Solving the left side of the defence

brownbear

Regardless of how close to fitness Josh Edwards is, an alternative specialist left back/wing back should be an absolute priority for the next league fixture. The whole balance  of the team has been completely compromised, and will be again unless we have quality left sided back up for Edwards.

Athletico Charlton

I think the issue is, we went into the season needing two left sided defenders for a back 5.  And we had 3.

Bell who was known to be injury prone.
Gillesphey who most guessed would not step up.
Edwards who spent a large time out last season.

It was crazy.  Whoever it was that left us so short needs a proper talking to.  Was it Jones who was happy, Chapel for not delivering, the board for jot supporting, someone else? Who knows.  Even more annoying is that we had the perfect player for there in Small and clearly did not do enough to keep him.

So now we are where we are and no fan dreamt back 4 or 5 is going to work as we don't have the players.  Simple.  Hopefully there is a quality incoming and soon.

Radostanradical

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

The answer is so blindly obvious we can just close the thread after i share the correct answer. We have to go to a back 4, we just dont have the personel to stick with the back 5 and anyone we could recall wouldnt be of the required quality either. So its a back 4 - Bell (until Edwards is back), Jones, Ramsay, Bree. When edwards is back have Jones and Bell in centre and move Ramsay to RB, even if we dont move ramsay to RB just give us so much more options.

The either go 4-5-1 if we need to accept we are going to have to flood the midfield when playing better teams or go 4-3-3 at home or where we can get a win. It’s important to remember that defending isnt just the defences job and our shape at times this season in midfield has been dreadful.

The only thing blindingly obvious is that this is a terrible take. Ramsay and Bell are not back 4 centre backs, they never have been and never will be. It completely removes from their game one of the things they are best at in carrying the ball forward. They are both so key to us being able to progress the ball from the back and in retaining possession, but they aren’t going to be able to do that from CB in a back 4. They are both also brilliant 1v1 defenders in wide areas, Ramsay especially. Playing either of them as a CB in a back 4 is removing most of what makes them brilliant players. 

If we play a back 4, then Jones and Burke are the only 2 centre backs I’d trust in it. And even both of them are much much better in a back 3. We will continue to play a back 3 though, because it’s what we’ve signed each defender we have to play in and it’s what they are best at 

Saying Ramsay and Bell “never” can play as back‑four CBs shows you dont really understsnd the need for versatility. Its ok I will explain it to you as I am feeling charitable.

I literally said Ramsay would ideally play as a RB; can you read?

Both can carry the ball and win 1v1s, but those traits don’t vanish in a flat four.

If you only trust Jones and Burke, explain which attributes make them better in a back four instead of dismissing everyone else. Also the question was how we sort things out without making new signings? If we dont have the required personnel why would we stick with a back 5?

It was cute you thought you had a point but its redundant, if you had bell or Ramsay at CB you wpuld play two midfielders in front of the defence and Jones would have to stick in CB instead of doing the press which he has been caught out with a lot this season. You say they are great at catrying the ball out and I dont disagree but when was the last time we actually saw this? The system we are playing at the moment certainly hasnt allowed them to do it recently. Now read this properly before you respond and respond to what I said as oppossed to what you want me to have said.

Radostanradical

NabySarr said:

So to answer your question 

Everyone fit: Bree, Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Edwards 

Now: Bree, Gough, Jones, Bell, TC

I’d also bring back Zach Mitchell and start him over Gough, if we haven’t brought in a new centre back or got Ramsay/Burke fit again by the Sheff Utd game 

Absolute incredible take - lets call back a kid who cant get a game at Hibs to start in the Championship to shoehorn players (who arent CURRENTLY good enough) in to a system that clearly isnt working. Incredible.

golfaddick

All I know is that you dont ask your attacking midfielders/wingers (TC & Aprer) to defend. 

So, without Edwards I would go with a flat back 4. As at 3pm today that would have been Bree, Jones, Burke & Bell. When Ramsay is fit then you could play a back 5. If Ramsay is fit before Burke is back then a back 4 of Ramsay, Bree, Jones & Bell. 

