There were lots of good points made about the midfield , and the perceived strengths and weaknesses of the various players.
I believe that the midfield is the key to how we both attack and defend. There is no doubt that we can score goals, and with the occasional blunder thrown in our central defenders are more solid.
Hence our midfield is the problem?. In some earlier contribution, I said that I felt that Macca & Bolder are often outnumbered and overrun in midfield. Even against Wimbledon, where we played so well, there was lots of times when Wimbledon had plenty of time and space on the ball in midfield. When was the last time we really controlled midfield? Would it be ridiculous to say it was when Macca partnered Simmo ?
So by deduction, we are letting teams play against us, rather than stifling them, and us controlling the game, and going on to win comfortably.
Why is this? I think the reason is quite clear in that Cleveland Taylor and Mags are essentially attacking players are not consistent in tackling back and covering . This means we are effectively playing 4 - 2 - 4 , up against 4 - 3 - 3 or 4 - 4 - 2 .
Howzabout, playing 3 dedicated midfield players (perm any 3 from Macca, Bolder, Palmer and Dyer), give Mags a free-roaming role behind the front two. Slightly more defensive, and it means sacrificing a winger, but I believe
it would give us more control, stopping the opposition from playng, making them look less threatening, and protecting our defence. It can be changed back to two wingers if we need to chase the game! The loss of a winger could be mitigated by two full-backs confident in going forward !
By the way I reckon Chris Palmer deserves a place in midfield, and what a dead-ball kicker!
What do you reckon guys!
C'mon you Brewers!
Brewer Dave
The Midfield Debate
posted on 2/12/11
A good thread Brewer Dave.
Just playing Devils Advocate to start, if we keep the same starting 11 and keep playing like this - the league table suggests we will be in the play offs in May. That will do for me. Maybe we shouldn't tinker and just be aware that we will score loads and concede loads.
Personally I don't think Cleveland has had that many good games this season at all. His contributions have been a bit like when he was with us on loan. Sometimes he goes missing for considerable periods of the game. Would it actually be a sacrifice?
I think Amankwaaaaaaah is very good attacking on that side so you have your mitigation as you correctly say.
The problems really arise when a team work out that they can do well out of sticking a player in the hole (or is gulf a better word?) between our defence and our midfield. Cheltenham did it as did Wimbledon.
A lot of our goals are also conceded by sloppiness. Our midfield can be so loose on throw in's in our half of the pitch. Failing to pick up players or not being alert can quickly lead to a chance being created or a goal scored. The first Wimbledon goal was a prime example.
Our throw ins is another discussion point worthy of debate one day but not on here as it would be off topic. How dreadful are we on our own throw ins? No movement and no players seemingly wanting to have the ball.
So, try to iron out some of the perceived problems or stick with what we are doing is another way of looking at it.