Quote of the year

[cashman]

Originally Posted by shakermaker

Oh dear. Try being constructive on AccyWeb. More fool me.

As you were...

More pathetic than constructive, in my view, yeh can NEVER see no wrong in the man who manages,

[accybeme]

Crooks: Awkward in front of goal and lacking in confidence but strong and can spot the forward runs of advancing teammates,
well at leased I would agree with the bit in blue

[Redraine]

Originally Posted by shakermaker

From my perspective it isn't as clear cut on the Crooks selection. It certainly isn't as illogical a decision as Beattie's to pick Michael Richardson ( )

Coley is playing a certain system that works for Accy - the 4-2-3-1. In this system you can forgo one goal scoring forward because it is the 1's job to hold up the ball and bring in to play the 3 who could all score. It makes sense both in defence because you pack the midfield and going forward because you have 4 chances to get a goal (in theory). So, the most important attribute for the forward in this formation is hold up play. Not scoring, beating your man or finishing. Of the forwards we have, I see it this way:

- Carver: Tall, willing and full of beans but still learning and as such is unreliable for holding up play for long enough to get midfield in to play.
- Gray: Enthusiastic but works better when playing 2 v 2 because his strength is in moving into channels and stretching defences.
- Crooks: Awkward in front of goal and lacking in confidence but strong and can spot the forward runs of advancing teammates.

I haven't included Bowerman because he's away on loan, nor have I included McCartan because I believe he is more of an inside right than a striker.

To summarise I believe we've struggled because the 3 have underperformed more than the 1. Molyneux has struggled after being robbed of a year by Crewe, O'Sullivan was quality but hit and miss and now not at the club, and Maguire hasn't taken his chances. Mingoia and McCartan have done best in these areas and I think them taking more prominent roles is the way forward.

Just my point of view. I don't like pantomime baddies v goodies; I like logic

Great theory, Shaker, but in fact Crooks doesn't hold the ball up very well at all. He is constantly beaten to the ball by centre halves who easily shepherd him off the ball. When he came on as sub recently the first high ball aimed on his direction landed about 10 yards away after he made no effort at all to get on it, when he should have been busting a gut. The theory is a good one, but he is the worst exponent of it in practice that I have seen. Not his fault though! Of course I haven't seen all his games, so maybe he has starred in those I've missed, but reports suggest not.

[Revived Red]

Originally Posted by shakermaker

it is the 1's job to hold up the ball and bring in to play the 3 who could all score.

Precisely. If he did this, there would be much more sympathy for him. It is not only his failure to score that is the problem. How many assists has he made?

Originally Posted by shakermaker

- Crooks: Awkward in front of goal and lacking in confidence but strong and can spot the forward runs of advancing teammates.

As Redraine says, this assessment is incomplete. His inability to win headers despite his height and his inability to control the ball are a huge worry. He may well be able to spot the forward runs of advancing teammates - the evidence suggests, however, that his passes find an opponent, or the touchline, with unerring accuracy. Spotting teammates and passing to them are two very different things.

[FrankMoody]

Originally Posted by shakermaker

From my perspective it isn't as clear cut on the Crooks selection. It certainly isn't as illogical a decision as Beattie's to pick Michael Richardson ( )

Coley is playing a certain system that works for Accy - the 4-2-3-1. In this system you can forgo one goal scoring forward because it is the 1's job to hold up the ball and bring in to play the 3 who could all score. It makes sense both in defence because you pack the midfield and going forward because you have 4 chances to get a goal (in theory). So, the most important attribute for the forward in this formation is hold up play. Not scoring, beating your man or finishing. Of the forwards we have, I see it this way:

- Carver: Tall, willing and full of beans but still learning and as such is unreliable for holding up play for long enough to get midfield in to play.
- Gray: Enthusiastic but works better when playing 2 v 2 because his strength is in moving into channels and stretching defences.
- Crooks: Awkward in front of goal and lacking in confidence but strong and can spot the forward runs of advancing teammates.

Just my point of view. I don't like pantomime baddies v goodies; I like logic

No offence but contrived drivel.

The furthest forward player in any team should be the main threat. If your theory on this system is correct someone must have forgotten to explain it to Diego Costa because Chelsea (amongst many others) play the same system.