Just dont try putting square pegs (TC) into round holes (lwb).  Just dont.

Elthamaddick

NabySarr said:

So to answer your question 

Everyone fit: Bree, Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Edwards 

Now: Bree, Gough, Jones, Bell, TC

I’d also bring back Zach Mitchell and start him over Gough, if we haven’t brought in a new centre back or got Ramsay/Burke fit again by the Sheff Utd game 

I agree with this - I'm not a massive fan of Burke - way too slow to play in the back 3 at this level (as is Gillesphy)

wmcf123

Sign a defender this week .  Ideally 2- a centre back and a left wing back.  

MuttleyCAFC

The obvious way to solve it is in the transfer market. 

hoof_it_up_to_benty

Mac's lack of pace is obviously an issue and gives me flashbacks to the days of Llera and Doherty. The oppo will always target him...

NabySarr

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

The answer is so blindly obvious we can just close the thread after i share the correct answer. We have to go to a back 4, we just dont have the personel to stick with the back 5 and anyone we could recall wouldnt be of the required quality either. So its a back 4 - Bell (until Edwards is back), Jones, Ramsay, Bree. When edwards is back have Jones and Bell in centre and move Ramsay to RB, even if we dont move ramsay to RB just give us so much more options.

The either go 4-5-1 if we need to accept we are going to have to flood the midfield when playing better teams or go 4-3-3 at home or where we can get a win. It’s important to remember that defending isnt just the defences job and our shape at times this season in midfield has been dreadful.

The only thing blindingly obvious is that this is a terrible take. Ramsay and Bell are not back 4 centre backs, they never have been and never will be. It completely removes from their game one of the things they are best at in carrying the ball forward. They are both so key to us being able to progress the ball from the back and in retaining possession, but they aren’t going to be able to do that from CB in a back 4. They are both also brilliant 1v1 defenders in wide areas, Ramsay especially. Playing either of them as a CB in a back 4 is removing most of what makes them brilliant players. 

If we play a back 4, then Jones and Burke are the only 2 centre backs I’d trust in it. And even both of them are much much better in a back 3. We will continue to play a back 3 though, because it’s what we’ve signed each defender we have to play in and it’s what they are best at 

Saying Ramsay and Bell “never” can play as back‑four CBs shows you dont really understsnd the need for versatility. Its ok I will explain it to you as I am feeling charitable.

I literally said Ramsay would ideally play as a RB; can you read?

Both can carry the ball and win 1v1s, but those traits don’t vanish in a flat four.

If you only trust Jones and Burke, explain which attributes make them better in a back four instead of dismissing everyone else. Also the question was how we sort things out without making new signings? If we dont have the required personnel why would we stick with a back 5?

It was cute you thought you had a point but its redundant, if you had bell or Ramsay at CB you wpuld play two midfielders in front of the defence and Jones would have to stick in CB instead of doing the press which he has been caught out with a lot this season. You say they are great at catrying the ball out and I dont disagree but when was the last time we actually saw this? The system we are playing at the moment certainly hasnt allowed them to do it recently. Now read this properly before you respond and respond to what I said as oppossed to what you want me to have said.

Bell and Ramsay have both never started a game as a centre back in a back 4 in their entire careers, because no manager is silly enough to waste their best attributes by playing them in that role. Burke and Jones are both actual centre backs so I’d trust them in a 4. Bell has played most of his career as a wing back, recently converted to a LCB in a 3. Ramsay we signed originally as a wing back, and converted to RCB in a 3. 

Bell playing left centre back recently has carried the ball out plenty. He is so vital to the way we play but if you box him in with a left back to his left and a midfielder in front of him then you take that completely out of his game. How many times does he get the ball in our left corner and get out of the situation because of the space he has to work with? 

