Pre-Match Thread Shrewsbury Town vs Southend United

[Jam_Man]

why change a winning team, manager must reward the players by keeping faith in them as they have done the biz.

he can chop + change the subs + bring them on if needed

Because the team that won against York were terrible and didn't deserve the win ?

We won but the team didn't perform and you don't reward poor performances just because you scrape the 3pts.

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Got some Brownie points so going to this and and a new ground for me, although went to the old one many times.
Remember the boat plucking the ball out of the river behind the stand

They are by far the best team who have been at Roots Hall and i think will confirm my choice as Champions.
We have to go for a point but hope for three. Only way to do that will be a smash and grab
If we go too attacking they will batter us. So i would go 4-5-1 JUST for this game.
Bring in Degnan and play him to protect the defence, and either Adam or Luke for Willams for the experince.
Put Hurst and Worrall in midfield too counter attack when we can, playing either side of Leonard and Timlin
With just Piggy up front Bazza to come when he is knackard

Bentley
White Barratt/Prosser Thompson Coker
Degnan
Hurst Timlin Leonard Worrall
Piggott

Subs P.Smith. Binnon-Williams Prosser/Barratt Atkinson Weston Coulthirst Cassidy

That's not a bad shout (other than forgetting to include Corr on the bench).

The big decision for me is whether Hurst in a 4-5-1 or Corr in a 4-4-2 with Timlin going to left midfield.

I'd want Payne on the bench instead of a second defender.

 

[davew]

Because the team that won against York were terrible and didn't deserve the win ?

We won but the team didn't perform and you don't reward poor performances just because you scrape the 3pts.

sorry can#t agree they were not terrible and York were pretty good (lucky they did not have a good finisher), A manager must reward if team gets 3 points,.
that's what is all about

Nice to see smiling in the VIC after match.

 

[Jai]

A manager shouldn't base his selection on rewarding his team for the last game. He should pick a team to win this one. The best managers are those vrave enough to pick a team looking forward not back.

 

[flangejackrabbit]

Think the most obvious change is to get Deegan in to shut down their small redhead midfielder.

I wouldn't be too worried about Barnett, he's not what he was. Are Shrews playing 3-5-2 at the moment? If so 4-5-1 seems the natural response, get Worrall and Weston running onto balls in behind the wing-backs, maybe recall Payne for this one.

 

[Jam_Man]

sorry can#t agree they were not terrible and York were pretty good (lucky they did not have a good finisher), A manager must reward if team gets 3 points,.
that's what is all about

Nice to see smiling in the VIC after match.

Even Brown said we deserved to lose.

You reward performance as well as results.

Lets say one player in our team has a terrible game, doesnt make the effort, doesnt follow instructions and costs us a goal. Would he then be immune from dropping if we managed to win still ?

If you win a game and the team play well thats when you cant make the argument.

 

[OldBlueLady]

Not too much to change, though I do expect a return to 4-5-1. Deegan into midfield, Cassidy to the bench. Possibly Weston in for Atkinson.

 

[Jam_Man]

Not too much to change, though I do expect a return to 4-5-1. Deegan into midfield, Cassidy to the bench. Possibly Weston in for Atkinson.

I can see that myself.

Shrewsbury's midfield are too much for two central midfielders, they out played us in the middle of the park at home and York outplayed us in 442, cant see us opting for one less midfielder.

 

[turkishm]

Not too much to change, though I do expect a return to 4-5-1. Deegan into midfield, Cassidy to the bench. Possibly Weston in for Atkinson.

Think PB will go for a workmanlike midfield, covering every blade of grass, for that reason Atkinson in for me, with Deegan holding, and only one up top. It aint going to be pretty.

 

[southchurch]

If it ain't broke don't try fix it.

Browns tactical nous won the last 3 and not lost in 8

It was broke. If we played that game 10 times they would win 9.
They only reason we got away with it was their god awful finishing.
Certainly not because of good tactics.

 

[mrsblue]

It was broke. If we played that game 10 times they would win 9.
They only reason we got away with it was their god awful finishing.
Certainly not because of good tactics.

Agree with you,


We were shambolic against York a total mess.

 

[flapjack]

Even Brown said we deserved to lose.

You reward performance as well as results.

Lets say one player in our team has a terrible game, doesnt make the effort, doesnt follow instructions and costs us a goal. Would he then be immune from dropping if we managed to win still ?

