• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

CHEMICO FC

Manager
Joined
Nov 22, 2006
Messages
1,090
Location
southend
Should of left Lee Barnard on up front with Barry Corr.This cost us the game today especially bringing on Gomas when it should of been Mark Laird for a midfielder.I dont see the point playing one up front at home and 5 in the middle to hold out to win the game.

Laird must start soon i think.
 

Eddy Melito

Coach
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
692
trouble is, as soon as you arent dominating a game, its very easy to get outnumbered in midfield. exeter under tisdale are a footballing team and got numbers in the midfield, so it made sense in that respect. regardless of anything, there will always be a time where you arent controlling a game completely.
 

mgh

PL Cup Winner 2014
Joined
Nov 19, 2013
Messages
482
Location
Hockley, United Kingdom
Corr was injured, Barnard was useless, twice in the space of two second half minutes he missed easy through-balls. Exeter played 4-5-1 and were dominating midfield, as Eddy says above - especially given Hurst was anonymous. The subs were all wrong of course, and I agree Laird should have been brought on (in fact he should have started), also Payne...
 

Silencer

Director
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
2,349
Location
Southchurch Village
I don't think the change in formation was the problem, I think it was the personnel and the subsequent panicked decisions/tinkering that followed!!!

Gomis produced the worst debut I have ever seen and his positional sense was shocking. Effectively we were playing with ten men. For the 4-5-1 to work, you need the two wide forward players to be an outlet and to link with the lone forward. As for the lone forward, Freddy would struggle in that role at the best of times let alone with his support players are an out of soughts Hurst and the woeful fish out of water Gomis.

Because of these mistakes, Brown had to revert to two up top which meant throwing an untried and untested youth teamer into a vital match. At that time despite Williams pace, I think we would have all preferred to have seen a Barnard or Corr still on the pitch. Also, the final change meant losing the vital energy in Timlin!!!!

very frustrating and I just hope Brown realises that his mistake cost us the three points.
 

Thundersley Blue

Coach⭐
Joined
Sep 9, 2010
Messages
1,658
Location
Mendlesham Suffolk
Still fail to understand why Brown had to change a system that the players were comfortable with and clearly worked.Was the system not good enough to humble Millwall, beat Chesterfield and give Hull a run for their money ?
Reverting to 4 - 4 - 2 has exposed our lack of pace in defence particularly down the middle. Hurst has not been the same player as he now has little freedom and as frustrating as Straker can be is now out of the side and replaced by Atkinson who is not as effective out wide.

Barnard should have been made to wait for a chance, however good he may have been and may be again he still hadn't played a game for nearly a year and unfortunately it shows.

Just why do Managers have to tinker, at least if you don't concede you don't lose and I dion't think anyone could complain about the entertainment value at Home this season.
 

Eddy Melito

Coach
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
692
you make a good point, but unfortunately the majority of fans wouldnt stand for it. in this country there is a constant clamour for the past, and that includes 4-4-2 being the only way to play in the lower leagues.
 

Thundersley Blue

Coach⭐
Joined
Sep 9, 2010
Messages
1,658
Location
Mendlesham Suffolk
That it may be but we were not short of attacking options provided the midfield were able to support Corr, who despite a lack of goals has been immense. Leonard seemed really comfortable playing just in front of the back four but thanks to the obvious understanding with Atkinson and Timlin was always able to get forward.

However we describe the system it worked and suited the players at Brown's disposal.
 

Eddy Melito

Coach
Joined
Aug 2, 2009
Messages
692
personally, i agree. i just know the number of times ive seen on here and heard at games about 'why are we only playing 1 up front at home' etc etc. im sure that has put a certain amount of pressure on the manager.
 

Jam_Man

Life President
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
25,545
Location
Southend
We got to the automatics with 5 in the middle and produced our best form.

We have done nothing so far using 442.

I never liked one up front under Sturrock but am happy with it under Brown as its used better, plus it allows the likes of Straker and Hurst to get forward so you have 3 threats, not just the one.

I doubt changing back to 4-5-1 will resolve our issues instantly but I do think our midfield was far better then.
 

Fairport

Coach⭐
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
2,121
Location
Shoeburyness
That it may be but we were not short of attacking options provided the midfield were able to support Corr, who despite a lack of goals has been immense. Leonard seemed really comfortable playing just in front of the back four but thanks to the obvious understanding with Atkinson and Timlin was always able to get forward.

However we describe the system it worked and suited the players at Brown's disposal.

Agree with you, PB should revert to the system that worked well and suited us best.
 

mrsblue

Banned
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
9,419
I am still amazed Barney is starting games as he simply is miles off the pace and since his inclusion the team have struggled badly,Even though I hate 451 but I understand why Phil uses this system as he knows up top there is no pace whilst giving extra protection to the back 4!,Phil has to bench LB and revert back to Corr as lone striker with the middle packed out.
 

Silencer

Director
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
2,349
Location
Southchurch Village
If Corr is struggling with Injuries then Barney would be a better option alone up top than Freddy due to his workrate and style of play (even though he is rusty at the moment).

I think a big problem is the loss of our dominant midfield three - they worked wonders are steamrolled almost everyone we played. As a two in the middle we are not as effective (especially when the opponents play 4-5-1) and it is also a case of too many square pegs.

Finally, we miss Prosser - Thompson is poor and Phillips is not the same player when he is the main centre back.
 

5scoops

Coach
Joined
Aug 4, 2010
Messages
830
better change two cb for the hartpool game has that luke james will walk past them . I think Thompson the worst player at cb since andy harris lol
 
Top