NabySarr

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

So to answer your question 

Everyone fit: Bree, Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Edwards 

Now: Bree, Gough, Jones, Bell, TC

I’d also bring back Zach Mitchell and start him over Gough, if we haven’t brought in a new centre back or got Ramsay/Burke fit again by the Sheff Utd game 

Absolute incredible take - lets call back a kid who cant get a game at Hibs to start in the Championship to shoehorn players (who arent CURRENTLY good enough) in to a system that clearly isnt working. Incredible.

Ok then let’s hear yours, without cheating and including Ramsay who is injured. 

The question was to pick a defence based on what we have available now. Bree, Jones and Bell are the obvious picks but then it’s either Mitchell, Gough or Gillesphey. Every fan on here was agreeing Gough should have come on instead of Gillesphey last night, I think Mitchell is better than Gough 

Obviously Mitchell probably isn’t ready for the championship but if we haven’t signed a new player and don’t have Ramsay or Burke back then who else do you play? 

NabySarr

golfaddick said:

All I know is that you dont ask your attacking midfielders/wingers (TC & Aprer) to defend. 

So, without Edwards I would go with a flat back 4. As at 3pm today that would have been Bree, Jones, Burke & Bell. When Ramsay is fit then you could play a back 5. If Ramsay is fit before Burke is back then a back 4 of Ramsay, Bree, Jones & Bell. 

Just dont try putting square pegs (TC) into round holes (lwb).  Just dont.

“Don’t try putting square pegs into round holes” and then puts Bree at centre back. Incredible 

se9addick

DOUCHER said:

i would have played fullah there and kept TC up top or in the hole 

Now there an idea, let’s start with 12 players! 

Pelham123

Would have liked to have seen Enslin given some time at some stage.

fenaddick

Pelham123 said:

Would have liked to have seen Enslin given some time at some stage.

It's very telling that he hasn't been. Kid needs a loan like Casey to probably find a home elsewhere

NabySarr

NabySarr said:

TC is a better option than Fullah and Apter at LWB, he’s better defensively and Jones knows this which is why he picks him there ahead of them. 

If you examine the 2 games that Fullah and Apter played, they had much less defensive responsibility tactically than TC has had in a lot of his games 

Fullah vs Birmingham - Fullah was tasked with pressing high up to Birmingham’s right back Iwata. Gillesphey dealt with the dangerous Patrick Roberts behind. Iwata is not a natural full back, he’s a central midfield player and drifts centrally. So Fullah wasn’t playing a traditional wing back role, he was pressing Iwata and then following him more central. Jones probably picked Fullah for this game because of his central midfield familiarity as he ended up following Iwata centrally a lot in our man to man system 


Apter vs Oxford - Bizarrely Oxford obviously hadn’t done much research and didn’t try and target our left hand side. They played a back 5 and their RWB was Brodie Spencer who has very little attacking threat, Oxford were also terrible and offered no threat in general. It was a much easier game for Apter defensively than anything TC has had to contend with. Oxford subbed on an attacking RWB later in the game but Apter had already been subbed off for TC by that point. 

TC isn’t good at wing back, it’s not his position. But he’s had some alright games there, Wrexham away probably his best defensively. If either Apter or Fullah had been chucked in to some of the games TC has been at LWB then they probably would have struggled even more than TC did. Tactically Fullah made more sense against Birmingham and Oxford’s lack of threat meant Apter was fine against Oxford. But both of them would have probably been torn apart by Kabore at Wrexham or by Brittain at Middlesbrough or Van Ewijk at Coventry but TC put a shift in and did ok. 

