I thought it was interesting that we won a game 0 -3, when often we turn down the volume at one or two. I reckon the substitutions made the continued attack minded play more likely.
!st substitution: [Forced] Taff is a wonder - his assurance, physical presence and acquring the ball skills are absolutely tip top, if there is an area which he could improve it is to increase the percentage of time that he passes towards Wycombe player who then stands a chance of keeping it.
2nd and 3rd substitutions: [Min 65 - Maybe one unplanned / one planned] Thompson for Freeman suggested by the pitch and although that looks defensive, actually freed Wing and Scowen to appear more often near the opposition goal. McCleary for Hanlan probably planned, but did happen before minute 70.
4th substution: [Min 86 (8 mins to play)] I was so glad when this happened. I was struggling to see who was going to come off for Campbell to show his flair and desire to attack. Gareth was imaginative and I guess that this change could be used in future to change our threat profile if it is desparate that we score towards the end of a game.
Credit to the boss. Four substitutions in a game we were winning! Our second goal suggested to their supporters that there was no come-back coming and the third confirmed it. They voted with their feet. There is some flexibility now that we didn't have. I just hope that our centre back trio are soon mended.
In Gareth we trust. We are well worth watching at the moment.
Big Dunc was a strange appointment. Can’t see the cultural fit and he may find lower League difficult to assimilate to in short order. It’s not like Tony Adams but it’s not not like Tony Adams.
One real positive in our playoff chase: all those 3-0 wins mean we are right in the mix with the three teams above us in goal difference, which is rare for us.
Changing subject - but still Derby related - about 18 months ago many of us immersed ourselves in the events and nuances of the EFL’s consideration of Derby conduct and the delays that led to their points deduction being levied last season, rather than the one befor. But something I have never understood, and cannot recalling having been explained at the time, was what the EFL’s rationale was in publishing two alternative sets of fixtures (one with us in the Championship and the other with Derby staying there) when at the same time allowing Derby until two weeks into the next season before they had to submit their.corrected accounts (re-presenting the amortisation of the transfer fees correctly). Does anyone have a clear explanation?
It was the appeal/review panel - which by it's nature has to be separate from the EFL - who requested Derby resubmit their accounts - not the EFL themselves.
Had Derby published before the season started they would have had the points deducted and been relegated rather than us. However, since the panel only stipulated something like "in a reasonable time" rather than give Derby an actual deadline they were able to delay publishing accounts until after the new season started.
I actually think in that respect the EFL did the correct thing in having two sets of fixtures prepared.
Thanks Twizz, for providing the first rational explanation I have seen. Nevertheless, what a comedy of non-joined up thinking of the highest, incompetent, order.
If we're going to be playing without Taf, Mawson and Forino for the foreseeable I think we should bring Thompson back into the team and switch formations to make it more defensive.
I'd like us to play 4321:
Obita, Jacobson, Grimmer, McCarthy
Thompson, Wing, Scowen
Wheeler/McCleary, Hanlan/Campbell
Vokes
That will give us the defensive cover we need while allowing Wing to get further forward and link up play.
Thumbs up to that. I put something on Twitter earlier today, suggesting that Curtis Thompson should start ahead of Nick Freeman. I’d be inclined to keep McCleary and Campbell back as impact subs.
Spare a thought for poor Jack Wakely, who must have thought his opportunity for meaningful first team action had finally arrived, before watching us keep a clean sheet with four full backs for an hour.
He really is the 'In Case of Emergency, Break the Glass' defender for us, and that emergency would be literally not having enough defenders or utility players (Wheeler, etc.).
I do wonder if Wakely may still be the better option on Saturday - presuming none of Forino, Mawson or Taf are fit.
Particularly if Gareth wants to go with a back four instead of a three.
Playing Port Vale with three fullbacks (although Jack Grimmer is as much a centre half now) across a back three is fine when they don’t have any fit forwards or anyone with any physical presence, but that definitely won’t be the case at the weekend.
James Collins will be a completely different kettle of fish on Saturday and we really might need someone a bit bigger to stop him providing a platform for their forwards who are scoring for fun at the minute.
He’s pretty inexperienced and still a bit of an unknown quantity but I was impressed by how he played against Bristol City’s Chris Martin in the League Cup. Martin’s a similar sort to of player to Collins and he tried to use his experience and physical power to intimidate Wakely who didn’t back away at all and did his job well.
Not an easy selection for Gareth, let’s hope our physios play a blinder.
