Maher was at his,

[SUFC Employee]

Why was Maher the one left at the back towards the end of the game when we were all out attacking?

 

[sufcintheprem]

Quote[/b] (Guest @ April 24 2005,09:52)]Whilst Nicolau seemed to be sleeping for the first goal, so was our so-called holding midfielder and captain. Mooney was given far too much time and space to thread the ball through for the first goal.

I'm not sure where Maher was, but surely the holding midfielder should be the one picking up Mooney when he drops deep? Nicolau's defending was poor, but if our midfield (and we had enough central midfielders playing) had got tight on Mooney that Oxford move would have been snuffed out a lot earlier.

Oh, come on, is that true?

Oxford were playing with 4 defensive midfielders for most of the game and a very deep back line. If our 4 defenders can't handle their 2 attackers and any oncoming wingers, something's seriously wrong. Nicky was badly out of position but, credit to the lad on the wing, it was a superb ball in that would cause anyone problems.

In my opinion, Che wouldn't have been caught out that badly, but there we go. I'm not going to get on Nicky's back because it'll be counterproductive but I do hope those who were calling for half the team to be dropped and Nicky to be brought in can see that he's not as good as perhaps the tainted memories would suggest.

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (sufcintheprem @ April 24 2005,11:17)]

Quote[/b] (Guest @ April 24 2005,09:52)]Whilst Nicolau seemed to be sleeping for the first goal, so was our so-called holding midfielder and captain. Mooney was given far too much time and space to thread the ball through for the first goal.

I'm not sure where Maher was, but surely the holding midfielder should be the one picking up Mooney when he drops deep? Nicolau's defending was poor, but if our midfield (and we had enough central midfielders playing) had got tight on Mooney that Oxford move would have been snuffed out a lot earlier.

Oh, come on, is that true?

Oxford were playing with 4 defensive midfielders for most of the game and a very deep back line.  If our 4 defenders can't handle their 2 attackers and any oncoming wingers, something's seriously wrong.  Nicky was badly out of position but, credit to the lad on the wing, it was a superb ball in that would cause anyone problems.

In my opinion, Che wouldn't have been caught out that badly, but there we go.  I'm not going to get on Nicky's back because it'll be counterproductive but I do hope those who were calling for half the team to be dropped and Nicky to be brought in can see that he's not as good as perhaps the tainted memories would suggest.

Of course its true. Maher is a holding midfielder. He offers virtually nothing going forward. His task in the team is to sit in front and protect the back 4. Then when we get the ball his job is to spray it out to someone who can do something with it. It is therefore Maher's responsibility to pick up Mooney and prevent the defence being dragged out of position. If maher isn't going to pick up strikers dropping into midfield, or midfielders getting forward then frankly he is not worth a place in the side as he does not offer enough offensively.

Saturday's game cruelly exposed Maher's limitations going forward. It showed that he is not creative, that he relies on other players to do the creative stuff. I'm not saying this as a criticism of Maher, I'm doing it to try and explain Maher's role in the team. Pettefer has a similar role, where his job is to tighten up our midfield and retain possession rather than create anything.

If we want someone to sit in front and protect the defence, and then play simple square balls to someone who can create something, then Maher is the best at the club at this role, but Maher is limited to this role.

I'd also say Maher isn't nearly as influential as many (in particular you and ORM) think. The far more influential figure in the Southend midfield is Mark Gower. When Gower is missing, Maher is far less effective as Maher hasn't the creativity necessary to break down defences. If the last month has shown anything, it has been Gower's importance to the side - its generally Gower who makes us tick, not Maher.

 

[sufcintheprem]

Still disagree. Mooney didn't run that far and when he passed the ball, he'd just run ten yards across the edge of the box. He certainly wasn't playing the ball from deep.

No player, however influential, can be creative when the front two are in the defenders pockets and there is no width to the midfield. When Gower came on, he offered a lot more width and was virtually the first player in our team to actually take a player on. Maher works well with Gower but if you take Maher away from Gower, he won't see nearly as much of the ball..

 

[prittlewellshrimper]