I don’t think it’s fair to compare Apter and Fullah’s games at wing back to TC’s, when their games were much easier due to the opposition/tactics of the game 

Going back to this: 

Apter played LWB against Brodie Spencer - 0 goals or assists this season 

Fullah played against Iwata - a central midfielder so a very different task to a traditional full back/wing back 

TC has played LWB against 

Kabore - 3 assists in 10 games this season 
Tchamedeu - 1 Goal, 1 assist, 
Van Ewijk (played against twice) - 6 assists this season 
Brittain - 4 assists this season 
Devlin - 3 goals 1 assist this season 
Miller - 1 goal 2 assists this season 

If Apter or Fullah had gone up against some of those full backs/wing backs that TC has been up against, I think they’d have been able to do a lot more damage against us. If TC had played against Birmingham or Oxford we’d have been no worse off 

Quite clear that Jones knew that TC needed a rest, so picked the 2 easiest games for a LWB to rest him and play the others. Jones watches them all every day, if Apter or Fullah were better at LWB than TC then they’d be playing there 

Mendonca In Asdas

aso914 said:

sammy391 said:

Surely rousillion must be near fit enough? If there’s no interest in him playing, why is he travelling with the squad! 

Allegedly he’s already gone. Not sure if that’s true. 

Gone where, Nando's?

Radostanradical

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

The answer is so blindly obvious we can just close the thread after i share the correct answer. We have to go to a back 4, we just dont have the personel to stick with the back 5 and anyone we could recall wouldnt be of the required quality either. So its a back 4 - Bell (until Edwards is back), Jones, Ramsay, Bree. When edwards is back have Jones and Bell in centre and move Ramsay to RB, even if we dont move ramsay to RB just give us so much more options.

The either go 4-5-1 if we need to accept we are going to have to flood the midfield when playing better teams or go 4-3-3 at home or where we can get a win. It’s important to remember that defending isnt just the defences job and our shape at times this season in midfield has been dreadful.

The only thing blindingly obvious is that this is a terrible take. Ramsay and Bell are not back 4 centre backs, they never have been and never will be. It completely removes from their game one of the things they are best at in carrying the ball forward. They are both so key to us being able to progress the ball from the back and in retaining possession, but they aren’t going to be able to do that from CB in a back 4. They are both also brilliant 1v1 defenders in wide areas, Ramsay especially. Playing either of them as a CB in a back 4 is removing most of what makes them brilliant players. 

If we play a back 4, then Jones and Burke are the only 2 centre backs I’d trust in it. And even both of them are much much better in a back 3. We will continue to play a back 3 though, because it’s what we’ve signed each defender we have to play in and it’s what they are best at 

Saying Ramsay and Bell “never” can play as back‑four CBs shows you dont really understsnd the need for versatility. Its ok I will explain it to you as I am feeling charitable.

I literally said Ramsay would ideally play as a RB; can you read?

Both can carry the ball and win 1v1s, but those traits don’t vanish in a flat four.

If you only trust Jones and Burke, explain which attributes make them better in a back four instead of dismissing everyone else. Also the question was how we sort things out without making new signings? If we dont have the required personnel why would we stick with a back 5?

It was cute you thought you had a point but its redundant, if you had bell or Ramsay at CB you wpuld play two midfielders in front of the defence and Jones would have to stick in CB instead of doing the press which he has been caught out with a lot this season. You say they are great at catrying the ball out and I dont disagree but when was the last time we actually saw this? The system we are playing at the moment certainly hasnt allowed them to do it recently. Now read this properly before you respond and respond to what I said as oppossed to what you want me to have said.

Bell and Ramsay have both never started a game as a centre back in a back 4 in their entire careers, because no manager is silly enough to waste their best attributes by playing them in that role. Burke and Jones are both actual centre backs so I’d trust them in a 4. Bell has played most of his career as a wing back, recently converted to a LCB in a 3. Ramsay we signed originally as a wing back, and converted to RCB in a 3. 

Bell playing left centre back recently has carried the ball out plenty. He is so vital to the way we play but if you box him in with a left back to his left and a midfielder in front of him then you take that completely out of his game. How many times does he get the ball in our left corner and get out of the situation because of the space he has to work with? 

So its mad/insane because they had never played as a CB in a back 4 but they had never done it in a back 3 and that was good. Omg what was I expecting a professional footballer playing the exact same position but with one less person. As said I agree its not their best position but the point here is sprting out defence with what we have not hypotheical situations. Once Edwards is back we will more than likely see Bell back at CB.

