Tactics

Revived Red · 08-05-2008, 18:33

So lots of us have stated our opinions about the individuals in the squad; about those who are leaving or who ought to leave. Sometimes, though, we ought to move away from the individuals and see how the team functions.

I took special note of what happened in the Bury game. For a start, it was strange to see Andy Todd at left back. But I suppose we have become used to players being played out of position. But how helpful were the changes made in the second half? Firstly, Jay Bell and Toddy were told to switch positions. Then Toddy and Cav switched, with Toddy moving to right midfield and Cav to full back. So we had three different right backs in that game, each with his own take on how to play in that position. As a youngster, Jay Bell concentrated on defensive duties - and quite rightly. When Toddy moved to right back, he was more adventurous and attacked down the wing. When Cav moved there, again he was willing to go forward but tended to move inside rather than down the wing.

Surely that must affect others in the team, especially midfield. A midfielder seeking to release the ball down the right would have had to have three different expectations in the course of the game. That's just one example.

Lots of people have said that we need a striker to play off Paul Mullin. Do we? Is this a tactic to be pursued? What actually happens? Most "passes" to PM are usually lofted clearances from the back. His first job is to make contact with the ball. The fact that he so often does make contact despite pressure from usually two defenders is a testament to PM's positional skill and effort. However, given the defensive pressure he is invariably faced with, it is almost impossible to direct a header to a colleague. So anyone playing off him has no idea where the glanced header is likely to go. In any case, as other teams have already sussed out our limited tactical options in attack, whoever is playing off PM will find himself marked so closely that he is unlikely to get to the ball.

The TV pundits always stress the importance of a team keeping its shape. The classic recent example has been Rangers in their European games. So often outclassed individually, they have done incredibly well because individuals have known and have kept to their designated role within the team. It is difficult to see any shape when Stanley play.

I wonder what others think. All I have tried to do is to move the debate away from the strengths and weaknesses of individuals.