Random possession stat

[nw6pie]

I agree. Just stating that we probably did better overall than a team that conceded 50 goals but only scored 45. It's a shame that the awful defensive record took so much away from the amazing attacking play. To have the top scorer and top assister and finish bottom half tells you everything you need to know about our current situation.

The question is whether we will ever be defensively sound if we continue to play JJ and AN as wing backs. That’s always going to be the trade off - more attacking threat vs. weaker defensive stability. Logic says we should sign back-ups at wing back who are stronger defensively than offensively to give ourselves more options.

[The_Don_ORiordan]

The possession start is meaningless in isolation. And even more meaningless when you look just at one half of a specific football match.

Those teams succeeded and failed due to that plus other stats.

It’s important to the way we play, but not the only stat that counts.

[slack_pie]

The question is whether we will ever be defensively sound if we continue to play JJ and AN as wing backs. That’s always going to be the trade off - more attacking threat vs. weaker defensive stability. Logic says we should sign back-ups at wing back who are stronger defensively than offensively to give ourselves more options.

I don't think we'll ever be the sort of team that concedes very few goals, but even if we just cut out the ridiculous unforced errors, we'd probably finish 10 points higher and in a playoff spot.

[TheProphet]

The question is whether we will ever be defensively sound if we continue to play JJ and AN as wing backs. That’s always going to be the trade off - more attacking threat vs. weaker defensive stability. Logic says we should sign back-ups at wing back who are stronger defensively than offensively to give ourselves more options.

This is an important point, often over-looked.

Look at the majority of our promotion season, Nemane one side, Chicksen the other.
When Nemane attacked, it gave us the option to drop into a back 4 if needed.
The latter part of that season Jones came in and his form made him almost un-droppable, but it definitely made us weaker defensively.
That carried on into this season, 2 wingers, no wing-backs.
It was no great surprise to me that when Chicksen came back into the team towards the end of the season for a few games, we started winning. I'm not saying it was solely down to that, or that we shouldn't play Jones, but it is something tactically that has to be adjusted for this season if we stick with a back 3.

[durhampie]

This is an important point, often over-looked.

Look at the majority of our promotion season, Nemane one side, Chicksen the other.
When Nemane attacked, it gave us the option to drop into a back 4 if needed.
The latter part of that season Jones came in and his form made him almost un-droppable, but it definitely made us weaker defensively.
That carried on into this season, 2 wingers, no wing-backs.
It was no great surprise to me that when Chicksen came back into the team towards the end of the season for a few games, we started winning. I'm not saying it was solely down to that, or that we shouldn't play Jones, but it is something tactically that has to be adjusted for this season if we stick with a back 3.

Neither Nemane or Jones are wingbacks. Only a complete idiot would persist in playing both in that roll..

[slack_pie]

Neither Nemane or Jones are wingbacks. Only a complete idiot would persist in playing both in that roll..

Yeah, that's why I'd like to see us play 4-2-3-1. We have the perfect players for that system.

[SmiffyPie]

Yeah, that's why I'd like to see us play 4-2-3-1. We have the perfect players for that system.

Something I have thought about all season. That middle five (with support from a back four player when possible) can still play the possession game. To say a back four stops our style is complete rubbish.