Make it make sense.

swords_alive

Mendonca In Asdas said:

aso914 said:

sammy391 said:

Surely rousillion must be near fit enough? If there’s no interest in him playing, why is he travelling with the squad! 

Allegedly he’s already gone. Not sure if that’s true. 

Gone where, Nando's?

He clearly does what he likes, whether it's smirking at others warming up, eating all the sweets on the team bus, leading others on walkabouts to local attractions pre-match, and now not moving on to West Ham when we showed him the door before the game yesterday!!?

Radostanradical

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

So to answer your question 

Everyone fit: Bree, Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Edwards 

Now: Bree, Gough, Jones, Bell, TC

I’d also bring back Zach Mitchell and start him over Gough, if we haven’t brought in a new centre back or got Ramsay/Burke fit again by the Sheff Utd game 

Absolute incredible take - lets call back a kid who cant get a game at Hibs to start in the Championship to shoehorn players (who arent CURRENTLY good enough) in to a system that clearly isnt working. Incredible.

Ok then let’s hear yours, without cheating and including Ramsay who is injured. 

The question was to pick a defence based on what we have available now. Bree, Jones and Bell are the obvious picks but then it’s either Mitchell, Gough or Gillesphey. Every fan on here was agreeing Gough should have come on instead of Gillesphey last night, I think Mitchell is better than Gough 

Obviously Mitchell probably isn’t ready for the championship but if we haven’t signed a new player and don’t have Ramsay or Burke back then who else do you play? 

I gave my answer and in my expert opinion it was correct but Im sure those who have never played the game to such a high standard as mine are right its insane to expect a player playing CB to carry on in a 2 instead of a 3. So for me right now -

Bree Jones Macca Bell. 

And then you use your midfield to plug gaps, ultimately like the last few seasons (Bar last and start of season) our defence as a team hasnt been great. We started okay but our system has been figured out.

NabySarr

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

So to answer your question 

Everyone fit: Bree, Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Edwards 

Now: Bree, Gough, Jones, Bell, TC

I’d also bring back Zach Mitchell and start him over Gough, if we haven’t brought in a new centre back or got Ramsay/Burke fit again by the Sheff Utd game 

Absolute incredible take - lets call back a kid who cant get a game at Hibs to start in the Championship to shoehorn players (who arent CURRENTLY good enough) in to a system that clearly isnt working. Incredible.

Ok then let’s hear yours, without cheating and including Ramsay who is injured. 

The question was to pick a defence based on what we have available now. Bree, Jones and Bell are the obvious picks but then it’s either Mitchell, Gough or Gillesphey. Every fan on here was agreeing Gough should have come on instead of Gillesphey last night, I think Mitchell is better than Gough 

Obviously Mitchell probably isn’t ready for the championship but if we haven’t signed a new player and don’t have Ramsay or Burke back then who else do you play? 

I gave my answer and in my expert opinion it was correct but Im sure those who have never played the game to such a high standard as mine are right its insane to expect a player playing CB to carry on in a 2 instead of a 3. So for me right now -

Bree Jones Macca Bell. 

And then you use your midfield to plug gaps, ultimately like the last few seasons (Bar last and start of season) our defence as a team hasnt been great. We started okay but our system has been figured out.

Anyone who knows anything about football knows that playing in a 3 is very different and the attributes you need are different to playing in a 2. That’s why Ramsay and Bell have never been put there starting a game and probably never will be 

So you switch to a back 4 (with Gillesphey in a 2 which is a whole other issue of madness) are you then changing the only good thing about our team at the moment which is Leaburn and Kelman playing up front together? Surely someone who has played to such a high standard wouldn’t be changing that? 

Radostanradical

Mendonca In Asdas said:

aso914 said:

sammy391 said:

Surely rousillion must be near fit enough? If there’s no interest in him playing, why is he travelling with the squad! 

