capt_oats Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 8 minutes ago, MurrayWell said: We don't half like an early season injury eh? Repeating myself here, but we must be looking at an attacking mid? Paton wasn't the answer there imo, but this must force our hand to look for an actual Spittal replacement. This is kind of where I am. Like, it's obviously shite for Paton and I'm in the "he's an absolutely fine squad player" camp but you'd think this kind of forces Kettlewell's hand a bit if his plan had been to use Paton in that role and keep trying to make it work. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'WellDel Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 20 minutes ago, capt_oats said: The photographer has done him dirty there. Guessing his recovery time of 14 weeks will be 12 x post op convalescence, and 2 x Turkish hair transplant. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camer0n_mcd Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 (edited) Nicholson is back in training but even then this pretty much forces Ketts into going back to the transfer market for an attacking midfielder, even if it's just a loan until January. Edited July 26 by camer0n_mcd 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eliphas Pettigrew Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 I like Kettlewell as a manager on the whole. However I think he is seemingly determined / stubborn to stick with his preferred system even when we haven't the players available to necessarily make it work - with all the injuries going into the league cup phase of the season it would have been a good time to tweak things to compensate for the injured players and try a couple of different formations I have thought since Spittal's confirmed departure, that it would be a good idea to find a number '10' or attacking midfield as competition and cover for Nicholson 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropy Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 The injury had to happen in the game he was being effective in, his link up with Wilson was good. Might see more of Wells than we otherwise would have? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eliphas Pettigrew Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 Be fantastic if they feel Wells is ready to regularly be involved 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Busta Nut Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 I kinda like Paton, He's useful. I worried that SK thought he was the first name on the team sheet though. (slight exaggeration I know) I also like Nicholson, he is a winger though. Sure he can play as an attacking midfielder if needed but I worry about us shoehorning him in there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellboy1991 Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 A creative midfielder for say the no 10 position with a bit of pace is now badly needed. Having to rely on Halliday to be that is going to cause some issues that’s for sure. Might force SK into going back to a pairing of two up front which would be good. Paton just not getting the luck at all injury wise. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casagolda Posted July 26 Author Share Posted July 26 (edited) Quote “Playing a little bit further forward against Clyde, I should probably have scored more than the one, but that will come during the season, hopefully. “I was playing as a six most of last year and I wasn’t hitting the box when I probably could have, I was probably playing more reserved. “This year it’s just about going into the box and trying to get goals and assists, and helping the team that way.” Reading his interview after the Clyde game, it did sound like Miller is potentially going to be given a more advanced role this season. Certainly on Saturday he seemed to have more license to roam about than last season, where he was generally just sitting- the change of shape probably helped. At times he was still the deepest midfielder spraying the ball about(see 1st goal) but then suddenly he’d be the most advanced supporting the strikers or bursting into the box. There was some debate the other week about Kettlewell building the team round him and I think we’re seeing that’s going to be the case. Everything’s going through him already and he’s now even taking the free kicks, pens etc. To be fair to Paton, I think his best attributes as we saw on Saturday are his energy and ability to pick the ball up from deeper and drive forward with it- even if his decision making in the final third is questionable at times. Which makes Kettlewell’s decision to play him as a 10 the previous couple of games quite baffling as it pretty much negated everything he’s actually good at. Edited July 26 by Casagolda 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swello Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 I don't really have a clue - but I've always assumed players for that Spittal/No 10 position are amongst the riskiest and hardest to find. I'm pretty sure that Kettlewell will have known he's needed a Spittal replacement since at least January but it might be easier said than done. We've had countless loans over the years - have we ever had an attacking midfield type? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cedrics Mighty Well Army Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 I thought we might have had ticket details for Ibrox by now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Electro Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 6 minutes ago, Swello said: We've had countless loans over the years - have we ever had an attacking midfield type? Ojamaa during spell two? Otherwise, good question..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
