[cite]Posted By: queensland_addick[/cite]Why has Semedo not had a run through on goal since Tranmere away? Why has Sam not got through on goal far more often in the way he was earlier in the season?
How can Millwall find it so easy to score goals, when, player for player, they are no better than us? It has to be down to restrictive tactics.
Surely that's not Semedo's game or his job. It was against Tranmere, a team managed by John Barnes, a very poor manager who tried to get them playing passing football. It was a rare moment rather than something he has stopped doing. Racon it can be argued should be far more of a goal threat, for me overall he has had a disappointing season.
Millwall are the better team, we're perhaps missing certain types of players and/or characters in some positions. Most of our midfield in Sam, Racon and Semedo can't really grab hold of a game "by the scruff of the neck" as some say.
Sam is often taking the safe option, is that a lack of confidence and belief or tactics? He is often crowded out by 2 or 3 players, I think the first half of the season teams saw just how dangerous he can be if given space. Since then they've also seen how other clubs have stopped him playing. Reid on the other side takes more risks, but he also loses possession more often. I think Semedo is doing what is pretty natural to him.
I think Pardew's other comment was a good point, that they had that bit of magic for their goal. Our chances were really all ones you'd expect a goalkeeper to save. We'd be very disappointed if Randolph or Elliot let in chances like Bailey's two headers and his shot for example.
We're hard to beat but going for it at the right moment could have turned some of those draws into wins. Starting with 4-4-2 might have seen us go 1-0 up, same time though we could gone a couple of goals down and lost the match in the first half. I know what you mean, perhaps we just don't judge when to take risks and when to sit back well enough, both Parky, his staff and the players themselves.
[cite]Posted By: Plaaayer[/cite]I think at times we're so worried about losing that the team won't push and commit people forward.
It's not until the other team has scored that we realise we need to go forward and get something.
Completely agree. With the attacking players we've got we should be on the front foot in every single game in this division. Instead we allow the opposition to dictate the game and when we have to move up a gear it doesn't come naturally. I'm not saying we'd win every week but we'd win more than we lost and the atmosphere at the Valley would be transformed. It must be depressing to be an attacking Charlton player and to play in such a conservative team.
It's a tough balancing act. To be fair, what Parky is trying to do isn't a million miles different to what good ol 'Cautious Curbs' used to do. Plenty of times we used to go away and keep it tight for the first hour and then have a go as the game wore on. Used to work as well. Trouble is, that was in the days of being a Premiership underdog. When he got us promoted we attacked teams and then shut up a bit once we had a lead. As one of the supposed top teams we need to show a bit less fear about attacking teams. Lets face it, the defensive style is seeing us go behind a lot anyway so we might as well try a bit harder to score ourselves.
would love to see burton and forster together, reckon that could be a great partnership at this level, hopefully starting tomorrow and to get us up automatically
Charlton Athletic has played 17 English League One matches this season on The Valley. On home ground Charlton Athletic has won 9, drawn 6 and lost 2 matches. This ranks the Whites 7th in home team performance in the English League One
Bailey & Shelvey should be given more freedom to support Forster so if a ball is played into Forster and he is holding it up has Bailey and Shelvey to play ball two and work to spilt the defence open up space, or in the sense if ball is played out wide to either Sam or Reid and they are preparing a cross from wide position hopefully have all them 3 ready to attack a ball in the box.
I'm not sure lining up with as physical side as possible (ie. Akpo up front) is really a good idea. If we simply try to nullify their physical presence it presumably won't work as they're bound to be stronger as this is how they've played all season. We should pick a forward line to counter this - I can't recall if Forster is very fast but it would help to have some nippy forwards to terrorise their lumbering centre halves. Have we got any of those?
That's the thing, Akpo is probably the quickest striker have have available as well as the strongest. Forster hasn't looked quick to me but he has or maybe still does have a bit of pace.