Allegedly he’s already gone. Not sure if that’s true. 

Gone where, Nando's?

He was last seen crying on the floor outside the now closed Pizza Hut next to the Odeon "On pouvait lire en ligne qu'ils proposaient toujours le buffet".

Scoham

NabySarr said:

So to answer your question 

Everyone fit: Bree, Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Edwards 

Now: Bree, Gough, Jones, Bell, TC

I’d also bring back Zach Mitchell and start him over Gough, if we haven’t brought in a new centre back or got Ramsay/Burke fit again by the Sheff Utd game 

The problem with that (or similar such as Ramsay) at wing back is it leaves us lacking pace and width going forward.

You could play TC up front with Kelman or Leaburn, but that left one of them effectively playing as a lone striker.

It’ll be interesting to see what we eventually settle on.

NabySarr

Scoham said:

NabySarr said:

So to answer your question 

Everyone fit: Bree, Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Edwards 

Now: Bree, Gough, Jones, Bell, TC

I’d also bring back Zach Mitchell and start him over Gough, if we haven’t brought in a new centre back or got Ramsay/Burke fit again by the Sheff Utd game 

The problem with that (or similar such as Ramsay) at wing back is it leaves us lacking pace and width going forward.

You could play TC up front with Kelman or Leaburn, but that left one of them effectively playing as a lone striker.

It’ll be interesting to see what we eventually settle on.

That’s a good point, it’s definitely our best defensive set up. I think a fit Bree and Edwards have enough about them going forward for it to work but there’d definitely be some games you’d have to get Apter/TC into the team somehow 

Radostanradical

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

So to answer your question 

Everyone fit: Bree, Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Edwards 

Now: Bree, Gough, Jones, Bell, TC

I’d also bring back Zach Mitchell and start him over Gough, if we haven’t brought in a new centre back or got Ramsay/Burke fit again by the Sheff Utd game 

Absolute incredible take - lets call back a kid who cant get a game at Hibs to start in the Championship to shoehorn players (who arent CURRENTLY good enough) in to a system that clearly isnt working. Incredible.

Ok then let’s hear yours, without cheating and including Ramsay who is injured. 

The question was to pick a defence based on what we have available now. Bree, Jones and Bell are the obvious picks but then it’s either Mitchell, Gough or Gillesphey. Every fan on here was agreeing Gough should have come on instead of Gillesphey last night, I think Mitchell is better than Gough 

Obviously Mitchell probably isn’t ready for the championship but if we haven’t signed a new player and don’t have Ramsay or Burke back then who else do you play? 

I gave my answer and in my expert opinion it was correct but Im sure those who have never played the game to such a high standard as mine are right its insane to expect a player playing CB to carry on in a 2 instead of a 3. So for me right now -

Bree Jones Macca Bell. 

And then you use your midfield to plug gaps, ultimately like the last few seasons (Bar last and start of season) our defence as a team hasnt been great. We started okay but our system has been figured out.

Anyone who knows anything about football knows that playing in a 3 is very different and the attributes you need are different to playing in a 2. That’s why Ramsay and Bell have never been put there starting a game and probably never will be 

So you switch to a back 4 (with Gillesphey in a 2 which is a whole other issue of madness) are you then changing the only good thing about our team at the moment which is Leaburn and Kelman playing up front together? Surely someone who has played to such a high standard wouldn’t be changing that? 

Thank you for explaining 2 is different to 3, I feel like my parents may have wasted money on my education now.

Yes it is but is it so different we couldnt expect professional players to do it when we have an injury crisis? Macca isnt great ill agree but he is certainly better than option right now than a kid or a kid that cant get a game at Hibs.

You could even keep Kelman and Leaburn playing up top together in a diamond or as part of a 3. Do you honestly think its better when we have a injury crisis to play all our defenders if we get another injury or two at centre back who starts?

