Ackey Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I'm tired of all this 'next season X/Y/Z' BS. So I thought I'd add to it. Irony, eh? This season has undoubtedly been poor. However I raised a point on weekend to a friend and I'd like to raise it again now. The reason we don't attack teams, and there's no doubting we don't do it enough, is that we're afraid to. I'm talking beyond tactical to simple out-and-out fear. I think the problem is that we know if we go all-out at a side, no matter how poor, we're at risk. We're afraid to attack them and this is more than just tactics. If, for example, you're a midfielder... you know that you 'should' gamble on that 40-60 against and get in to the box at 0-0 to try and find the lead. However you know that if you fail and we're caught short and we go 1-0 down we're basically screwed. I feel that Penney was brought in to fix problems we all knew were there - a lack of discipline and team structure, coupled with an over-attacking side which crossed from adventurous to reckless too many times. The problem is that once we failed to score earlier in the season - a problem Penney openly admitted to and has tried (but admittedly failed) to correct - we developed (both players and managers) this psychological fear of being an attacking side. So, that's the case. How does it apply to next season, should Penney remain? Well - he's shown a willingness to be assertive (example: dropping Brill twice) and if we can correct the fear of attacking sides by finding a goalscorer to partner Pav whilst retaining our stingy defence then there's no reason to feel we can't be a top-ten side next season. This season has been poor, there are problems which remain and problems which have been addressed. I guess my underlying point and hope is we get behind the side and try to produce a more positive environment conducive to winning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bertie_Dugger Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 I wonder if we may have a problem defensively next season. How much longer can Gregan keep it all together at the back. I know he's got more experience than the rest of the team but all footballers have to quit sooner or later. Despite all the Hungarian comings and goings, have we got a ready made understudy? Is it too much to expect another full season from him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 There are just a couple of things there Ackey, whilst you say that maybe the tea is afraid to attack, isn't it the manager's job to gee the team up, tell them to attack! the half time team talk- If there is no attacking football in the 1st half just exactly what is beig said in the dressing room, "Come on lads, we got to get at em, get in their faces and attack them". how many times this season have we seen the same tactics employed in the 2nd half as the 1st? I've stood there at half time thinking that Penney will kive em a kick up the arse at half time and we might see some attacking football alas the second half commences and the formation and tactics are exactly the same until the substitutions are made, usually an attacker for a midfielder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ackey Posted March 17, 2010 Author Share Posted March 17, 2010 I agree - that's why I included the management in those suffering from the mental block. As a manager who's constantly seen his side fail to score (Parker's 11+ missed one-on-ones, Pav's lack of 'poachers instinct', Taylor/Smalley never crashing the back post on opposite-flank attacks...) when in attack it must be difficult to set that side out as an all-out attacking force - knowing that if the opposition can break and score you're almost certainly looking for a point at best? It's not an excuse, as such, simply my identification of where I see the problem and how I think it probably can't be addressed at this stage of the season - making the performance at Stockport as much a necessity as a choice... we could have tried to all-out-attack the ten men but who's to say we wouldn't fluff the chances again and then they'd get a 2-on-1 counter attack to level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangerinedreams Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Coupled with the state of the pitch I would say that was a fair assumption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted March 17, 2010 Share Posted March 17, 2010 Saturday was my first game for a while and I actually thought we played very well first half (albeit against :censored:e), we could easily have been 4 up, yet we ended i 1-1 and nearly lost. Maybe that was the death-knell of us giving it a go for this year. Trouble is that the safetey first policy is almost guaranteeing lost points, they need the strength to accept some losses or draws in return for some goals and wins, and it has to be a factor that this isn't easy to do with some of the fan base as they are now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Ritchie Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 Saturday was my first game for a while and I actually thought we played very well first half (albeit against :censored:e), we could easily have been 4 up, yet we ended i 1-1 and nearly lost. Maybe that was the death-knell of us giving it a go for this year. Trouble is that the safetey first policy is almost guaranteeing lost points, they need the strength to accept some losses or draws in return for some goals and wins, and it has to be a factor that this isn't easy to do with some of the fan base as they are now It was 2-2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garcon Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 I agree we could be a top ten side next season. In League Two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 knowing that if the opposition can break and score you're almost certainly looking for a point at best? So we just seem to settle for a point from the off. The objective seems to be to not get beaten. Not the worst idea but not exactly working as it should. We've gone a goal down far too often and with 15 or so scoreless games you sort of know what is going to happen for the rest of the game. Comments like "as always, we go out to win the game" from Dave are crap really. Mainly because, we do not. We go for damage limitation and seem content with 2-0 defeats to