@DevC why not try something different, or is that too avant-garde for you? The current methods, without Kashket, (including the last half of the previous season), is utter gash to watch. At least it offers a variation of the weekly dross, that you don't suffer!
@Malone speak for yourself, I'm not in my 60''s! @DevC using your logic, we may as well give up on the rest of the season, because playing as we are, we've little/no chance of making the play offs. The formation I suggested is hardly set in stone, it is fluid and I've seen PCH play as a wing back. Try watching us 30+ times a season before your caustic/sarcastic replies, they may carry some credit.
While I think it is unlikely we will reach the playoffs, logic for me is to continue to play the tactics that got the team into the position to challenge for them (and to the second best cup run in history etc etc) in order to give the best possible chance of doing so. Logic is not to drop arguably your best player and play with virtually no defence in a wild gamble.
Don't think 5 at the back is a silly suggestion. Would let Harriman get forward more and hopefully get JJ crossing more balls to Bayo. Pierre with 2 of Muller WDH and Sido as the central 3.
3 of O'Nien, Saunders, Gape and Bloomfield with Kashket/PCH off of Bayo.
It would in my opinion be a daft time to launch into experimental formations.
Longer term actually five at the back may be an option if Muller can develop into a sweeper/ball playing CD may work. But it would need full backs being the two wide midfielders (such as JJ and Harriman) not wingers (such as PCH and Weston).
@DevC Virtually no defence! When defending 5 at the back, when attacking 5 in midfield 3 of whom can go forward with two holding midfielders, doesn't sound too bad to me. Who do you aspire to as a coach, George Graham? I believe that if the ball is in the opponents half/box for the majority of the game, with the ball in our possession, we are more likely to score than concede. There is also a decent chance we will get to see some form of entertainment.
5 at the back could be interesting, on the hope that Pierre can guide WDH and Muller a bit.
Harriman has played plenty of games in midfield anyway, and I'm sure JJ could do a similar job.
You'd then have Saunders able to focus more on the attacking side, and with 2 proper forwards ahead of him.
Lower league teams and moving from back 4s is difficullt though
Two points. I'm getting tired of seeing that there are a dozen new comments about Dave Tarpey, only to discover a load of tedious comments about formations.
Second point. I worked at RAF stations in the Met Office in the 'fifties and "gash" was much used at the time. I use it sparingly nowadays to avoid upsetting people 20-30 years younger.
Ewan, I'll leave you to your fantasy. For what it is worth 352 with Weston and PCH the two wide men in the five and Jacobson on the bench would be suicidal IMHO.
What exactly are you hoping to see about Tarpey exactly @micra?
He scores most weeks, we can't sign anyone until the summer anyway, and it's unlikely 1) we would add another forward when we're awash with them, and 2) could come up with a deal for him to make it worthwhile anyway.
Unless you want witless conjecture about how he'd do? Which noone really has any idea of. It's been done to death
@micra Don't know if this ties with your RAF experiences, but In the naval service 'gash' means rubbish, both as in litter and as in 'that's a gash idea'.
(I know this is further deviating from discussing the merits of Dave Tarpey as a potential Wycombe centre forward, but until the Gasroom powers that be provide a designated lexicography thread I'm afraid this is just where we are.)
Dev, so we couldn't play JJ on the left side as a wing back if Weston-super-Mare can't manage the role. IMHO you can't see anything outside of the status quo. At least my "fantasy" is at least feasible, unlike the drooling over some girls legs on a train eh?
@EwanHoosaami Got to take issue with your last comment. I actually think Dev has more chance of pulling than we have of watching GA undergo a Damascus-like conversion to putting out a team designed to entertain
Considering we've done at the very least OK this season, and definitely more than OK in the cups, I don't see why we should change dramatically while we still have a chance of getting in the playoffs by sticking to what we are good at.
Sure, if we were out of it I could see an argument for experimenting and beginning preparations for next season.
@Malone said:
What exactly are you hoping to see about Tarpey exactly micra?
He scores most weeks, we can't sign anyone until the summer anyway, and it's unlikely 1) we would add another forward when we're awash with them, and 2) could come up with a deal for him to make it worthwhile anyway.
Unless you want witless conjecture about how he'd do? Which noone really has any idea of. It's been done to death
None of the above unless it was a reported comment by him that he would welcome a chance to join Wycombe Wanderers. The forwards we're awash with are mainly nearing the end of their careers or are injury prone or both.
I'm going to cease looking at this thread forthwith if not fifth.
We have Bayo and Hayes for next season. One has been terrific and is the centre of our play, and one is the club captain Ainsworth will be stubborn around.
Paris and Kashket are also key players, yes injury affected, but they're here and key players.
Weston has come to the fore recently, and yes injury affected, but here another year.
Then you have last year's Tarpey, Southwell, who again will surely be given another season.
We still haven't quite worked out how to get Saunders into our line up the best way. He's more of a forward player than a midfielder.
So i'm not sure how you can then add Tarpey into that?
Comments
@DevC why not try something different, or is that too avant-garde for you? The current methods, without Kashket, (including the last half of the previous season), is utter gash to watch. At least it offers a variation of the weekly dross, that you don't suffer!
Using that logic, why not try dropping Blackman and playing rush goalies.
Six games from end of season and challenging for a play-off spot. Hardly time for wild gambles.
Did a guy in his 60s (i presume) just use the word gash to describe something!