IMHO Gower is a good Div 2 player but I cant see him unlocking Div 1 defences ( if ) we get there that is BUT his fitness level is his biggest downfall , I have seem him in training a number of times and he just doesnt strike me as an athlete ,and in modern day football the fitness of wide midfield players is crucial. As I warned before the game yesterday Nicky Nic doesnt claim to be or want to be played out of his best position any more than any other squad member , and I feel a bit for him that he gets judged . Its a bit like asking Bentley to play right back or something and taking it out on him if he f.cked up. Not sure where my sympathy comes from for any pro footy player who lead pretty easy lives other than I am left footed meself??? I feel happier when Mayer plays as he does seem to pull the whole thing together when on song but his game relies on other players looking for space as soon as he (Mayer) has the ball . On the " fighting amongst our own " issue , unfortunately it has made me , and Im sure many others, about going to Grimsby and as for taking my 7 year old daughter that is well n truly of the agenda now . What a sad reflection but I couldnt risk putting her at personal physical harm from the CHAV SCUM . One last thing did any one see at Cardiff the knob in a white jacket and sunglasses ( sound familiar ?) who stood on his seat when Wrexhams second went in and stood facing our Welsh friends ( we were in the lower tier nearest the Wrexham fans ) arms spread wide , givin it the old "COME ON THEN " routine ,face knarled up with hate only for .......... wait for it ............. his strides to fall to his ankles and to add insult to injury he was "going Commando !!!" .... funnier still he didnt realise his pedicament for a good few seconds and continued to stand on his seat looking a complete pratt ..... poetic justice.... PRICELESS........... ps when does Tilly,s contract expire ?? get him on another asap i say . see you all Saturday .

 

[Angell Delight]

Quote[/b] (Kris @ April 24 2005,00:12)]

Quote[/b] (stickyboy @ April 23 2005,23:51)]the 2 games I think Maher missed were 3-0 wins V Rochdale and Cheltenham so we are not too bad without him!

- he also annoys me when he plays an utter crap ball or whatever and then tries to moan at every other player about it

Surely the fact that Tilly resorted to getting a Championship player on loan to cover Kev's suspension underlines how important Kev is to the team? I doubt we'd have beaten either Cheltenham or Rochdale if one of our own squad players had stood in instead - just look at our two results and performances the previous time he had a suspension.

Thankyou, somebody needed to say it and if you hadn't Kris I would have done. So Maher's had a couple of poor games, big deal - if we'd been without him this season we'd have had no chance of being involved in a title dogfight. When are people gonna realise just how important Maher is to this team?

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (sufcintheprem @ April 24 2005,13:31)]Still disagree.  Mooney didn't run that far and when he passed the ball, he'd just run ten yards across the edge of the box.  He certainly wasn't playing the ball from deep.

No player, however influential, can be creative when the front two are in the defenders pockets and there is no width to the midfield.  When Gower came on, he offered a lot more width and was virtually the first player in our team to actually take a player on.  Maher works well with Gower but if you take Maher away from Gower, he won't see nearly as much of the ball..

Do you really not consider running ten yards across the edge of the box "that far"? How far can players run across the edge of the area unchallenged before it is a problem?

Besides Mooney was dropping off, it may not be that deep, but it was deep enough for the central defenders not to want to follow him, because by following him they would have left a big hole in the defence. That is why we play a holding midfielder, to sit in front of the midfield and protect our defence from players doing that.

However for the first goal, Mooney was not closed down and was given too much time to play a through ball to carve us open. The way you stop goals like that is to close players down. Fortunately we don't often meet players in League 2 who have Mooney's movement and footballing brain (Darlington with Hignett and Wijnhard are the only other team I can think of - and we lost 4-0 at their place). If we had Mooney and Eastwood up front we would walk this division - despite our current defensive shortcomings.

Whislt the lack of width meant play was cramped and space at a premium, the main problem was that our midfield was holding onto the ball for too long. Eastwood and Dudfield made numerous runs, only for the midfield to take another unnecessary touch instead of playing one of our strikers through on goal. Maher was by no means the only guilty culprit, but it illustrated the limits of his game as without the outlet of a sideways pass to Gower, Maher looked lost. In fact the only midfielder who looked as if he knew what to do with the ball was Guttridge.

 

[Jonesy tap-in]

Even Zidane would've had difficulty finding a blue shirt on saturday. As i've said elsewhere, Maher couldn't really do too much because he had so few options, either up front or out wide. I feel on the whole we were tactically outmanoeuvered by oxford.

And as for this apparent consensus that sideways or backwards passes are bad, can i say, "what a load of absolute rubbish". If there's no available forward pass it's always preferable to pass sideways or backwards and keep possession rather than just lump it or play aimlessly speculative passes into the opposition's third. It really gets on my baps when the crowd start groaning if probing play down one side of the pitch, for example, doesn't provide anything and the ball is sent backwards so the team can recycle and start again. Some people just don't seem to realise that you can't ping hollywood passes around the pitch every other ball. Retaining possession and keeping the ball moving enables the team to move the opposition around a lot more, creating openings 8 or 9 passes down the line.

On saturday, maher tried a few over the top balls out to the channels, but nothing came of them so he tried to keep possession and keep things moving. If he'd been trying to pick out killer passes the whole he would've got abuse for wasting possession as they lapped up everything in the air (did wanless even touch the ball with his feet?) and alot of the stuff on the deck.

To conclude, "lay off maher!"

 

[prittlewellshrimper]

Quote[/b] (Jonesy tap-in @ April 24 2005,22:04)]Even Zidane would've had difficulty finding a blue shirt on saturday. As i've said elsewhere, Maher couldn't really do too much because he had so few options, either up front or out wide. I feel on the whole we were tactically outmanoeuvered by oxford.