the top sides. If that is his way of going out to win, I for one am not looking forward to a game where we in his eyes play for a draw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edhunteruk Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 I'm tired of all this 'next season X/Y/Z' BS. So I thought I'd add to it. Irony, eh? This season has undoubtedly been poor. However I raised a point on weekend to a friend and I'd like to raise it again now. The reason we don't attack teams, and there's no doubting we don't do it enough, is that we're afraid to. I'm talking beyond tactical to simple out-and-out fear. I think the problem is that we know if we go all-out at a side, no matter how poor, we're at risk. We're afraid to attack them and this is more than just tactics. If, for example, you're a midfielder... you know that you 'should' gamble on that 40-60 against and get in to the box at 0-0 to try and find the lead. However you know that if you fail and we're caught short and we go 1-0 down we're basically screwed. I feel that Penney was brought in to fix problems we all knew were there - a lack of discipline and team structure, coupled with an over-attacking side which crossed from adventurous to reckless too many times. The problem is that once we failed to score earlier in the season - a problem Penney openly admitted to and has tried (but admittedly failed) to correct - we developed (both players and managers) this psychological fear of being an attacking side. So, that's the case. How does it apply to next season, should Penney remain? Well - he's shown a willingness to be assertive (example: dropping Brill twice) and if we can correct the fear of attacking sides by finding a goalscorer to partner Pav whilst retaining our stingy defence then there's no reason to feel we can't be a top-ten side next season. This season has been poor, there are problems which remain and problems which have been addressed. I guess my underlying point and hope is we get behind the side and try to produce a more positive environment conducive to winning. i dont think there is anything physcologial going on at all..at the end of the day they are proffessional sportsmen,and get paid accordingly....and i cant accept that they enter the field of play expecting to get beat or lose or draw...it just doesnt happen,not en-mass maybe one or two players have dips in form from time to time...but not the whole team... i have played football and other sports over the years at various levels and not once have i ever gone onto a field and thought..were gonna lose today.i always had a winning attitude and geed up the players around me.... it makes me wonder what thehell they do in training...surely they must play against each other know each others strenghts and weaknesses... latics teams over the years have always played best with two flying wingers and a forward who can hit the net,with a good solid defence....and i think a lot of fans have been spoilt by that over the years...now since talbot and moore we seem more acceptable of hoofing it,instead of playing it along the floor...we have players capable of running with the ball,but dont utilise it enough,and thats down to tactics and training... next season if the manager is still here,he needs to bring in players capable of playing the ball on the floor and passing and moving....otherwise it will be another very long season with crazy chants from the teraces Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 It was 2-2 Ah, I meant the first half when we gave it a go. It looked like we went out to attack and it didn't work in terms of the result up to then so the drawbridge came back up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigfinLatic Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 Saturday was my first game for a while and I actually thought we played very well first half (albeit against :censored:e), we could easily have been 4 up, yet we ended i 1-1 and nearly lost. Maybe that was the death-knell of us giving it a go for this year. Trouble is that the safetey first policy is almost guaranteeing lost points, they need the strength to accept some losses or draws in return for some goals and wins, and it has to be a factor that this isn't easy to do with some of the fan base as they are now Err... you were at Exeter mate???!! Your brain already in the far east? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted March 18, 2010 Share Posted March 18, 2010 Err... you were at Exeter mate???!! Your brain already in the far east? I was? :unsure: I may have meant first home game for a whle... and it's only the Middle East... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 i dont think there is anything physcologial going on at all..at the end of the day they are proffessional sportsmen,and get paid accordingly....and i cant accept that they enter the field of play expecting to get beat or lose or draw...it just doesnt happen,not en-mass maybe one or two players have dips in form from time to time...but not the whole team... i have played football and other sports over the years at various levels and not once have i ever gone onto a field and thought..were gonna lose today.i always had a winning attitude and geed up the players around me.... it makes me wonder what thehell they do in training...surely they must play against each other know each others strenghts and weaknesses... latics teams over the years have always played best with two flying wingers and a forward who can hit the net,with a good solid defence....and i think a lot of fans have been spoilt by that over the years...now since talbot and moore we seem more acceptable of hoofing it,instead of playing it along the floor...we have players capable of running with the ball,but dont utilise it enough,and thats down to tactics and training... next season if the manager is still here,he needs to bring in players capable of playing the ball on the floor and passing and moving....otherwise it will be another very long season with crazy chants from the teraces Professional ha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
