⚽ Match Thread vs. Barrow 07.10.23 [EFL L2]

[upthemaggies]

Tier 4 managers PPG table (4th tier league and play offs only, does not include Caretakers)

2.50 Steve Cotterill
2.15 Sam Allardyce
2.01 Jimmy Sirrel
2.00 David Kevan
2.00 Luke Williams
1.87 Frank Hill
1.56 Kevin Nolan
1.42 Tim Coleman
1.42 Andy Beattie
1.33 Jack Wheeler
1.30 Ricardo Moniz
1.29 Hans Backe
1.28 Steve Thompson
1.26 Jack Burkitt
1.24 Eddie Lowe
1.18 Harry Kewell
1.17 Ian Richardson
1.13 Gudjon Thordarson
1.13 Ian McParland
1.10 Billy Gray
1.10 Mark Cooper
1.06 Gary Mills
0.96 Neal Ardley
0.92 John Sheridan
0.83 Jamie Fullarton

[jackal2]

Seen it all now. Notts have gone from not serious contenders in the NL to the top of League 2 but you want to revert to 4-4-2?? Teams just don't play 4-4-2 these days, you lose the middle of the park.

I think 4-4-2 can still be played, but you need two exceptional midfielders who can effectively do the work of three players week in, week out. Bishop and Ravenhill achieved it in the Munto season, but that was 13 years ago now. Neal Ardley was devoted to 4-4-2 but relied too much on an ageing Michael Doyle. It was okay at times, but had its limitations, hence why we fell short.

There's no doubt that Luke Williams' tactical approach places a high expectation and workload defensively on players who are generally better going forward, and that's why we let in more goals than would be ideal, but the entertainment and goals at the other end are outstanding and the the ultimate measure is where we've been in the league table whilever LW has been in charge. Top or very near the top.

[SmiffyPie]

What we need to do for starters is to get Baldwin to release the ball to Cameron earlier (if that is the pass available) instead of holding while he appears to be looking for the killer pass through the middle. Cameron is quite good at pushing forward with the ball (for a defender) but is weak if he comes under opposition pressure and he gets a pass to his feet. He (Cameron) is at heart an old style defender being asked to do something he is not suited for.

[jackal2]

He (Cameron) is at heart an old style defender being asked to do something he is not suited for.

I actually think Cameron's talents would be better suited to a mid-field role. I'll grant you he looks physically like a centre-half, but his instincts aren't defensive. He's not quick at sensing danger and doesn't always take up good defensive positions, which is why he so often seems to be scrambling to recover and making rash mistakes.

I don't like the scapegoating of Cameron, though. He's a talented player on the ball and many other League two teams would snap him up, but the way Luke Williams likes to play puts a very heavy expectation on players like Kyle and at times exposes his weaknesses. The Head Coach obviously considers that what his Captain adds to the team in terms of playing style and attacking potential outweighs the defensive frailties. Our position in the league would suggest LW is right.

[SmiffyPie]

I actually think Cameron's talents would be better suited to a mid-field role. I'll grant you he looks physically like a centre-half, but his instincts aren't defensive. He's not quick at sensing danger and doesn't always take up good defensive positions, which is why he so often seems to be scrambling to recover and making rash mistakes.

I don't like the scapegoating of Cameron, though. He's a talented player on the ball and many other League two teams would snap him up, but the way Luke Williams likes to play puts a very heavy expectation on players like Kyle and at times exposes his weaknesses. The Head Coach obviously considers that what his Captain adds to the team in terms of playing style and attacking potential outweighs the defensive frailties. Our position in the league would suggest LW is right.

I have often thought that he would make a good midfield player, it's just that turn and recover aspect. I have a lot of time for him and, like you, accept that he is at times exposed through no fault of his own. He of all our players needs the ball quicker, that's all (IMO).

