The New Raith Rovers Thread

[CALDERON]

16 minutes ago, R.R.FC said:

I thought it was a 3 at the back the last 10-15 minutes after McGill came on. Back 3 of Millen, Brown and O’Reilly. Could be wrong because I was only watching on a stream but certainly how it appeared with how high McGill played.

Im not totally sold on the 3 at the back as a permanent move. We were excellent against the Pars using it and it’s worked chasing games but the element of surprise has helped in those cases. Also, despite it working, on paper I don’t think we have a squad particularly well suited to playing 3 at the back. When we had Tumilty and MacDonald it made perfect sense but I don’t think we have any natural wing backs in the squad. I don’t see Murray making the switch yet, I think it will be tweaks rather than wholesale changes needed at this stage IMO.

However, I think moving Easton inside as the most attacking of a midfield 3 whilst Stanton is out is a good shout and definitely worth a shot. Different qualities obviously but he could add a lot in that role. I also think Smith is better off the left than through the middle.

Yeah he went 3 at the back when Mcgill came on, and it was a bit of a mess to be honest.

[A_Rover_In_The_Burgh]

8 minutes ago, pub car king said:

I don't know if Easton would have the insight to play the role in the way that we play. I mean in terms of Stanton understands he needs to get forward through the middle and is a very intelligent player similar to Byrne in a lot ways about when to make a pass and where to move off the ball.

I think (but I'm more than happy to be proved wrong) Easton would try to take on too many players, drift wide or go for goal when all that's needed is a quick pass.

I do feel that Easton has added a lot to his game ovee the last six months. He does sometimes try and do too much but the same can be said of Lewy. I think it's one of those things when it comes to talented players. They have sometimes too much belief in themselves. 

I don't think trying it would hurt. 

Even playing Mullin on the right and Connolly on the left who are both capable of covering in there if he's further up. 

I'd just like to see the 3-5-2 started and if it doesn't work so be it, I will put my hands up. I just feel we've played our best football with that formation. 

[grumswall]

1 minute ago, A_Rover_In_The_Burgh said:

It looked to me like McGill was at left back. His use of subs on Saturday was perplexing and not thought out in my eyes. 

Like why would you even put Brown in to the back line when chasing the game? It made no sense?

It should have been Byrne Matthews and Brown in the centre with Smith on the left Connolly on the right. As much as Vaughan was having a poor game I'd have left him on with Hamilton, certainly not putting Gullan up there, he's rank rotten upfront. 

The back line should have been Millen O'Reilly and Dick. 

Murrays complete lack of tactical and a formational change to try and outwit Airdrie was worrying. We all knew, or I thought we did, that we had to change it up for this and he didn't and well the rest is history. 

I do think Easton should be tried in there. He is our most creative player on his day. Stanton is more consistent though. Stantons injury is huge but I really believe that we do have a squad capable of filing in there or should. 

McGill was lb but was asked to try and push on which left a massive gap for airdrie to waste time/ attack in to. 

Brown can play the ball out better from cb, it's something Murray has spoken of in the past. 

You're right about gullan being rotten which makes it even more perplexing that you'd want to play him at rm ahead of connolly there or Mullin who are both very good rm/rws. 

Easton has been moved central at times this season and hasn't looked nearly as effective. 

 

[A_Rover_In_The_Burgh]

4 minutes ago, CALDERON said:

Yeah he went 3 at the back when Mcgill came on, and it was a bit of a mess to be honest.

I swear he went 4 at the back. McGill was on the left of the 4 and Smith went to the left wing and Gullan went up top. Byrne and Matthews were in the middle Connolly on the right. 

McGill definitely did not go out to left wing. 

[Langtounlaud]

38 minutes ago, Kirkcaldybanjo said:

Passed this place a hundred times and never even knew it was a Chinese 

I got one of their giant curry balls ,which were supposed to be fantastic, a couple of years ago. Took a bite of it and it was like it was made out of baby wipes. Disgusting. Never been back since.

[A_Rover_In_The_Burgh]

3 minutes ago, grumswall said:

McGill was lb but was asked to try and push on which left a massive gap for airdrie to waste time/ attack in to. 