And as for this apparent consensus that sideways or backwards passes are bad, can i say, "what a load of absolute rubbish". If there's no available forward pass it's always preferable to pass sideways or backwards and keep possession rather than just lump it or play aimlessly speculative passes into the opposition's third. It really gets on my baps when the crowd start groaning if probing play down one side of the pitch, for example, doesn't provide anything and the ball is sent backwards so the team can recycle and start again. Some people just don't seem to realise that you can't ping hollywood passes around the pitch every other ball. Retaining possession and keeping the ball moving enables the team to move the opposition around a lot more, creating openings 8 or 9 passes down the line.

On saturday, maher tried a few over the top balls out to the channels, but nothing came of them so he tried to keep possession and keep things moving. If he'd been trying to pick out killer passes the whole he would've got abuse for wasting possession as they lapped up everything in the air (did wanless even touch the ball with his feet?) and alot of the stuff on the deck.

To conclude, "lay off maher!"

Jonesy , I agree with you 100% on all the points you make there , unfortunately reading Tillys post-match comments on Blues World I'm not sure he agrees with us .

 

[J]

maher needs to be dropped...

 

[Guest]

Quote[/b] (CS J @ April 24 2005,22:36)]maher needs to be dropped...

He may have had a couple of poor games, but at this stage of the season the team needs stability. Dropping the club captain will probably not help us in the slightest.

 

[bas blue]

seems to me listening to all the arguments, if you stop maher you stop southend

 

[South Bank Hank]

Interesting the Kev Maher was named in the PFA Team of the Year (alongside Barrett). Admittedly had a poor game at the weekend but, at this level, our captain is different class.

 

[sufcintheprem]

Quote[/b] (Guest @ April 24 2005,20:10)]Do you really not consider running ten yards across the edge of the box "that far"? How far can players run across the edge of the area unchallenged before it is a problem?

Besides Mooney was dropping off, it may not be that deep, but it was deep enough for the central defenders not to want to follow him, because by following him they would have left a big hole in the defence. That is why we play a holding midfielder, to sit in front of the midfield and protect our defence from players doing that.

However for the first goal, Mooney was not closed down and was given too much time to play a through ball to carve us open. The way you stop goals like that is to close players down. Fortunately we don't often meet players in League 2 who have Mooney's movement and footballing brain (Darlington with Hignett and Wijnhard are the only other team I can think of - and we lost 4-0 at their place). If we had Mooney and Eastwood up front we would walk this division - despite our current defensive shortcomings.

Whislt the lack of width meant play was cramped and space at a premium, the main problem was that our midfield was holding onto the ball for too long. Eastwood and Dudfield made numerous runs, only for the midfield to take another unnecessary touch instead of playing one of our strikers through on goal. Maher was by no means the only guilty culprit, but it illustrated the limits of his game as without the outlet of a sideways pass to Gower, Maher looked lost. In fact the only midfielder who looked as if he knew what to do with the ball was Guttridge.

Didn't run that far from deep. Maher shouldn't be on his own penalty box on a counter attack from Oxford, particularly as you expect him to be picking an attacking pass. Mooney wasn't deep at all. He picked the ball up well behind our midfield and ran at the centre backs before running square and playing the ball in to the massive space. On top of that, there were no breaks from midfield that weren't being tracked and only the wingers had come forward at any pace, leaving a man apiece at the back.

If you don't want your centre backs challenging him there then, in your team, do the centre backs do anything more than head the ball away?

Actually, don't answer that. We'll agree to disagree.

 

[Wessex Blue]

Quote[/b] (Upminster Blue @ April 24 2005,00:54)]A defeat and guess who comes out of the woodwork, yes, you guessed it, Wiggy.  

Maher didn't have the best of games but that doesn't suddenly make him a bad player.  Our record over recent seasons when he's been missing says it all - abysmal.  

As for blaming him for the loss and the rest of the midfield playing badly, absolute rubbish.  

Oxford had done their homework - closed down Maher quickly to cut off the supply line and left no space between defence and midfield for Eastwood to exploit.

Having said that, ultimately, we gifted Oxford two soft goals and apart from that Flavs had nothing to do.  We could and should have got at least a point.  IMO, team selection cost us dearly - McCormack, Petts and Maher are more defensive midfielders and as a result lacked width and creativity.

We never really had any width on Saturday and failed to make any real impact in the final third, well at least until Gray came on in the second half.

Our passing was very predictable and reminded me of England at their worst,moving crab from one end of the pitch to the other. The comparison with Ray Wilkins was spot on..! Maher wasn't great but in fairness we really lacked flair and creativity and ran out of ideas to break them down.

We really need Gower back firing on all cylinders to give us the creativity to get behind the opposition. Makes me wonder what lineup Tilly will go for on Saturday.