If you win a game and the team play well thats when you cant make the argument.

Provided the player you are going to bring in to the team is as good or better than the one you are going to drop because they had a bad day at the office, too many changes dosen't bring stability and sometimes you have to run with a side struggling but still wining....so if Bentley has a mare this weekend would you drop him for the next game...no I doubt it

 

[Jam_Man]

Provided the player you are going to bring in to the team is as good or better than the one you are going to drop because they had a bad day at the office, too many changes dosen't bring stability and sometimes you have to run with a side struggling but still wining....so if Bentley has a mare this weekend would you drop him for the next game...no I doubt it

Ive never said you should change players after every bad performance, the point I was making is that winning a game doesn't mean that you can't.

Just because we won against York doesn't guarantee every player a start in the next game just because we won, because they didn't play well.

As you say you don't drop players and just play someone else for the sake of it, but we have good options to replace some of the players who would be more suited to the next game, ie Deegan. So leaving him out of a game he would be ideal for just because the team won against York doesn't really make a lot of sense to me.

A good case could be argued however to leave the back 5 as it is, as they still kept a clean sheet.

 

[TBV_Dan]

Best home record in the division vs the 2nd best away record in the division..........

1-1 draw anyone?

 

[Jam_Man]

Best home record in the division vs one of the best (if not the best) away record in the division..........

1-1 draw anyone?

2nd best away, and Id be delighted with a point there.

 

[TBV_Dan]

2nd best away, and Id be delighted with a point there.

If offered a point right now, I'd take it without hesitation. Point would be a very good result for us.

 

[flapjack]

Ive never said you should change players after every bad performance, the point I was making is that winning a game doesn't mean that you can't.

Just because we won against York doesn't guarantee every player a start in the next game just because we won, because they didn't play well.

As you say you don't drop players and just play someone else for the sake of it, but we have good options to replace some of the players who would be more suited to the next game, ie Deegan. So leaving him out of a game he would be ideal for just because the team won against York doesn't really make a lot of sense to me.

A good case could be argued however to leave the back 5 as it is, as they still kept a clean sheet.

Again I never said you did, don't get too defensive I was just asking the question would you drop Bentley if he had a mare, the answer would be no, as the other keepers might not be up to scratch, I don't get this droping players to suit the opposition, we did this early on in the season when Barnard had a good game at home and then Brown droped him for the Newport away game because of the opposition.... apart from suspensions and Injuries how many changes has Brown made in the last 3 wining line ups, yes you can keep the same players as confidence grows and players will have good and bad games it happens at all levels of the game

 

[Jam_Man]

I'm not getting defensive I was explaining my point in the context that I made it.

As you are bringing Bentley up again it suggests you still dont follow the point I was making.

The points made before were the team should stay the same because we won, I was making the simple point that winning a game should not protect a player who has a stinker. If someone plays badly and there is competition for the place then there is no problem in dropping him.

As for tactical changes for the opposition I personally think there is plenty of reason to change from a home game against a struggling team, who still out played us, to then have to play one of the top team away. If York can reduce our midfield to the mess they were on Saturday making changes to strengthen it makes sense to me.

There is certainly strengths in continuity though, but I think we have better options for the game in hand.

 

[flapjack]

I'm not getting defensive I was explaining my point in the context that I made it.

As you are bringing Bentley up again it suggests you still dont follow the point I was making.

The points made before were the team should stay the same because we won, I was making the simple point that winning a game should not protect a player who has a stinker. If someone plays badly and there is competition for the place then there is no problem in dropping him.

As for tactical changes for the opposition I personally think there is plenty of reason to change from a home game against a struggling team, who still out played us, to then have to play one of the top team away. If York can reduce our midfield to the mess they were on Saturday making changes to strengthen it makes sense to me.

There is certainly strengths in continuity though, but I think we have better options for the game in hand.

Bringing Bentley up is a good example of a player that could have a nightmare and not get left out the side for next week

But there are certain players that it is doubtful would be left out even if they had a poor game or not, again you only make changes if the players coming in can offer you more than you have already in the side

 

[Jam_Man]

Bringing Bentley up is a good example of a player that could have a nightmare and not get left out the side for next week

But there are certain players that it is doubtful would be left out even if they had a poor game or not, again you only make changes if the players coming in can offer you more than you have already in the side

Yes but I wasn't making the point players should be dropped, I was making the point that winning a game shouldn't mean players couldn't be !