[cite]Posted By: Scoham[/cite]That's the thing, Akpo is probably the quickest striker have have available as well as the strongest.
all we need now is for him to learn how to kick a ball properly and we'll be ok ... although the law of averages says he will strike one decently soon cos he's fluffed a few
I cant believe some people on here would consider putting Elliott in for Randolph if fit. Im sorry but i do think Randolph is a much stronger keeper than robbie, he actually commands his box unlike Elliott which probably makes Dailly and Sodje's jobs much easier! Rands has waited along time for this opportunity but boy has he stamped his foot down in the selection process!
[cite]Posted By: cafc_se7[/cite]I cant believe some people on here would consider putting Elliott in for Randolph if fit. Im sorry but i do think Randolph is a much stronger keeper than robbie, he actually commands his box unlike Elliott which probably makes Dailly and Sodje's jobs much easier! Rands has waited along time for this opportunity but boy has he stamped his foot down in the selection process!
I think it's too soon to make a call on the Randolph v Elliot. I've got to say I've been impressed by Randolph (and proven wrong to an extent - I wasn't sure he was up to it) and he deserves to keep his place. If Parky were to drop Randolph put a possibly-not-100%-fit Elliot in goal, that would be as ridiculous as Pardew relegating Elliot to the bench after his performance at Plymouth away when Weaver was sent off.
At the same time as i agree with you dabos that it is to soon to call, I just think Randolph straight away looks a bigger stronger keeper. Some keepers just dont have the "commanding their box" ability and unfortunately i do think Robbie falls into this bracket. Although Rands does punch the ball more often than not, I'd still have a keeper who comes off his line to take the ball. Especially against a team like colchester who carry that aerial threat.
Randolph deserves to keep his place at the moment and if he continues as he is maybe he'll earn a new contract for next season. Problem then is with two young keepers and both wanting to play we could end up losing one anyway as they will want first team football.
Tonight we must go for jugular therefore we need our best ball players out there. This means we have to find a place for bailey, shelvey and mooney. We need a greater goal threat as well We also need to give forster a hand so for me 4-5-1 is out of the question. Time for the kid to play his natural position me thinks let him know we feel he is capable of unlocking the defence with his vision to many times in the hole he simply has no options ahead to show this vision and its stifled his progress imo. At home i'm not sure we need such a mono talent as Semedo just breaking things up, we need someone who can carry and create as well.
Tonight for me
DR FR SS CD Borrow Sam Bailey Shelvey Reid Mooney Forster
Despite agreeing in my heart that we need a team capable of playing the ball on the floor, I still feel we need Akpo in this match for 2 reasons:
1) We need a big lump of our own up front to keep their lump CB's busy. When Akpo came on at Southampton, suddenly their CB's had to work - the difference compared to the lone Forster was obvious.
2) They have overall bigger, more physical players than us. We need Akpo's height and physical presence defending set-pieces in our own box.
So for me, Akpo in tandem with Forster feeding off the knockdowns and loose balls.
[cite]Posted By: Oggy Red[/cite]Despite agreeing in my heart that we need a team capable of playing the ball on the floor, I still feel we need Akpo in this match for 2 reasons:
1) We need a big lump of our own up front to keep their lump CB's busy. When Akpo came on at Southampton, suddenly their CB's had to work - the difference compared to the lone Forster was obvious.
2) They have overall bigger, more physical players than us. We need Akpo's height and physical presence defending set-pieces in our own box.
Agreed. You beat me to it! I'd also play Semedo for similar reasons.
Jonjo could then play in the middle, Bailey on the left Sam on the right (by a sort head from Reid) because, although he frustrates, Sam can unlock the tightest defence when he is "at it." He still gets crosses in even when off form although nobody gets on the end of them usually!
Comments
Millwall are the better team, we're perhaps missing certain types of players and/or characters in some positions. Most of our midfield in Sam, Racon and Semedo can't really grab hold of a game "by the scruff of the neck" as some say.