Brown can play the ball out better from cb, it's something Murray has spoken of in the past. 

You're right about gullan being rotten which makes it even more perplexing that you'd want to play him at rm ahead of connolly there or Mullin who are both very good rm/rws. 

Easton has been moved central at times this season and hasn't looked nearly as effective. 

 

I feel trying Gullan there and if he's pants boot him. He's offering nothing up front. 

I get Brown can play a ball out but we didn't need that against Airdrie. We just needed the ball up the field. 

As for Easton, would just like to see him in there with the support of Brown and Byrne. Both offer defensive cover for him. 

[SerieA]

Aye thought the subs were a mess on Saturday

[grumswall]

47 minutes ago, A_Rover_In_The_Burgh said:

I feel trying Gullan there and if he's pants boot him. He's offering nothing up front. 

I get Brown can play a ball out but we didn't need that against Airdrie. We just needed the ball up the field. 

As for Easton, would just like to see him in there with the support of Brown and Byrne. Both offer defensive cover for him. 

That's fair enough but I'm honestly at the stage with Gullan where there's only so many positions you can try him in before you just put your hands up and admit he isn't good enough. Happy to be proven wrong but I can't really remember him being effective at this level in any single position and he's infuriating when he's moving wide as a main striker, nullifying any threat we have in the process. 

When I seen brown moving in to cb I assumed it was just until the subs where made and was surprised he stayed there tbf. I thought we where going with 3 atb. 

I'm like many others who aren't sold on brown and Byrne as a 2 despite them both being fantastic players, easton can track back when he wants to aswell but I'm not convinced from the admittedly limited time he's player in that or a similar role that we could carry him defensively when he isn't tracking back. I'm not sure Vaughan is any less defensive minded in that role. Did connolly not play that position for us in his first game under mckinnon? Had a bit more pace about him then admittedly but he looked a handful with his direct running. 

As you've said we've got options and thankfully it isn't any of us making the decisions. 

[RRFC_Liam]

50 minutes ago, SerieA said:

Aye thought the subs were a mess on Saturday

Making 4 at once disturbed the entire flow and shape of us it was like we’re playing with 6 attackers and playing hectic football rather than trying to play and break them down 

[A_Rover_In_The_Burgh]

I'm clasping at straws with Gullan .  I feel bad at times but I just don't see the same player as his 1st stint with us. 

Maybe right back?  

We do have McGill who is a midfielder, could we maybe play him as a midfielder for once? Or am I being crazy?

[David McGurns Left Glove]

I dont think gullan has gotten the chance he deserves this season. Often he's came on the pitch late into the game and he's managed to be behind the making a goal. Off the top of my head: 

Queens park Away : Won the penalty 

Caley Home : scored the winner 

Ayr Home : won the penalty 

Caley Away : Scored the winner (All be it a Pen ) 

- with most of these being extremely late on, that's an extra 10 points on the board this season due to his efforts, and i feel he is a massively unrecognised factor in regards to the amount of late wins we have had this season. 

 

[pub car king]

The main issue with Gullan is regardless of where you play him he will drift onto that left wing. 

The covid season he was linking up nicely with Vaughan, most notably against the pars in the 5-1 extravaganza 

[TxRover]

1 hour ago, pub car king said:

I don't know if Easton would have the insight to play the role in the way that we play. I mean in terms of Stanton understands he needs to get forward through the middle and is a very intelligent player similar to Byrne in a lot ways about when to make a pass and where to move off the ball.

I think (but I'm more than happy to be proved wrong) Easton would try to take on too many players, drift wide or go for goal when all that's needed is a quick pass.

There is one way to try it, but it misuses Matthews a bit. That would be to put Byrne in the Mid/AM role in the middle behind the striker and use Brown/Matthews at DM. I think Matthews is better suited to AM, but it would be a way to trial Byrne in that role...I just suspect it's not something he can simply jump into.

[Been going too long]

17 minutes ago, TxRover said:

There is one way to try it, but it misuses Matthews a bit. That would be to put Byrne in the Mid/AM role in the middle behind the striker and use Brown/Matthews at DM. I think Matthews is better suited to AM, but it would be a way to trial Byrne in that role...I just suspect it's not something he can simply jump into.

