Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: DonnyOsmond on February 18, 2017, 05:22:10 pm
-
Not sure why we've changed system long term anyway seeing as it's the one that got us up and running in the first half of the season. This 3 at the back is stifling us and it needs changing.
Get Alfie starting aswell.
-
Could just be down to Baudry being injured and he see's playing Butler & Wright together at the back a bit one dimensional.
Agreed about Alfie. Loved his celebration.
-
Could just be down to Baudry being injured and he see's playing Butler & Wright together at the back a bit one dimensional.
Agreed about Alfie. Loved his celebration.
Wright did n't play
-
Could just be down to Baudry being injured and he see's playing Butler & Wright together at the back a bit one dimensional.
Agreed about Alfie. Loved his celebration.
Wright did n't play
That's my point. When he doesn't have Baudry at the back he'd rather play 3 and Butler just as his main centre half.
-
In the last two games we've basically had only two actual defenders on the pitch at any point. Butler / Wright and Alcock.
Is it any wonder that we've conceded three sloppy goals from wide positions in that time? The balance doesn't seem right to me.
-
In the last two games we've basically had only two actual defenders on the pitch at any point. Butler / Wright and Alcock.
Is it any wonder that we've conceded three sloppy goals from wide positions in that time? The balance doesn't seem right to me.
I wouldn't say their goal was sloppy today, it was a brilliant finish.
-
Is Baudry still injured or ill ???
-
In the last two games we've basically had only two actual defenders on the pitch at any point. Butler / Wright and Alcock.
Is it any wonder that we've conceded three sloppy goals from wide positions in that time? The balance doesn't seem right to me.
I wouldn't say their goal was sloppy today, it was a brilliant finish.
I'm not doubting that it was a good finish but;
1) Two of our guys were out fought by one of theirs for the initial breakaway. Should have done better.
2) Our defence was all over the place once Mason had committed himself. The bloke who scored then had loads of space to get into the box with relative ease and get a (very good) shot away.
-
I said that earlier. We have regressed since 3 at the back became first choice rather than plan be. We have been at our best playing a back 4. That's a fact.
-
Never seen three at back add owt. Yet we keep seeing it rear its head. Mystery.
-
I said that earlier. We have regressed since 3 at the back became first choice rather than plan be. We have been at our best playing a back 4. That's a fact.
You make a good point there Gaz. DF seems very pigheaded with playing 3 at the back. I think we can play 3 at the back when we have Butler and Frenchie there but when either one is missing we are very vunerable.
May's time has come and what a performance to keep our home record going.
-
Where is Beestin these days?
-
We played three at the back throughout our great run in January.
-
We played three at the back throughout our great run in January.
Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't Butler and Frenchie both playing in January? If that is the case it would support the point I made.
-
I think three at back is just one element of debate about what added value Ferguson bring to Rovers, in terms of nouse, tactics, motivation etc.
We have a squad of players generously provided by our owners, that are way way beyond dreams of almost all clubs in this league. Yet we haven't beaten any team in top four and have only beaten two teams in the top seven.
We look like flat track bullies, beating easy meat and relying on our talented players in this league. Results show that we are poor against the better teams in this league. That doesn't matter so much so long as we are ahead of other teams, but it does suggest we are going to struggle next season if we go up against decently resourced teams of a higher standard than most in this league.
-
Using the same benchmarks you could argue that the other teams in the top seven aren't good enough to beat the "easy meat" because they obviously haven't done it often enough to get more points than us.
-
We played three at the back throughout our great run in January.
Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't Butler and Frenchie both playing in January? If that is the case it would support the point I made.
No we played a back 4 Blair Baudry Butler Mason
-
That is correct.
-
Yeovil away we won 3-0 with 3 at the back, mason also played as the 3rd centre back in march with Rowe and Blair as wing backs
-
Yeovil away we won 3-0 with 3 at the back, mason also played as the 3rd centre back in march with Rowe and Blair as wing backs
March ???
-
Ha no idea mate,
-
This post might be more valid if we played three at the back against Luton.
We didn't...