Sam is often taking the safe option, is that a lack of confidence and belief or tactics? He is often crowded out by 2 or 3 players, I think the first half of the season teams saw just how dangerous he can be if given space. Since then they've also seen how other clubs have stopped him playing. Reid on the other side takes more risks, but he also loses possession more often. I think Semedo is doing what is pretty natural to him.
I think Pardew's other comment was a good point, that they had that bit of magic for their goal. Our chances were really all ones you'd expect a goalkeeper to save. We'd be very disappointed if Randolph or Elliot let in chances like Bailey's two headers and his shot for example.
We're hard to beat but going for it at the right moment could have turned some of those draws into wins. Starting with 4-4-2 might have seen us go 1-0 up, same time though we could gone a couple of goals down and lost the match in the first half. I know what you mean, perhaps we just don't judge when to take risks and when to sit back well enough, both Parky, his staff and the players themselves.
Completely agree. With the attacking players we've got we should be on the front foot in every single game in this division. Instead we allow the opposition to dictate the game and when we have to move up a gear it doesn't come naturally. I'm not saying we'd win every week but we'd win more than we lost and the atmosphere at the Valley would be transformed. It must be depressing to be an attacking Charlton player and to play in such a conservative team.
Randolph
Richardson
Dailly---Sodje
Borrowdale
-
Sam
Bailey
Racon
Reid
Shelvey
Forster
Main reason being i dont want to see Semedo booked against the U's we need him for Naaridge.
If Elliot and Burton are fit I'd go for the following:
4-4-1-1: Elliot, Richardson, Dailly, Sodje, Borrowdale, Bailey, Semedo, Racon, Reid, Shelvey, Burton
If Elliot and Burton are not available then I'd play 4-4-2 with Randolph in goal and Mooney and Forster up front, dropping Shelvey.
Anything less than 3 points will be very, very disappointing...
Randolph
--------------
Richardson
Dailly
S.Sodje
Borrowdale
---------------
Sam
Semedo
Reid
---------------
Shelvey
Bailey
---------------
Forster
Bailey & Shelvey should be given more freedom to support Forster so if a ball is played into Forster and he is holding it up has Bailey and Shelvey to play ball two and work to spilt the defence open up space, or in the sense if ball is played out wide to either Sam or Reid and they are preparing a cross from wide position hopefully have all them 3 ready to attack a ball in the box.
all we need now is for him to learn how to kick a ball properly and we'll be ok ... although the law of averages says he will strike one decently soon cos he's fluffed a few
Got to agree with this
This means we have to find a place for bailey, shelvey and mooney.
We need a greater goal threat as well
We also need to give forster a hand so for me 4-5-1 is out of the question.
Time for the kid to play his natural position me thinks let him know we feel he is capable of unlocking the defence with his vision to many times in the hole he simply has no options ahead to show this vision and its stifled his progress imo.
At home i'm not sure we need such a mono talent as Semedo just breaking things up, we need someone who can carry and create as well.
Tonight for me
DR
FR SS CD Borrow
Sam Bailey Shelvey Reid
Mooney Forster
but it wont be it'll
DR
FR SS CD BOR
Sam TR JS KR
NB
NF
we shall see
1) We need a big lump of our own up front to keep their lump CB's busy. When Akpo came on at Southampton, suddenly their CB's had to work - the difference compared to the lone Forster was obvious.
2) They have overall bigger, more physical players than us. We need Akpo's height and physical presence defending set-pieces in our own box.
So for me, Akpo in tandem with Forster feeding off the knockdowns and loose balls.
Agreed. You beat me to it! I'd also play Semedo for similar reasons.
Jonjo could then play in the middle, Bailey on the left Sam on the right (by a sort head from Reid) because, although he frustrates, Sam can unlock the tightest defence when he is "at it." He still gets crosses in even when off form although nobody gets on the end of them usually!