Nearly choked on my corn flakes this morning
after reading that Chris Powell claimed that “it is natural for players to take
a step back when defending a lead even though you want them to keep going
forward”, So it had nothing to do with the fact that at the end of the game we
had no strikers on the pitch then, thereby inviting pressure?
After 3 games of having things more or less our own way we
came up against a Scunthorpe side who were well worth a point I thought, but
things should have been different after being 2 up with 15 minutes to go.
We’ve started the season brilliantly although yesterday we
seemed a bit flat I thought & didn’t seem to play at as high a tempo as in
previous games. We’re not going to be great in every game but what puzzles me
is the bench & the
substitutions. I don’t see the value in having Euell on the bench, people
may say that he’s versatile & can play midfield or the strikers role.
Wrong, his strength & goals have always come from midfield when supporting
the front men & coming into the box. His match fitness is questionable
& at 34 his sharpness probably isn’t what it used to be. Effectively we
have no striker on the bench. Do we need Euell in midfield ? We also have
Hughes who can play at full back or again in midfield, surely it makes sense to
just have Hughes as the back up versatility man giving us a space on the bench
for a recognised striker, either Benson or more hopefully a new signing?
The substitutions are even more difficult to work out. You bring
on Green to sling those brilliant crosses into the box but you take off Hayes
who seems the likeliest to get on the end of them. Many on here have commented
that we have been defending from the front with Hayes & BWP working hard to
close down defenders, so why are we taking both off & surrendering that
first line of defence. Personally I cannot understand any reason other than
injury why you would ever take off BWP
whose the only guy likely to grab you a goal out of nothing. As for his
replacement Doherty watch the replay of their goal 2nd goal. Together with
another body in a red shirt (can’t make out who) his standing a yard off of the
goal scorer watching & not challenging. So that substitution worked out didn’t
it?
I’m all for bringing on a sub to change the game but I don’t
see the point if all we’re going to be doing is inviting them to attack. With
the lack of a striker on the bench I would have liked to have seen Wagstaff
move across into a strikers role if you’re going to take hayes off. Surely his
work rate, speed & obvious eye for goal would have kept the pressure up
& not handed the initiative to scunthorpe .
Anyway I understand a deal has been agreed with a
championship club for a centre back which should be completed this week which
will hopefully tighten up the back 4 which I for one am not 100% convinced
about.
No word on a striker tho’......everybody has
talked about getting a big lump up front, well I thought that Hayes already
filled that role cause he certainly hasn’t been signed as a goal scorer. 2
glaring misses yesterday effectively cost us 2 points. With the team at last
trying to play a passing game I see no need for a lump up front unless we need
to play a long ball game if we’re needing a goal late on. I’d love to see a
fast young goal scorer come in to play alongside BWP in much the same way that Swindon had a couple of years ago (Austin & Paynter was it ?) because as things stand if
BWP is marked out of the game we’re relying on the midfield to come up with
goals because our other "striker" isn't a goal scorer.
Comments
Subs should be impact players...........we should be bringing on a fast, nippy player with 10-15 mins to go to exploit the gaps that natuarally apear as a game progresses..............not bringing on Euell & The Doc !!
he's bringing on subs to close the game out
it worked at notts county not yesterday
if he bought on attackers/impact players when 2-0 up and we'd drawn the game you'd all be moaning what was he thinking we'd already won the game
anyway danny green is an impact player
weirdos
I generally find you don't draw too many matches by going 3-0 up in the 80th minute - but you do draw some by going too defensive at 2-0 !
I cant believe some of our fans I really cant!!
Lets hope we win 10-0 away next week!! Or maybe someone will say it should have been 11!
Well if we're not allowed to have opinions whats the point in a public forum ?
Close down Charlton Life now in case anybody gets upset !
who is the CH bob? Or at least from which Club !!
Sorry I don't know any details other than that it's all agreed & that little sniff comes from board level so not "just a rumour"
I've really no idea, I only know that a deal has been agreed. Who with & whether we'll think it's a good signing I don't know
@TheLovelock fitness will come on with more minutes on the pitch, but I feel very good.
to take a step back when defending a lead.
After Saturday I'm still convinced we need a big strong targetman. Not to hoof it up to, but to offer something different. Hayes like Burton can offer a good touch and link the play well, but he's not always going go have a good game. A more physical striker (Hayes is not a "big lump" type striker) would have challenged a lot better for headers the times we did go long (eg from Elliot) and when the ball was at his feet might have held off defenders and kept the ball. A proper targetman would also be ideal for getting on the end of crosses.
Currently we can use Wagstaff up front to add pace, energy and a goal threat. If we need to add a real physical presence we have no one. A targetman coming on for Hayes on Saturday could have helped us win the game.
I felt the biggest mistake was bringing on Doc instead of Hughes. To their credit, Scunny were not lumping into the box, but passing it around and through our obviously tiring midfield (Stephens seemed especially knackered).
Plus Doc's appearance looked like a panic move, and that wouldn't have inspired confidence in the younger players (witness Solly's poor/tired attempt to lump the ball out of the box - instead just giving it back to the guy who crossed for their equaliser).
Old 'uns like us can't serously think that 5 subs is not enough. The main problem was in midfield I think.
But it's all with hindsight, and 10 pts from 4 games is something we'd have all settled for.