No offence but if you think Wakely has a chance of starting (assuming JJ Grimmer and McCarthy are fit), you’re bonkers. It’s derby county. Unbeaten since October. We’re not starting a lad who has only played circa 15 mins of pro league football.
Maybe this is all a ruse, and we will unexpectedly play a 7-2-1 formation with three fit CBs and two fullbacks on each side, with Scowen and Thompson providing cover and everyone punting long balls up for Hanlan to chase.
It would be a very brave call granted, but what I’m really saying is I don’t much fancy going into a game against an experienced, physically powerful front line without a big dominant centre-half type.
If Wakely is the only fit one left in the building he has to come into the reckoning.
I've gone from being very annoyed that I'll miss us battering Derby - p**s poor holiday planning on my behalf - to really relieved I'll not see us getting trounced.
This really could go either way and I feel it's down to how GA/Dobbo cope with the defensive injuries.
Somehow the loss of Anis has become almost irrelevant!
At least I will be able to (legitimately) watch from Vipienne on Saturday.
A bit reminiscent of going into a play-off semi-final away at Plymouth with a goalkeeper that was making his senior debut.
Cue one of the all-time Gareth Ainsworth classics, that saw a full on kamikaze press that kept Plymouth 60 yards away from our goal until the last 10 minutes by which time they were 0-3 down.
Thumbs up to that. The only slight reservation in my mind arises from the difficulty of predicting how well our defence will cope (without a single “recognised” centre half) against more potent strike forces than the one which Port Vale were reduced to as a result of injuries to their attacking players.
I have in mind Derby, Bolton and Barnsley of course.
But, fear not. Our lads will leave nothing on the pitch. And I’ll repeat something that probably shook me ole mate @Malone to the core. I’d like to see Curtis Thompson start ahead of Nick Freeman for next Saturday’s match. Very much because of the current centre half mini crisis. A one-off (or as many off as the injury situation may dictate)!
Comments
I thought it was interesting that we won a game 0 -3, when often we turn down the volume at one or two. I reckon the substitutions made the continued attack minded play more likely.
!st substitution: [Forced] Taff is a wonder - his assurance, physical presence and acquring the ball skills are absolutely tip top, if there is an area which he could improve it is to increase the percentage of time that he passes towards Wycombe player who then stands a chance of keeping it.
2nd and 3rd substitutions: [Min 65 - Maybe one unplanned / one planned] Thompson for Freeman suggested by the pitch and although that looks defensive, actually freed Wing and Scowen to appear more often near the opposition goal. McCleary for Hanlan probably planned, but did happen before minute 70.
4th substution: [Min 86 (8 mins to play)] I was so glad when this happened. I was struggling to see who was going to come off for Campbell to show his flair and desire to attack. Gareth was imaginative and I guess that this change could be used in future to change our threat profile if it is desparate that we score towards the end of a game.
Credit to the boss. Four substitutions in a game we were winning! Our second goal suggested to their supporters that there was no come-back coming and the third confirmed it. They voted with their feet. There is some flexibility now that we didn't have. I just hope that our centre back trio are soon mended.
In Gareth we trust. We are well worth watching at the moment.
They were a right dirty bunch before he arrived, so... No idea about signings, doubt it as he's barely been there long
FGR signed a mere 11 players in January
https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/league-one-bottom-side-forest-8110822
Big Dunc was a strange appointment. Can’t see the cultural fit and he may find lower League difficult to assimilate to in short order. It’s not like Tony Adams but it’s not not like Tony Adams.
Put it this way: I thought NASA were sending footage of a strange potholed planet they had discovered.
One real positive in our playoff chase: all those 3-0 wins mean we are right in the mix with the three teams above us in goal difference, which is rare for us.
Changing subject - but still Derby related - about 18 months ago many of us immersed ourselves in the events and nuances of the EFL’s consideration of Derby conduct and the delays that led to their points deduction being levied last season, rather than the one befor. But something I have never understood, and cannot recalling having been explained at the time, was what the EFL’s rationale was in publishing two alternative sets of fixtures (one with us in the Championship and the other with Derby staying there) when at the same time allowing Derby until two weeks into the next season before they had to submit their.corrected accounts (re-presenting the amortisation of the transfer fees correctly). Does anyone have a clear explanation?
It was the appeal/review panel - which by it's nature has to be separate from the EFL - who requested Derby resubmit their accounts - not the EFL themselves.
Had Derby published before the season started they would have had the points deducted and been relegated rather than us. However, since the panel only stipulated something like "in a reasonable time" rather than give Derby an actual deadline they were able to delay publishing accounts until after the new season started.