[Old_pie]

Tier 4 managers PPG table (4th tier league and play offs only, does not include Caretakers)

2.50 Steve Cotterill
2.15 Sam Allardyce
2.01 Jimmy Sirrel
2.00 David Kevan
2.00 Luke Williams
1.87 Frank Hill
1.56 Kevin Nolan
1.42 Tim Coleman
1.42 Andy Beattie
1.33 Jack Wheeler
1.30 Ricardo Moniz
1.29 Hans Backe
1.28 Steve Thompson
1.26 Jack Burkitt
1.24 Eddie Lowe
1.18 Harry Kewell
1.17 Ian Richardson
1.13 Gudjon Thordarson
1.13 Ian McParland
1.10 Billy Gray
1.10 Mark Cooper
1.06 Gary Mills
0.96 Neal Ardley
0.92 John Sheridan
0.83 Jamie Fullarton

I don't think Jack would ever have considered himself a manager even though he probably ended up having to do it longer than expected. What a servant to the club though and he comes top of any list for that alone.

[the_anticlough]

I don't like the scapegoating of Cameron, though. He's a talented player on the ball and many other League two teams would snap him up, but the way Luke Williams likes to play puts a very heavy expectation on players like Kyle .

This bit I agree with.
It's pathetic how after every game we don't win, some posters revert to slagging off the players who got us out of the NL and to the top of L2

Many just can't get their heads around the fact we play only 3 defenders.

Imagine any job where 4 staff are fully stretched with the workload, but then that number is reduced to 3, it's still the same workload, but the company does better overall because that missing staff is deployed in another department. The 3 remaining have it hard, but the overall result makes it worthwhile. That pretty much sums up our promotion and the rise to the top of L2.

Let's say that missing 4th defender is an average 6/10. So how about distributing his marks, 2 each to the remaining 3 defenders as compensation for how much harder they have to defend for the team, in terms of risk of exposure, in this system?

AB said he's proud of the job the back three do and they've every right to be.

[durhampie]

This bit I agree with.
It's pathetic how after every game we don't win, some posters revert to slagging off the players who got us out of the NL and to the top of L2

Many just can't get their heads around the fact we play only 3 defenders.

Imagine any job where 4 staff are fully stretched with the workload, but then that number is reduced to 3, it's still the same workload, but the company does better overall because that missing staff is deployed in another department. The 3 remaining have it hard, but the overall result makes it worthwhile. That pretty much sums up our promotion and the rise to the top of L2.

Let's say that missing 4th defender is an average 6/10. So how about distributing his marks, 2 each to the remaining 3 defenders as compensation for how much harder they have to defend for the team, in terms of risk of exposure, in this system?

AB said he's proud of the job the back three do and they've every right to be.

Thats a good theory, but the wingbacks are just not capable of doing what they are suppose to.. Hence my comment about square pegs in round holes...

[the_anticlough]

Thats a good theory, but the wingbacks are just not capable of doing what they are suppose to.. Hence my comment about square pegs in round holes...

Are we sure we play "wing-backs''?
They seem like old-fashioned outside-rights and outside-lefts to me. We play a 3-2-4-1 or 3-4-2-1 depending on the game, personnel, or how you wish to view it. We play a genuine back 3 - it allows us to dominate while exposing us at the same time - the dominate part of that might bag us enough wins to get back-to-back promotions.

I'd be more interested in getting a new first choice defender (right-side?) in January than reverting to more defensive wide players.

[LaxtonLad]

Absolute garbage.
If we have a non league defence we’d be nowhere near being top of the league. Simple as that.
The system we play is fundamentally based on the ability to play out from the back. On the flip side our ability to defend is massively dependant on our ability to defend high up the pitch. So it’s totally unfair to say our defence are responsible for the goals we concede and our attack for the goals we score.
Unless you have defenders with 100% pass accuracy, you’re going to concede chances.
It’s a risk/reward system. We’re top of the league so it’s overwhelmingly working, throughout the whole team.

The last line of defence is the defenders, is it not? But having said that, I do think LW's following of the Premier League teams playing out from the back is a mistake (I think it's a mistake for them too) but while Premiership defenders are less likely to make errors in their own penalty areas the same cannot be said for defenders at our level, be it in L2 or non-league. An easily misplaced pass to a team-mate by a player with not so much skill is more likely to happen. So which is the best tactic, the goalie hoofs it upfield where it might be intercepted by the enemy or the pass, pass, pass betwixt defenders, midfielders, wingers, and strikers where one mistake gives the ball away?

Maybe MOTD edits out the slow cautious second option but it does seem to me that the second is now being edged out in favour of the more spectacular first. Perhaps Premiership managers have seen the light? Or is it that both tactics just come and go?