NabySarr

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

So to answer your question 

Everyone fit: Bree, Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Edwards 

Now: Bree, Gough, Jones, Bell, TC

I’d also bring back Zach Mitchell and start him over Gough, if we haven’t brought in a new centre back or got Ramsay/Burke fit again by the Sheff Utd game 

Absolute incredible take - lets call back a kid who cant get a game at Hibs to start in the Championship to shoehorn players (who arent CURRENTLY good enough) in to a system that clearly isnt working. Incredible.

Ok then let’s hear yours, without cheating and including Ramsay who is injured. 

The question was to pick a defence based on what we have available now. Bree, Jones and Bell are the obvious picks but then it’s either Mitchell, Gough or Gillesphey. Every fan on here was agreeing Gough should have come on instead of Gillesphey last night, I think Mitchell is better than Gough 

Obviously Mitchell probably isn’t ready for the championship but if we haven’t signed a new player and don’t have Ramsay or Burke back then who else do you play? 

I gave my answer and in my expert opinion it was correct but Im sure those who have never played the game to such a high standard as mine are right its insane to expect a player playing CB to carry on in a 2 instead of a 3. So for me right now -

Bree Jones Macca Bell. 

And then you use your midfield to plug gaps, ultimately like the last few seasons (Bar last and start of season) our defence as a team hasnt been great. We started okay but our system has been figured out.

Anyone who knows anything about football knows that playing in a 3 is very different and the attributes you need are different to playing in a 2. That’s why Ramsay and Bell have never been put there starting a game and probably never will be 

So you switch to a back 4 (with Gillesphey in a 2 which is a whole other issue of madness) are you then changing the only good thing about our team at the moment which is Leaburn and Kelman playing up front together? Surely someone who has played to such a high standard wouldn’t be changing that? 

Thank you for explaining 2 is different to 3, I feel like my parents may have wasted money on my education now.

Yes it is but is it so different we couldnt expect professional players to do it when we have an injury crisis? Macca isnt great ill agree but he is certainly better than option right now than a kid or a kid that cant get a game at Hibs.

You could even keep Kelman and Leaburn playing up top together in a diamond or as part of a 3. Do you honestly think it’s better when we have an injury crisis to play all our defenders if we get another injury or two at centre back who starts?

Personally I’d rather play Mitchell or Gough in a 3 alongside Jones and bell, than play Gillesphey in a 2. It’s a lot easier to cover a weakness in a back 3 than it is in a 2. 

We’ve seen us try a diamond against Middlesbrough and it wasn’t pretty, and if we hadn’t changed it early in the game we’d have been absolutely thrashed. You’re also then relying on full backs for width which risks Bell getting re-injured and also further exposes Gillesphey at LCB. 

4-3-3 with Kelman out wide is also not good at all when he’s finally looking great as a striker next to Leaburn. The whole squad has been built to play 3-5-2 so it just is our best set up. All the defenders are better in a 3, none of the strikers could play at this level as a lone striker. 

This whole discussion basically sums up Jones problem recently. Whatever team and formation he picks it isn’t good enough for this level with the players we have available. He’s picking what he thinks is the least bad option, and also closest to our usual system so that when we have a good RCB and LWB available he can plug them in and we will quickly improve 

As for your last point I’m confused. Your back 4 had all of our senior fit defenders playing in it. Mine has Gillesphey on the bench spare, so if there was another injury then him or Gough could step in 

Radostanradical

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

Radostanradical said:

NabySarr said:

So to answer your question 

Everyone fit: Bree, Ramsay, Jones, Bell, Edwards 

Now: Bree, Gough, Jones, Bell, TC

I’d also bring back Zach Mitchell and start him over Gough, if we haven’t brought in a new centre back or got Ramsay/Burke fit again by the Sheff Utd game 

Absolute incredible take - lets call back a kid who cant get a game at Hibs to start in the Championship to shoehorn players (who arent CURRENTLY good enough) in to a system that clearly isnt working. Incredible.

Ok then let’s hear yours, without cheating and including Ramsay who is injured. 

