active member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
4,184
Location
Buckingham
We are pretty much lining up 3-2-3-2 which is a very attacking line up.
 

Macca

Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2005
Messages
720
Location
Dawlish
A
But our inability to put a game to bed is a concern, and is reflected in our tight goal difference.
I agree with this Mike. Whilst our defensive unit looks as strong as I can remember since watching from the mid 90s, attacking wise we look lightweight. Particularly when you compare to the likes of Swindon.

Let’s hope the cliche ‘attack wins games, defence wins titles’ comes to fruition!
 

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
34,044
Location
Touring Central Java...
We are pretty much lining up 3-2-3-2 which is a very attacking line up.
And yet we seldom win by two goals or more
 

milts

Active member
Joined
Nov 8, 2005
Messages
2,818
And yet we seldom win by two goals or more
But rarely through lack of chances created....
 

IndoMike

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
May 9, 2010
Messages
34,044
Location
Touring Central Java...
But rarely through lack of chances created....
Yes, maybe that's true. Would need to see the stats for that.
 
Top