Walking Down The Halbeath Road

[Chubbychops]

6 minutes ago, CallumPar said:

We played the back 5 against Dundee Utd, KRH was at RWB that night, with Edwards at LWB. But I do agree the back 4 looked better against Ayr and  Partick than we have seen most weeks from the regular back 5. Unfortunately though, the back 4 also looked really poor in a few games around then - including Inverness away and Airdrie at home.

Switching back to the back 5 from the Raith defeat saw us go on a 3 game winning run, including the United game. It wasn’t pretty, but got us the results we needed for safety. That doesn’t mean it’s the best shape for next season though.

From what I saw. MWH was right back and Hosler was infront of MWH on the right further forward. He was quite far up the park to score two goals from RWB.. Bene and MFW were two CBs. We switched to 3 at the back last 20 minutes and United had their best spell of the match.

Stand to be corrected but that's what I thought happened.

[Wacky]

33 minutes ago, The Toun Clock said:

Stuff like that is embarrassing and I hope they f*ck right off. There’s plenty under contract players I’d rather see the back of but even if they were all offered five year deals tomorrow I’d still buy my season ticket/support the team. 

Agreed 

[The Toun Clock]

2 minutes ago, Chubbychops said:

From what I saw. MWH was right back and Hosler was infront of MWH on the right further forward. He was quite far up the park to score two goals from RWB.. Bene and MFW were two CBs. We switched to 3 at the back last 20 minutes and United had their best spell of the match.

Stand to be corrected but that's what I thought happened.

This seems to be a big issue with some thinking he played RWB and some thinking a more forward role. The further forward role is exactly what I saw as well.

KRH hasn't looked like creating much since that game. He finally got a chance to run at someone in the first half against ICT, bit of trickery and won a corner. It needs to be utilised more. He was even played in the middle (Otoo role) last week against QP. He's one of the most creative players, he needs to be given the license to do that.

[CallumPar]

1 hour ago, Chubbychops said:

From what I saw. MWH was right back and Hosler was infront of MWH on the right further forward. He was quite far up the park to score two goals from RWB.. Bene and MFW were two CBs. We switched to 3 at the back last 20 minutes and United had their best spell of the match.

Stand to be corrected but that's what I thought happened.

Seems to be a bit of debate on it. But McPake spoke to BBC post-match and said that he went with the back 3 for that game, because he believes it’s the best system for the players we’ve got. He also admitted he’d been too stubborn earlier in the season, when it maybe wasn’t the best system with the players available on the day.

[parsboi]

The formation and the type of football we play don’t have to be intrinsically linked.   3 at the back certainly shouldn’t necessarily mean guff, overly pensive stuff.   The same way that 4 at the back or 1 up front whatever it is doesn’t dictate how attacking or otherwise.    
 

The issue is, I just don’t think McPake has the players nor the gumption to really make it work by being more adventurous in terms of style.  At no point during his career at us or Dundee has there been a significant run built on any sort of attacking style.  Most of his best results and performances have come from gutsy resolute defending and grabbing a goal.  Thats what we’ve got. 

[Salvo Montalbano]

I think that something like this could work but it relies on the three behind the main striker chipping in with goals, or having a centre forward who can score 15-20 goals on their own. 

That still has the likes of Chalmers, the youngsters from the reserves etc as other options should we change things. It isn't much of a change from the 3-4-2-1 McPake seems to prefer but means that Ritchie-Hosler can get further up the pitch, we don't need to rely on full backs for width and it gives Todd a settled position and role.

[The Toun Clock]

7 minutes ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

 

 

That's the formation I think would suit us best with our personnel. We don't have a number of strikers so better playing with one up, with an array of quality in behind and wide. 

[Rammit Bawdeep]

49 minutes ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

I think that something like this could work but it relies on the three behind the main striker chipping in with goals, or having a centre forward who can score 15-20 goals on their own. 

That still has the likes of Chalmers, the youngsters from the reserves etc as other options should we change things. It isn't much of a change from the 3-4-2-1 McPake seems to prefer but means that Ritchie-Hosler can get further up the pitch, we don't need to rely on full backs for width and it gives Todd a settled position and role.

This formation 100%

[101]

51 minutes ago, Salvo Montalbano said:

I think that something like this could work but it relies on the three behind the main striker chipping in with goals, or having a centre forward who can score 15-20 goals on their own. 

That still has the likes of Chalmers, the youngsters from the reserves etc as other options should we change things. It isn't much of a change from the 3-4-2-1 McPake seems to prefer but means that Ritchie-Hosler can get further up the pitch, we don't need to rely on full backs for width and it gives Todd a settled position and role.

I think this would be excellent next season, maybe with Cammy Kerr offering Comrie some competition?

However I think that third midfield option, essentially replacing Allan has to be a robust combative midfielder, because when both Hamilton and Otoo have been out the team we have had no control of the midfield.