well fan for life Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 10 minutes ago, Swello said: I don't really have a clue - but I've always assumed players for that Spittal/No 10 position are amongst the riskiest and hardest to find. I'm pretty sure that Kettlewell will have known he's needed a Spittal replacement since at least January but it might be easier said than done. We've had countless loans over the years - have we ever had an attacking midfield type? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swello Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 14 minutes ago, well fan for life said: <shudder> Not a loan. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 1 minute ago, Swello said: <shudder> Not a loan. Ah, I get your point now. Have we had a loan that was an attacking mid/#10. You could maybe make the argument for Callum Lang? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StAndrew7 Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 (edited) 41 minutes ago, Swello said: We've had countless loans over the years - have we ever had an attacking midfield type? 12 minutes ago, capt_oats said: Ah, I get your point now. Have we had a loan that was an attacking mid/#10. You could maybe make the argument for Callum Lang? I was gonna say Lang and maybe Jake Taylor? He felt like a winger/10 type, despite being utterly, utterly shite for us. McCormack came back on loan as well, always thought he was best as a 10; just not in his second spell when he had more timber than a Canadian lumber yard. Edited July 26 by StAndrew7 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swello Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 13 minutes ago, capt_oats said: Ah, I get your point now. Have we had a loan that was an attacking mid/#10. You could maybe make the argument for Callum Lang? Just now, StAndrew7 said: I was gonna say Lang and maybe Jake Taylor? He felt like a winger/10 type, despite being utterly, utterly shite for us. McCormack came back on loan as well, always thought he was best as a 10. Maybe as I never actually saw him in the flesh - but I'd forgotten about Lang. I remembered him as a number 9/centre forward.. Also - maybe Stuparevic might be earmarked for that role once he's settled in - Sunday might tell us.. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handsome_Devil Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 26 minutes ago, Swello said: Also - maybe Stuparevic might be earmarked for that role once he's settled in - Sunday might tell us.. Eventually it becomes arguing over yards but I could imagine him being a 10 as a second striker, I can't imagine him being a 10 as part of a three-man midfield behind another two strikers. I think regardless, even without Paton's injury but even more so now, we 100% need another attacking midfielder who we would trust to be responsible enough to play in a three at times...not easy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazylegsjoe_mfc Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 I think the fact that we have build and recruited an entire squad, fixated with a back three system has hampered our recruitment a bit. We all looked at our list of central midfielders and thought it looked plentiful, yet before the season starts, they are picking themselves. Which begs the question, how many central midfielders is too many when you play up to four at a time? We've got four players in our squad now, whom if we changed formation, would all list right-back as their preferred position. Spittal was undoubtedly fantastic last season and at times carried the can of being our sole creator. In squads which are built with a degree of flexibility around formation, their are normally various sources of creativity (wingers, 10s, anywhere across the front three types) who can be changed based on form etc, but trying to replace a guy who was instrumental for us with one player is always going to be a tall order. Particularly when Spittal, who was a bit nomadic before joining us, completely outperformed everyone's expectations. The next signing could be a punt that goes the other way. I think when teams make a success of a back-three, it's more because the players available to them at a certain time are a perfect fit for us (much like when SK took over), rather than having a squad purposely built for it. I said Kettlewell had a clean slate with me this summer with recruitment and squad because of the limitations he'd had to put up with thus far as manager, but I am a bit concerned about any plan B this season. I do hope at least the signing of Stama means we are going to go with a front two, to go with our back three. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capt_oats Posted July 26 Share Posted July 26 (edited) 58 minutes ago, Swello said: Maybe as I never actually saw him in the flesh - but I'd forgotten about Lang. I remembered him as a number 9/centre forward.. Also - maybe Stuparevic might be earmarked for that role once he's settled in - Sunday might tell us.. I think the thing with Lang was that Robinson was playing him in his 433 which (clearly) didn't use a #10. Instead he relied on 'anywhere across the front three' types. To my mind Lang was probably more of a second striker than a #9 - someone who'd drop into the areas off a #9. In fact, although it's early days, you could probably draw a throughline from him to Stuparević. Although I'd agree with @Handsome_Devil's point about Stuparević on the previous page even if it is an argument over yards - he's definitely a 'forward' rather than a midfielder. In fact, other than Hammell's short lived spell of trying to make a 4231 happen it's been a long time since we've actually had a shape that used a true #10. The '1' in Kettlewell's original 3412 was really Spittal playing as the more advanced of a central midfield 3 as opposed to an attacking midfielder - again, semantics. A hill that I'll happily die on is that Turnbull is an #8 rather than a #10. Before that you had Robinson's Thunderdome with the midfield of Campbell, McHugh and Andy Rose while Baraclough/McGhee's teams had Pearson in as an #8 for the attacking mid role. As I say, I absolutely agree with you - it feels like trying to recruit a genuine #10 is probably a really difficult thing to get right. I can't remember if I've asked @RandomGuy. this before or not but I'd be interested to know who the closest comparisons to Spittal last season were. Edited July 26 by capt_oats 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.