-
This post might be more valid if we played three at the back against Luton.
We didn't...
Sorry what were we paying then???
Alcock, Butler & Mason centre backs with Blair & Rowe as wing backs.
-
Blair was right back with Copps, Houghton, Grant and Rowe in the diamond.
When he subbed Mason he played Rowe at left back with Blair right back and Alcock and Butler centre backs.
-
That I so wrong.
Back three of Alcock,Butler and Mason.
Blair and Rowe as wing backs.
When Mason went off we effectively had a back two with Blair and Rowe helping out if required.
After Mason went off our extra players going forward forced Luton to pull men back to counter that and they hardly got forward at all late on.
DF himself said it was a big risk but it paid off.
-
Blair is massively wasted as a defender. Once personnel come back he has to be used on the wing.
-
After the first twenty minutes or so against Luton I thought he would be nailed on as man of the match.
He skinned the left back a few times but then they doubled up on him.
-
We've played 3-5-2 since the Barnet game.
-
No, that is not correct.
-
No, that is not correct.
Why?
-
No, that is not correct.
We change throughout most games from a 4 to a 3, or vice versa. It seems for all the games we win you're saying we played 4 and the ones we lost we played 3. Which simply isn't the case
-
No, that is not correct.
We change throughout most games from a 4 to a 3, or vice versa. It seems for all the games we win you're saying we played 4 and the ones we lost we played 3. Which simply isn't the case
Well in the last 3 games we have played 3 at the back with wing backs. That is for definate and if you don't agree I suggest you ask DF and I am 100% sure he will confirm it.
-
Blair was right back with Copps, Houghton, Grant and Rowe in the diamond.
When he subbed Mason he played Rowe at left back with Blair right back and Alcock and Butler centre backs.
Sorry you are so wrong. You must have been at a different match to the one I was at.
-
No, that is not correct.
We change throughout most games from a 4 to a 3, or vice versa. It seems for all the games we win you're saying we played 4 and the ones we lost we played 3. Which simply isn't the case
Well in the last 3 games we have played 3 at the back with wing backs. That is for definate and if you don't agree I suggest you ask DF and I am 100% sure he will confirm it.
I do agree, but we've played more than the last 3 games with 3 at back,
-
No, that is not correct.
We change throughout most games from a 4 to a 3, or vice versa. It seems for all the games we win you're saying we played 4 and the ones we lost we played 3. Which simply isn't the case
I agree with that, in fact our formations are more flexible than they've ever been
-
When they warmed up before the game on Saturday - it was as a 4. That changed during the game to a 3 and then sometimes back to a 4 again.
Personally, I think with Blair as a RB, its easy to switch from 4 to 3, a 3 when we are attacking and a 4 when we're defending. Simples!
-
Flat back four throughout January with Blair at RB.
-
Rowe at left wing back is s massive waste of talent for me.
-
Flat back four throughout January with Blair at RB.
And 5 straight wins.. So why 3 draws and a lose (Is it any change) It will have to alter now with injury to Houghton...
-
Flat back four throughout January with Blair at RB.
And 5 straight wins.. So why 3 draws and a lose (Is it any change) It will have to alter now with injury to Houghton...
Easy grant to play Houghton's role allowing a reversion to a diamond
-
Mason to DM, Alcock to LB.
Job done.
-
Flat back four throughout January with Blair at RB.
Which was same against morecambe,
And all the games since we've switched from a 4 to a 3 and vice Versa throughout the games.
We probably switched many times in January to a 3 aswell.
Switching to a 3 in games has won us matches
-
Yes i know that, DF said the same in his post match interview on Saturday too.
We switched to a back two for a while on Saturday as well, did you notice that one?
I was talking about starting line ups.
-
If we're changing formations throughout a match I can't see how one can be blamed for not winning matches. We might start with a 4 and change to a 3 within the first 15 mins.
Blair can play full back, wing back or right wing, Alcock and mason can play centre half full back or wing back, Rowe can play wing back, full back or left wing, even centre mid.
It's good that we're so adaptable, it shouldn't be criticised