The question was to pick a defence based on what we have available now. Bree, Jones and Bell are the obvious picks but then it’s either Mitchell, Gough or Gillesphey. Every fan on here was agreeing Gough should have come on instead of Gillesphey last night, I think Mitchell is better than Gough 

Obviously Mitchell probably isn’t ready for the championship but if we haven’t signed a new player and don’t have Ramsay or Burke back then who else do you play? 

I gave my answer and in my expert opinion it was correct but Im sure those who have never played the game to such a high standard as mine are right its insane to expect a player playing CB to carry on in a 2 instead of a 3. So for me right now -

Bree Jones Macca Bell. 

And then you use your midfield to plug gaps, ultimately like the last few seasons (Bar last and start of season) our defence as a team hasnt been great. We started okay but our system has been figured out.

Anyone who knows anything about football knows that playing in a 3 is very different and the attributes you need are different to playing in a 2. That’s why Ramsay and Bell have never been put there starting a game and probably never will be 

So you switch to a back 4 (with Gillesphey in a 2 which is a whole other issue of madness) are you then changing the only good thing about our team at the moment which is Leaburn and Kelman playing up front together? Surely someone who has played to such a high standard wouldn’t be changing that? 

Thank you for explaining 2 is different to 3, I feel like my parents may have wasted money on my education now.

Yes it is but is it so different we couldnt expect professional players to do it when we have an injury crisis? Macca isnt great ill agree but he is certainly better than option right now than a kid or a kid that cant get a game at Hibs.

You could even keep Kelman and Leaburn playing up top together in a diamond or as part of a 3. Do you honestly think it’s better when we have an injury crisis to play all our defenders if we get another injury or two at centre back who starts?

Personally I’d rather play Mitchell or Gough in a 3 alongside Jones and bell, than play Gillesphey in a 2. It’s a lot easier to cover a weakness in a back 3 than it is in a 2. 

We’ve seen us try a diamond against Middlesbrough and it wasn’t pretty, and if we hadn’t changed it early in the game we’d have been absolutely thrashed. You’re also then relying on full backs for width which risks Bell getting re-injured and also further exposes Gillesphey at LCB. 

4-3-3 with Kelman out wide is also not good at all when he’s finally looking great as a striker next to Leaburn. The whole squad has been built to play 3-5-2 so it just is our best set up. All the defenders are better in a 3, none of the strikers could play at this level as a lone striker. 

This whole discussion basically sums up Jones problem recently. Whatever team and formation he picks it isn’t good enough for this level with the players we have available. He’s picking what he thinks is the least bad option, and also closest to our usual system so that when we have a good RCB and LWB available he can plug them in and we will quickly improve 

As for your last point I’m confused. Your back 4 had all of our senior fit defenders playing in it. Mine has Gillesphey on the bench spare, so if there was another injury then him or Gough could step in 

I cant be blthered with this as you arent actually reading what I write and just imagine arguments you want me to have made. Your back 5 has our senior players on the bench for a kid or a kid that cant get a game for Hibs. Its painfully obvious to see you (and others) have never played the game professionally.

redman

This thread started out as an interesting problem to which there is no easy and obvious solution with our current available players. Unfortunately now fallen into a usual Charlton Life slanging match between 2 people throwing their toys out of the pram. Please can everyone grow up and respect other people's opinion, even if you don't agree with them. 

Radostanradical

redman said:

This thread started out as an interesting problem to which there is no easy and obvious solution with our current available players. Unfortunately now fallen into a usual Charlton Life slanging match between 2 people throwing their toys out of the pram. Please can everyone grow up and respect other people's opinion, even if you don't agree with them. 

Fair enough will wind my neck in.

Braziliance

redman said:

This thread started out as an interesting problem to which there is no easy and obvious solution with our current available players. Unfortunately now fallen into a usual Charlton Life slanging match between 2 people throwing their toys out of the pram. Please can everyone grow up and respect other people's opinion, even if you don't agree with them. 

That would never happen on Charlton Life