Byrne has never been an attacking type of player Tx for any team, he is 30 now think it’s a bit late to teach him new tricks tbh

[A_Rover_In_The_Burgh]

38 minutes ago, pub car king said:

The main issue with Gullan is regardless of where you play him he will drift onto that left wing. 

The covid season he was linking up nicely with Vaughan, most notably against the pars in the 5-1 extravaganza 

Well start him at right back and by half time we'll be playing that 3 at the back I want to see

[TxRover]

41 minutes ago, Been going too long said:

Byrne has never been an attacking type of player Tx for any team, he is 30 now think it’s a bit late to teach him new tricks tbh

I don’t disagree, but the question was asked about using him differently…I just figured I’d point out what it would take.

Here’s the ugly reality, Stanton papered over a massive weakness in the Rovers for almost half the season. Matthews, we hope, can possibly help fill the gap that Sam’s injury created, but for all our talks of a strong midfield and such, we’re just not that strong in the preferred playing style. Hopefully we can now find a son of Sam, if you will, to plug in until Sir Stanton returns, but it is critical we start planning for some other things.

Do we want Byrne? Most people will look at me as if I’ve grown two heads for asking that question, but here’s why. This year, our basic 4-2-3-1 has relied upon Byrne and Stanton, with Brown at CB. Now Brown isn’t a CB, and really isn’t strong enough in the air to be converted to one, what he is is an excellent DM or sweeper (one does wonder about RB, thou). Brown and Byrne are somewhat similar players, and don’t provide an effective bridge between the back and front, lacking the creativity and ball movement that Sam provided. Brown is signed through next season, Byrne isn’t.

I think some very essential math on Byrne will be promotion and plans. If we are getting promoted, we absolutely want him as we need the depth and skill. If we are not getting promoted, can we afford Brown and Byrne, or does just Brown make more sense for next season. Byrne has been an absolute warrior for us, and we could well argue could be critical in a drive for promotion next year if this year falls short, but Championship teams have to make trade offs that Premiership teams don’t.

This year we’ve saved a bit at CB, and had to scramble…we’ve run without proper cover at RB and LB, and had to scramble…we've run with one proper target man, and had to scramble…all these are examples of areas where spending can fix it, but Championship budgets don’t really allow it across the board. Byrne was a late find for a weakness we hadn’t realised, but that IM had apparently spotted, but where else did it cost us cover.

[TxRover]

Forgot to add to the above, has Millen played himself out of contention for a new contract with his yellows and this red? I love his crossing, but everyone in the league now knows exactly how to play him.

[RRFC_Liam]

17 minutes ago, TxRover said:

Do we want Byrne? Most people will look at me as if I’ve grown two heads for asking that question, but here’s why. This year, our basic 4-2-3-1 has relied upon Byrne and Stanton, with Brown at CB. Now Brown isn’t a CB, and really isn’t strong enough in the air to be converted to one, what he is is an excellent DM or sweeper (one does wonder about RB, thou). Brown and Byrne are somewhat similar players, and don’t provide an effective bridge between the back and front, lacking the creativity and ball movement that Sam provided. Brown is signed through next season, Byrne isn’t.

If Brown isn’t in midfield and is forced to play CB which ain’t ideal then it has to be Matthews look at one of my previous posts about how Matthews is different and is the progressing the ball forward when playing said position 

[MICMAC]

7 hours ago, pub car king said:

I don't know if Easton would have the insight to play the role in the way that we play. I mean in terms of Stanton understands he needs to get forward through the middle and is a very intelligent player similar to Byrne in a lot ways about when to make a pass and where to move off the ball.

I think (but I'm more than happy to be proved wrong) Easton would try to take on too many players, drift wide or go for goal when all that's needed is a quick pass.

Mullin might be more suited to Stantons role. Didn't he play through the middle against Linlithgow and bagged a couple of goals. He definitely puts the milage in.

[RAITHROVERS84]

Fruitless exercise the 2 pages of tactics and formations with Murrayball at the helm.

I just hope the penny drops that no Stanton mean we need to change it.