De_La_Vega Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 (edited) I agree with the point you make at the head of the piece dude - we have a block when it comes to attacking and I don't think that it is something that requires a dozen new players to rectify. The way I see it is that a lack of goals puts huge pressure on the rest of the team, and impacts everything that the players do. Nonsense comments such as "they are professional sportsmen" have no relevance and are missing the point; if you are a team that struggles to score then your wingers don't attack for fear of conceding and your midfield are scared to get beyond the strikers - in the modern game though you need to do both these things to put the opposition under pressure. As for next season, I'd be generally happy to take most of this squad into the next campaign. I agree that we need to strengthen the defence and my choice would be to try and sign :censored: to play there; thought he showed up well against Leeds and has the physicality to play there. Brill doesn't inspire confidence as a number 1, but Fleming could be back - basically there we just need to make sure that we have the position covered. We obviously need to have a first-rate striker to accompany Abbott, and that has to be the priority - it'll give the whole place such a lift and for the reasons outlined above will make us so much more attacking and confident. I actually think it is really important that we don't rip this squad to pieces over the summer because to my mind that has been a real weakness for us. Every year we look to move on so many players that we start the new season with half a dozen new guys, too many loanees and without a settled first XI. What we have now is decent at full-back, centre-mid and on the wings, while the centre-halves' problem is age. Abbott has been class all year long. Bringing Worthington, Purdie, Holdsworth and a couple of the young lads into the squad will serve us well too. As for releases; obviously Parker who I always said was crap, Lomax and Brill. Alessandra would get another year given his injuries, but he is on last-chance saloon and finally Whitaker would be relegated to a sort of special teams player - get him on late on when the game is stretched and he doesn't have to try and battle for possession, or play him out wide away from home as a sort of free-roamer to mix things up. Edited March 19, 2010 by De_La_Vega Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bring Back Ronnie Moore Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 Aye, I want Penney in for another season for him to give him chance to right his wrongs. After all, we gave him a two year deal, so let's see what he can do in two years. I'd personally like the following to be gone though next season: Parker, Whitaker, Colbeck, Alessandra, Alijofree. I'd like us to try and retain Flahavan, but I think if Palace go down he'll be their number one next season as Speroni will be sold. I'd like to see Fleming back but I doubt he will. I agree with DLV that a striker is a priority....and not a "car boot" player as BB80 would put it. I'd like Paul Heffernan since he's out of contract at the end of the season, but I can see there being competition from the likes of Bristol Rovers, Millwall and those sort of teams. I can see Furman being loaned out for a period next season as well. But we could do with a quality centre mid....being honest we just haven't replace Wellens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
De_La_Vega Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 We definitely haven't replaced Wellens, but I just can't see where we are going to get anyone with that level of quality without a massive outlay which isn't going to be forthcoming. I almost added a playmaker to my wishlist, but I think we have enough there to see us deep into the top half as long as Stephens continues to progress - he could be very important for us next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted March 19, 2010 Share Posted March 19, 2010 We definitely haven't replaced Wellens, but I just can't see where we are going to get anyone with that level of quality without a massive outlay which isn't going to be forthcoming. I almost added a playmaker to my wishlist, but I think we have enough there to see us deep into the top half as long as Stephens continues to progress - he could be very important for us next year. At risk of getting into the Wellens>Whits debate, talk of a playmaker is IMO wide of the mark. We just need good midfielders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
De_La_Vega Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 At risk of getting into the Wellens>Whits debate, talk of a playmaker is IMO wide of the mark. We just need good midfielders. I think we already have some pretty good midfielders to be honest. Stephens looks a very promising player to me; he's got a good eye for a pass and yet can carry the physical side of the game too, he is far from the finished article but if nothing else his set-piece delivery makes him a useful guy to have around. Worthington can provide him with an enforcer in and around him, and it isn't long ago that we were raving about Furman's potential - the guy seems to have hit a bit of a block but if he can get round it then he can be a good player again. As for Whitaker; the guy still picks a good pass and strikes a great ball which to my mind suggests that he is still of value late in the day if we need to try and open the game up. On the wings we're in a bit of a sticky situation, but we aren't bereft of options. Taylor needs to start playing like the player he was, Smalley and Colbeck are both young lads with a bit of something but in urgent need of bringing it out - not promotion material on the surface. Yet add Purdie and Holdsworth into that, and we have options and some decent calibre I think. If Taylor came back into his own then the whole side would be a different proposition. The only way we are going to get near Wellens for quality though is if Scholes decides to do the decent thing. Richie Wellens is different class, as he is showing in the Championship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 I think we already have some pretty good midfielders to be honest. Stephens looks a very promising player to me; he's got a good eye for a pass and yet can carry the physical side of the game too, he is far from the finished article but if nothing else his set-piece delivery makes him a useful guy to have around. Worthington can provide him with an enforcer in and around him, and it isn't long ago that we were raving about