Hmmmmm.........
Like Kitchener I was so disappointed by Saturday's performance that I decided not to attempt making any comments for a couple of days!
Before the match I was predicting a 0-0 draw based on our recent good defence and on the fact that we have simply lacked fire power up front!
The match started with us playing Terry Gornell on his own up front in what appeared to be a 4-5-1 formation which just reinforced my doubts about our inability to score! However, I don't accept the comments that some of our players were not trying on Saturday. It was just difficult for some of them to perform from within the selected formation.
For me the first half was simply a dull affair! We seemed to be in control defensively as Newport hardly got near our goalmouth and we played our usual passing game from the keeper and forward through the defence and Captain Coneely. However, beyond a few yards over the half way line we were just as inept as Newport had been!
Immediately after the restart we once again fell foul of our inability to defend an opposing break away after being in an attacking position! I do think though that their lad who scored the first goal deserves a lot of credit as he ran swiftly and glided round Vyner in the style that Chris Eagles used to do for Burnley in his heyday! The lad finished his move with a super shot hit viciously just inside the post. Perhaps Parish could/should have done better in narrowing the angle? (I was at the opposite end of the ground so a bit difficult to judge that one?) We lost confidence and of course Newport's confidence grew!
The second goal was down to defensive errors and slack marking! After that, the game from our point of view was a disaster!
I cannot understand why we play with a lone attacker at home against opposition who we are expected to beat! Lord Stiffly rightly quotes Bill Shankly about the game being 'Simple' and all this talk of differing formations is just nonsense to me. In the modern game to me it is simple...Each team has a goal keeper and then 10 other players on the pitch who should attempt to cover as much of the playing area as is possible, getting forward when in possession and retreating to help defend when not in possession....... So when under pressure with opponents in possession the formation becomes a defensive 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 but as soon as possession is regained and the team should move forward into a 2-4-4 or even 2-3-5. This is based an a central spine of two central defenders, two central midfield players and TWO UP FRONT as well! The two full backs and wingers have to be the ones with more dynamic ability to get up and down the pitch. In attack then the front 5 would be made up of TWO players up front in the middle, two wingers and a surging player from midfield running in behind the two up front! I am clearly talking an attacking philosophy here but I don't see it from Stanley. I am still waiting this season for Sean Mac to attempt to take a full back on down the outside. Now I know that Sean is basically right footed and he he is regularly played on the left side of the field but he is so predictable that he has become easy to play against! Those who know me will know that my favourite move is when a winger on either wing gets round his opposing full back, into the penalty box with the aim of getting to the goal line towards the six yard box. This small part of the pitch is what I consider to be 'The Golden Spot' on the pitch! From here the flying winger pulls the ball back towards the penalty spot leaving the opposing goal keeper and central defenders powerless and presents the ball to our players coming into the penalty box with the goal at their mercy! What we seem to do is get into the opponents half and then pump diagonal crosses from deep (so often over hit!) to a lone striker. (Terry is off side far too often in this situation as well!) The opposing central defenders just love it! Of course what I suggest sounds simple and is hard to achieve but we never ever seem to attempt to get the ball into this area!
On Saturday I struggled to understand the selection from the start of Terry as alone striker and the persistent choice of Sean Mac who has been ineffective for most of the matches that I have seen this season. I value loyalty very highly in life but perhaps Coley is just being too loyal for the good of the team and the paying supporters with these two lads.....I don't know? I understood even less the substitutions in the second half. For me both of the above should have been replaced by Taylor Fletcher and Boco. I was nonplussed too by the replacement of Vyner from his attacking full back position by a forward, (Shay), leaving us with three at the back which created a totally unbalanced formation. Johnno should have stayed on too as he had been far more threatening than Sean Mac. Shay struggled to find a position in the now over crowded forward formation and we totally lost our shape and left ourselves exposed to the possibilty of conceding more goals. Late in the match Newport actually found even more freedom in attack and managed to get players several times into that 'Golden Spot' described and duly scored a third goal and could have had a couple more! Our team is crying out for two up front and two wingers willing to get round the outside of the full backs.
Call me naive but it seems a simple football philosophy to me to compliment a good defence with a positive attacking system higher up the pitch.
For the supporters too we would be entertained far more!
The atmosphere was very flat on Saturday even in the Clayton End and I was disappointed to see some of our supporters leaving early and even more disappointed to hear so much negativity.
Oh for some positivity from somewhere please.....
As true Stanley supporters we all need to ........
KEEP THE FAITH
Things will improve I am sure......
ON STANLEY ON