The problem is the players the tactical genius has played there have not been good enough. We've played about 27/28 games this season, only 3 players up top have scored: Carver once, Maguire once (playing as the forward) and Gray 5 times; surely that tells JC something

[yonmon]

Guess that our No.33 has crossed our Forum off his bedtime reading list !..if not he'll be lying on some Psychiatrist's couch come the New Year !.
However, I suppose that if JC picks him then he'll have to turn out and face whatever the fans throw at him ( verbally that is !).
So I presume from this that any blame for his failings , which seem to get worse the more he tries, must be laid at the Managers feet ?.
In my opinion, and unscrewing ever so slightly the lid on a much-loved can of worms, I very much doubt if James Beattie would have persevered with this struggling player.
Is it me or does JC seem a little bit dismayed and disconnected when being quizzed in his post match interviews ?.... Thus coming up with ' the quote of the year'.
Bobby Robson said 'goals win games and make points ...no goals leads to failure !'. and he really knew didn't he !. So where will the goals craved so badly on this Forum come from ?, or is failure to be dogging the Reds for the remainder of the season.

[smudgie]

You make some good points shaker but the fact remains..... Crooks is a defender when he has played for Huddersfield, so we are playing the lad out of position....When we have 3 other strikers available to play.

[shakermaker]

Originally Posted by FrankMoody

No offence but contrived drivel.

The furthest forward player in any team should be the main threat. If your theory on this system is correct someone must have forgotten to explain it to Diego Costa because Chelsea (amongst many others) play the same system.

The problem is the players the tactical genius has played there have not been good enough. We've played about 27/28 games this season, only 3 players up top have scored: Carver once, Maguire once (playing as the forward) and Gray 5 times; surely that tells JC something

It's perfect if you have a player who can do both. We had one to an extent in Terry Gornell, however such players are at a premium and currently we don't have any. I don't agree that CFs have to be the prime scoring threat. Paul Mullin anyone?

I'm not saying Crooks is the perfect fit; just trying to explore the sense behind the selection and our other options in that position. Call it Devil's Advocate if you like, only I don't see our manager as Satan!

On the subject of defenders playing the forward role I'm reminded of Darius Charles at Stevenage. A nasty player in a nasty side but supremely effective because of his defensive capabilities working up top. Indeed if Tom wasn't so crucial for us at the back I dare say he'd be great in the CF role for us.

[Chubbyman]

Originally Posted by shakermaker

It's perfect if you have a player who can do both. We had one to an extent in Terry Gornell, however such players are at a premium and currently we don't have any. I don't agree that CFs have to be the prime scoring threat. Paul Mullin anyone?

I'm not saying Crooks is the perfect fit; just trying to explore the sense behind the selection and our other options in that position. Call it Devil's Advocate if you like, only I don't see our manager as Satan!

On the subject of defenders playing the forward role I'm reminded of Darius Charles at Stevenage. A nasty player in a nasty side but supremely effective because of his defensive capabilities working up top. Indeed if Tom wasn't so crucial for us at the back I dare say he'd be great in the CF role for us.

But could you play Crookes in his defensive role?I think Tom up front would be exciting or the prancing stallion Rob

[cashman]

Originally Posted by shakermaker

It's perfect if you have a player who can do both. We had one to an extent in Terry Gornell, however such players are at a premium and currently we don't have any. I don't agree that CFs have to be the prime scoring threat. Paul Mullin anyone?

I'm not saying Crooks is the perfect fit; just trying to explore the sense behind the selection and our other options in that position. Call it Devil's Advocate if you like, only I don't see our manager as Satan!

On the subject of defenders playing the forward role I'm reminded of Darius Charles at Stevenage. A nasty player in a nasty side but supremely effective because of his defensive capabilities working up top. Indeed if Tom wasn't so crucial for us at the back I dare say he'd be great in the CF role for us.

I agree CFs aint the main scoring threat, "ALL" strikers should be, thats what striker meant when i went to school.!! Crookes is "NOT" a striker, never has been, never will be.So i dont think yer playing devils advocate Shaker, more defending the indefensible.