I chuckled. Then gently despaired
@Malone speak for yourself, I'm not in my 60''s!
@DevC using your logic, we may as well give up on the rest of the season, because playing as we are, we've little/no chance of making the play offs. The formation I suggested is hardly set in stone, it is fluid and I've seen PCH play as a wing back. Try watching us 30+ times a season before your caustic/sarcastic replies, they may carry some credit.
Sorry @EwanHoosaami , i'll give you "very late" 50s if that makes you happier :-)
While I think it is unlikely we will reach the playoffs, logic for me is to continue to play the tactics that got the team into the position to challenge for them (and to the second best cup run in history etc etc) in order to give the best possible chance of doing so. Logic is not to drop arguably your best player and play with virtually no defence in a wild gamble.
Don't think 5 at the back is a silly suggestion. Would let Harriman get forward more and hopefully get JJ crossing more balls to Bayo. Pierre with 2 of Muller WDH and Sido as the central 3.
3 of O'Nien, Saunders, Gape and Bloomfield with Kashket/PCH off of Bayo.
It would in my opinion be a daft time to launch into experimental formations.
Longer term actually five at the back may be an option if Muller can develop into a sweeper/ball playing CD may work. But it would need full backs being the two wide midfielders (such as JJ and Harriman) not wingers (such as PCH and Weston).
@DevC Virtually no defence! When defending 5 at the back, when attacking 5 in midfield 3 of whom can go forward with two holding midfielders, doesn't sound too bad to me. Who do you aspire to as a coach, George Graham? I believe that if the ball is in the opponents half/box for the majority of the game, with the ball in our possession, we are more likely to score than concede. There is also a decent chance we will get to see some form of entertainment.
@Malone, do you have some form of prejudice against more senior people? :-)
just never heard one use the word "gash" is all.
Bit of a "yoof" type of phrase
5 at the back could be interesting, on the hope that Pierre can guide WDH and Muller a bit.
Harriman has played plenty of games in midfield anyway, and I'm sure JJ could do a similar job.
You'd then have Saunders able to focus more on the attacking side, and with 2 proper forwards ahead of him.
Lower league teams and moving from back 4s is difficullt though
Two points. I'm getting tired of seeing that there are a dozen new comments about Dave Tarpey, only to discover a load of tedious comments about formations.
Second point. I worked at RAF stations in the Met Office in the 'fifties and "gash" was much used at the time. I use it sparingly nowadays to avoid upsetting people 20-30 years younger.
@Malone I try to keep youthful!
I'm shocked to discover contemporary definitions of "gash". I'm pretty sure it meant spare or superfluous in those ancient times.
Ewan, I'll leave you to your fantasy. For what it is worth 352 with Weston and PCH the two wide men in the five and Jacobson on the bench would be suicidal IMHO.
What exactly are you hoping to see about Tarpey exactly @micra?
He scores most weeks, we can't sign anyone until the summer anyway, and it's unlikely 1) we would add another forward when we're awash with them, and 2) could come up with a deal for him to make it worthwhile anyway.
Unless you want witless conjecture about how he'd do? Which noone really has any idea of. It's been done to death
Back in my day "gash" simply meant a cut, typically to the knee. Gashed your knee etc
@micra Don't know if this ties with your RAF experiences, but In the naval service 'gash' means rubbish, both as in litter and as in 'that's a gash idea'.
(I know this is further deviating from discussing the merits of Dave Tarpey as a potential Wycombe centre forward, but until the Gasroom powers that be provide a designated lexicography thread I'm afraid this is just where we are.)
Dev, so we couldn't play JJ on the left side as a wing back if Weston-super-Mare can't manage the role. IMHO you can't see anything outside of the status quo. At least my "fantasy" is at least feasible, unlike the drooling over some girls legs on a train eh?
@EwanHoosaami Got to take issue with your last comment. I actually think Dev has more chance of pulling than we have of watching GA undergo a Damascus-like conversion to putting out a team designed to entertain
Considering we've done at the very least OK this season, and definitely more than OK in the cups, I don't see why we should change dramatically while we still have a chance of getting in the playoffs by sticking to what we are good at.
Sure, if we were out of it I could see an argument for experimenting and beginning preparations for next season.
@bookertease fair point, even if it conjures up hideous images!
Whatever you do don't image search "nasty gash" at the dinner table it took me a lot of explaining to mrs ital
i did chuckle!
None of the above unless it was a reported comment by him that he would welcome a chance to join Wycombe Wanderers. The forwards we're awash with are mainly nearing the end of their careers or are injury prone or both.
I'm going to cease looking at this thread forthwith if not fifth.
We have Bayo and Hayes for next season. One has been terrific and is the centre of our play, and one is the club captain Ainsworth will be stubborn around.
Paris and Kashket are also key players, yes injury affected, but they're here and key players.
Weston has come to the fore recently, and yes injury affected, but here another year.
Then you have last year's Tarpey, Southwell, who again will surely be given another season.
We still haven't quite worked out how to get Saunders into our line up the best way. He's more of a forward player than a midfielder.
So i'm not sure how you can then add Tarpey into that?
You've tempted me back Malone! I think you'll find Matt Bloomfield is the club captain and I agree that to describe 5 goals as a haul is questionable.
@micra - So how many goals do we think does constitute a "haul"? Nice to see you, yesterday, by the way.
Depends on the player @Cyclops. For Kashket 5 would be a drought; for Blooms it's a glut.