Furman's potential - the guy seems to have hit a bit of a block but if he can get round it then he can be a good player again. As for Whitaker; the guy still picks a good pass and strikes a great ball which to my mind suggests that he is still of value late in the day if we need to try and open the game up. On the wings we're in a bit of a sticky situation, but we aren't bereft of options. Taylor needs to start playing like the player he was, Smalley and Colbeck are both young lads with a bit of something but in urgent need of bringing it out - not promotion material on the surface. Yet add Purdie and Holdsworth into that, and we have options and some decent calibre I think. If Taylor came back into his own then the whole side would be a different proposition. The only way we are going to get near Wellens for quality though is if Scholes decides to do the decent thing. Richie Wellens is different class, as he is showing in the Championship. Think I largely agree with you that it's all about the balance. I reckon the problem is the bits and pieces we are faced with at the moment. Stephens, and I think also Furman, are undone by wingers looking at their bootlaces 15 yards behind play, never mind fullbacks. There are a number of options even from what we have, please let's see a coherent version of it. First half last Saturday will do for me, movement, passing, dropping off, it was all good. We need the courage to keep that up when we don't get results Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 (edited) Something is stopping the team attacking as freely as they should. Personally I think it's the manager, not helped by one winger (Taylor) who's scared of getting injured and another (Smalley) who needs help from the coaching staff on how to deliver a cross once he has used his pace to get past the defenders. Looking through the squad of players that belong to Latics, who do we actually have (that I've seen kick a ball)? GK: Brill, Fleming. I would pick Fleming from the 3, but perhaps we need to start again. FB: Lomax, Jacobson, Black and I'll throw Lee in to the mix too. I'm reasonably okay with Jacobson - I am convinced that the manager restrains his attacking tendencies though. Black seems ok to me too, Lomax is a bit limited going forwards. Lee has potential to be a genuine attacking threat, but needs to improve his defensive capabilities. CB: Gregan, Hazell. The lack of cover in this area is a genuine disgrace when you look at the number of players in the squad. The imbalance is something Penney needs to address in the summer. Especially given the age and booking tendencies of Gregan. Wide: Taylor, Smalley, Colbeck. All three over to the coaches - I don't doubt Taylor's ability, but who's giving him the confidence to express it and stand up for himself. Colbeck rarely goes past a man, but can cross. Smalley has pace to die for but no end product. I heard a rumour that Purdie is a wide man too. Perhaps he is the answer on the right if he ever kicks a ball again. Not seen enough of Kirk Millar to know. Central Midfield: Furman, Whitaker, Stephens, Worthington, Holdsworth. I like Stephens. Worth his place for the dead ball alone, but also a little more creative in the middle. I think Whitaker works hard, but just doesn't have enough in the locker. And his goal threat has vanished this season. I recall Holdsworth making a few dangerous runs in to the area, so he is, as a midfielder, a potential attacking threat. Worthington just kicks people. Strikers: Abbott, Alessandra, Brooke, Eaves. I've deliberately left Parker off the list, partly because he's a wide man, partly because he's :censored:e. The fact DP started the season without an obvious striker to play with Abbott is extraordinary. I know we flirted with Byfield, I know Parker has picked up on a dozen or so Pav flicks to go clean through and missed the lot (we average 1.33 points per goal - 12 misses x 1.33 = 16 points = joint 8th position). Clear to me that Abbott is a no brainer in the front line. I like Alessandra, he was right alongside Hughes as the hold up man, but too similar to Abbott and not in the same class. Nice to see appearances from Eaves and Brooke, but neither are ready to start every week. So a glaring gap for me. So a fully fit squad, with no loanees in or out, leads me to suggest the following starting line up: GK: Fleming (but possibly the need to bring in a new keeper) RB: Lee (more for the attacking threat, but work needed defensively) LB: Jacobson (let him cross the halfway line please DP) CB: Gregan CB: Hazell LW: Taylor (get the head shrink in though to get him back to what he was) RW: Smalley (but I really think we need to take a long hard look at this position and find a solution for it) CM: Stephens CM: Holdsworth (open to debate on this one, but I think he has attacking intent and a threat to defenders) ST: Abbott ST: Brooke (but not really ready) The bolded players are the ones I think we have sorted. The others, there are still doubts in my head. So we're nearing the business end of a season and only got 6 out of 11 positions right. The rest are down to "potential" and little else. As for scoring goals? The manager needs to give the midfield and full backs licence to get forwards. I don't think he does that. Edited March 20, 2010 by opinions4u Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
De_La_Vega Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 (edited) I'd go along with that assesment to be fair, although I would put Lee in bold because I think it is long overdue that he gets a game as he is a genuine footballler and I like to see those. I'd also start with Worthington because it is a long time since I really saw a Latics side rough up an opposition midfield succesfully and it is time to start doing so, and also because his limited game gives Stephens licence to push as far as he can. We saw glimpses against Orient of what can happen when the midfield push up beyond the forwards - both goals. At the back we need a new first choice centre-half so that the three can be rotated, and we obviously need a foil for Abbott. Only the one mind; if we have Alessandra, Brooke and Eaves I'd like to see each of them get some time next year so a first team pairing backed by some youth wouldn't appall me... Edited March 20, 2010 by De_La_Vega Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.