[HoBNob]

4 hours ago, CallumPar said:

We played the back 5 against Dundee Utd, KRH was at RWB that night, with Edwards at LWB. But I do agree the back 4 looked better against Ayr and  Partick than we have seen most weeks from the regular back 5. Unfortunately though, the back 4 also looked really poor in a few games around then - including Inverness away and Airdrie at home.

Switching back to the back 5 from the Raith defeat saw us go on a 3 game winning run, including the United game. It wasn’t pretty, but got us the results we needed for safety. That doesn’t mean it’s the best shape for next season though.

The Airdrie at home game was weird, the first half we actually looked good imo and created enough chances that we should've been going in at the break a couple of goals up, and Airdrie a man down. 

Inverness away we played 4 at the back but the shape in midfield was rancid, we had Allan sitting, Otoo playing on the left with Todd on the right, Summers in the middle and McCann and Jak up top in a weird 4132.

The four at the back formation isn't the silver bullet if you're putting Otoo wide left. 

2 hours ago, parsboi said:

The formation and the type of football we play don’t have to be intrinsically linked.   3 at the back certainly shouldn’t necessarily mean guff, overly pensive stuff.   The same way that 4 at the back or 1 up front whatever it is doesn’t dictate how attacking or otherwise.    
 

The issue is, I just don’t think McPake has the players nor the gumption to really make it work by being more adventurous in terms of style.  At no point during his career at us or Dundee has there been a significant run built on any sort of attacking style.  Most of his best results and performances have come from gutsy resolute defending and grabbing a goal.  Thats what we’ve got. 

Agreed, McPake isn't all of a sudden going to have a team playing swashbuckling attacking football. You can tell by the way he's approached the QP and Inverness games he's a safety first manager. 

1 hour ago, 101 said:

I think this would be excellent next season, maybe with Cammy Kerr offering Comrie some competition?

However I think that third midfield option, essentially replacing Allan has to be a robust combative midfielder, because when both Hamilton and Otoo have been out the team we have had no control of the midfield.

Didn't see anything at all from Kerr to suggest he'd be worth pursuing. 

[The Toun Clock]

13 minutes ago, HoBNob said:

Didn't see anything at all from Kerr to suggest he'd be worth pursuing. 

Feel exactly the same, I think it's an area we'll look to add to, not sure if he think's Welsh-Hayes could be that guy or if he'll be available but I'd sooner have him than Kerr. One player that really caught my eye on Saturday was the boy Alex Samuel. A complete nuisance of a striker, built like a tank. Maybe not overly prolific in front of goal but I thought he was good, and has been good any time I seen him this season. Sure he scored two at Starks against Raith.

[Raithie]

10 minutes ago, The Toun Clock said:

One player that really caught my eye on Saturday was the boy Alex Samuel. A complete nuisance of a striker, built like a tank. Maybe not overly prolific in front of goal but I thought he was good, and has been good any time I seen him this season. Sure he scored two at Starks against Raith.

He scored a hattrick in 1st half against us way back at the end of January. He was indeed a complete nuisance.

[Diamonds are Forever]

2 hours ago, Raithie said:

He scored a hattrick in 1st half against us way back at the end of January. He was indeed a complete nuisance.

 

Raith game was a freak. Other than that he scored 1 goal against BSC Glasgow and 1 against Arbroath this season. He's scored goals in 3 out of 30 games this season. His goalscoring record across his career is similarly horrific.

I know there's more to striker play than just goals, but that's taking it to the extreme. Players like that can often seem a nuisance playing against you but when they play for you they quickly become frustrating/infuriating at how little they actually offer beyond running around a lot.

[101]

3 hours ago, The Toun Clock said:

Feel exactly the same, I think it's an area we'll look to add to, not sure if he think's Welsh-Hayes could be that guy or if he'll be available but I'd sooner have him than Kerr. One player that really caught my eye on Saturday was the boy Alex Samuel. A complete nuisance of a striker, built like a tank. Maybe not overly prolific in front of goal but I thought he was good, and has been good any time I seen him this season. Sure he scored two at Starks against Raith.

I thought he looked like a poor version of Jakubiak tbh.

[parsforlife]

Samuel is a good pest, and teams including us have had success with that type of player at this level. 

We have too many options of strikers that a good at 'the other things' without anyone getting enough goals.  And if we're looking to bring in another of that type keeping kane on would be preferable.  Even jak would be considered alongside samuel, I don't think there's much between them.

[Rob1885]

No more strikers that don't score goals, please.

[BukyOHare]

Just noticed Jakub Stolarczyk is in goal for Leicester tonight on Sky for anybody interested.

 

[Coypars]

3 hours ago, Raithie said:

He scored a hattrick in 1st half against us way back at the end of January. He was indeed a complete nuisance.

On loan at Inverness from Ross County signed a two year deal 23/24 season 

[North West]

A consistent goal scorer, where the f**k do we find one of them?

 

[Well over Par]

4-2-3-1 should absolutely have been the default formation this season. If fans can see it, why can’t McPake ?

Edited April 29 by Well over Par