Why

All things unofficial about AFC Rushden & Diamonds and general football talk.
Basil
Posts: 350
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 6:43 pm

Re: Why

Post by Basil »

:oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:
AFC Rushden & Diamonds Membership No: 26
rudolph_hucker
Posts: 1750
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 6:22 pm

Re: Why

Post by rudolph_hucker »

Basil wrote::oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops: :oops:

None taken, lol.
You're knocked out with who I am,
Look at you now, you're all in my hands.
Dukes
Posts: 449
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 4:00 pm

Re: Why

Post by Dukes »

Our major problem is we have no width - we try to play the ball through a narrow corridor in front of goal, very easy to defend with lots of bodies there.

We need to get down the flanks behind the defence and cross the ball. That's how we scored today. It really beggars belief that the manager and coaching staff can't see this and continue to play this system. It worked last year but teams have sussed us out now. I also don't think we have the quality in our forward line since Howe has gone.

I'd like to see Robinson recalled and play Day in from of him on the left of midfield because Robbo does a good job there and Day's is wasted in that position. On the other flank have Charles in front of Osano, with two forward - O'Connor and one other ?

I'm not knocking JE and I'm relieved he has signed a new contract but I think it is time to consider how we play with the players we have.
rudolph_hucker
Posts: 1750
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 6:22 pm

Re: Why

Post by rudolph_hucker »

Dukes wrote:Our major problem is we have no width - we try to play the ball through a narrow corridor in front of goal, very easy to defend with lots of bodies there.

I'm reliably informed that a certain left sided player is not too happy at his current club. Oh and he had a blinding game last week.
You're knocked out with who I am,
Look at you now, you're all in my hands.
Everyweeker
Posts: 866
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2009 6:32 pm
Has Liked: 4 times

Re: Why

Post by Everyweeker »

rudolph_hucker wrote:
Dukes wrote:Our major problem is we have no width - we try to play the ball through a narrow corridor in front of goal, very easy to defend with lots of bodies there.

I'm reliably informed that a certain left sided player is not too happy at his current club. Oh and he had a blinding game last week.
I was delighted when Charles finally came on yesterday, and when we got the ball wide to him instead of simply lumping it up to Farrell, we looked a far better team
Member Number: 21
User avatar
TheIncognitoKid
Posts: 3206
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 6:21 pm
Location: Higham Ferrers
Has Liked: 64 times
Been Liked: 36 times

Re: Why

Post by TheIncognitoKid »

Everyweeker wrote:
rudolph_hucker wrote:
Dukes wrote:Our major problem is we have no width - we try to play the ball through a narrow corridor in front of goal, very easy to defend with lots of bodies there.

I'm reliably informed that a certain left sided player is not too happy at his current club. Oh and he had a blinding game last week.
I was delighted when Charles finally came on yesterday, and when we got the ball wide to him instead of simply lumping it up to Farrell, we looked a far better team
He did well against Plops i thought. Sounds crazy, but he could been MOM yesterday IMO!
Mad Dog
Posts: 2067
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2009 11:05 pm
Location: Rushden
Has Liked: 2 times
Been Liked: 5 times

Re: Why

Post by Mad Dog »

TheIncognitoKid wrote:
Everyweeker wrote: I was delighted when Charles finally came on yesterday, and when we got the ball wide to him instead of simply lumping it up to Farrell, we looked a far better team
He did well against Plops i thought. Sounds crazy, but he could been MOM yesterday IMO!
Not man of the match, but he certainly a player who I think is really promising and did play well when he came on. His work rate in particular should be applauded (take note Curtis Osano).
scot
Posts: 115
Joined: Thu Dec 24, 2009 7:56 am

Re: Why

Post by scot »

Mad Dog wrote:
TheIncognitoKid wrote:
Everyweeker wrote: I was delighted when Charles finally came on yesterday, and when we got the ball wide to him instead of simply lumping it up to Farrell, we looked a far better team
He did well against Plops i thought. Sounds crazy, but he could been MOM yesterday IMO!
Not man of the match, but he certainly a player who I think is really promising and did play well when he came on. His work rate in particular should be applauded (take note Curtis Osano).
MOTM couldn't pick one :!: .Charles did ok and i thought we pick up a bit when Johnson and Miller came on.There were so many wasted balls pumped up to Faz yesterday and he was beaten to the majority of them.
AFC R&D Member 480
Dukes
Posts: 449
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 4:00 pm

Re: Why

Post by Dukes »

Wrong system of play, we need wide playes, that simple.

The times in games when players have the ball and look to switch play and see no one there out wide on the opposite wing is dispiriting. So what do they do - well the ball goes backwards and eventually hoofed up field by the goalie and collected by the oppositions defence.

I hear Brazil can play 4-3-3......
We're in Blue Square Bet Premier League - time to get real - and I don'y mean Madrid..! ;)
HiHoRushden&Diamonds
Posts: 541
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 2:00 pm

Re: Why

Post by HiHoRushden&Diamonds »

Dukes wrote:Wrong system of play, we need wide playes, that simple.

The times in games when players have the ball and look to switch play and see no one there out wide on the opposite wing is dispiriting. So what do they do - well the ball goes backwards and eventually hoofed up field by the goalie and collected by the oppositions defence.

I hear Brazil can play 4-3-3......
We're in Blue Square Bet Premier League - time to get real - and I don'y mean Madrid..! ;)
100% Agreed. 4-4-2 is the way forward!
Post Reply