I actually think in that respect the EFL did the correct thing in having two sets of fixtures prepared.
Thanks Twizz, for providing the first rational explanation I have seen. Nevertheless, what a comedy of non-joined up thinking of the highest, incompetent, order.
If we're going to be playing without Taf, Mawson and Forino for the foreseeable I think we should bring Thompson back into the team and switch formations to make it more defensive.
I'd like us to play 4321:
Obita, Jacobson, Grimmer, McCarthy
Thompson, Wing, Scowen
Wheeler/McCleary, Hanlan/Campbell
Vokes
That will give us the defensive cover we need while allowing Wing to get further forward and link up play.
Was thinking exactly this earlier today especially against Derby. But more a 352 to start with Vokes and Hanlan up top.
Definitely go with Scowen, Thompson and Wing
Skysports stats suggest 32 Port Vale passes to our 28. Was it that bad?
I'm wondering if there's been a major glitch there, because it's saying we completed 7 passes to their 6...
Especially as the same source (Opta) is showing 3 completed passes in Oxford v Shrewsbury
Thumbs up to that. I put something on Twitter earlier today, suggesting that Curtis Thompson should start ahead of Nick Freeman. I’d be inclined to keep McCleary and Campbell back as impact subs.
Spare a thought for poor Jack Wakely, who must have thought his opportunity for meaningful first team action had finally arrived, before watching us keep a clean sheet with four full backs for an hour.
He really is the 'In Case of Emergency, Break the Glass' defender for us, and that emergency would be literally not having enough defenders or utility players (Wheeler, etc.).
I do wonder if Wakely may still be the better option on Saturday - presuming none of Forino, Mawson or Taf are fit.
Particularly if Gareth wants to go with a back four instead of a three.
Playing Port Vale with three fullbacks (although Jack Grimmer is as much a centre half now) across a back three is fine when they don’t have any fit forwards or anyone with any physical presence, but that definitely won’t be the case at the weekend.
James Collins will be a completely different kettle of fish on Saturday and we really might need someone a bit bigger to stop him providing a platform for their forwards who are scoring for fun at the minute.
He’s pretty inexperienced and still a bit of an unknown quantity but I was impressed by how he played against Bristol City’s Chris Martin in the League Cup. Martin’s a similar sort to of player to Collins and he tried to use his experience and physical power to intimidate Wakely who didn’t back away at all and did his job well.
Not an easy selection for Gareth, let’s hope our physios play a blinder.
No offence but if you think Wakely has a chance of starting (assuming JJ Grimmer and McCarthy are fit), you’re bonkers. It’s derby county. Unbeaten since October. We’re not starting a lad who has only played circa 15 mins of pro league football.
Maybe this is all a ruse, and we will unexpectedly play a 7-2-1 formation with three fit CBs and two fullbacks on each side, with Scowen and Thompson providing cover and everyone punting long balls up for Hanlan to chase.
It would be a very brave call granted, but what I’m really saying is I don’t much fancy going into a game against an experienced, physically powerful front line without a big dominant centre-half type.
If Wakely is the only fit one left in the building he has to come into the reckoning.
I've gone from being very annoyed that I'll miss us battering Derby - p**s poor holiday planning on my behalf - to really relieved I'll not see us getting trounced.
This really could go either way and I feel it's down to how GA/Dobbo cope with the defensive injuries.
Somehow the loss of Anis has become almost irrelevant!
At least I will be able to (legitimately) watch from Vipienne on Saturday.
A bit reminiscent of going into a play-off semi-final away at Plymouth with a goalkeeper that was making his senior debut.
Cue one of the all-time Gareth Ainsworth classics, that saw a full on kamikaze press that kept Plymouth 60 yards away from our goal until the last 10 minutes by which time they were 0-3 down.
I genuinely think for the first time in a long time, teams fear playing Wycombe Wanderers. I fancy us in any game in this division when we turn up.
Thumbs up to that. The only slight reservation in my mind arises from the difficulty of predicting how well our defence will cope (without a single “recognised” centre half) against more potent strike forces than the one which Port Vale were reduced to as a result of injuries to their attacking players.
I have in mind Derby, Bolton and Barnsley of course.
But, fear not. Our lads will leave nothing on the pitch. And I’ll repeat something that probably shook me ole mate @Malone to the core. I’d like to see Curtis Thompson start ahead of Nick Freeman for next Saturday’s match. Very much because of the current centre half mini crisis. A one-off (or as many off as the injury situation may dictate)!
I had to Google who Nick Chapman was and found out that he is an MMA fighter known as The Headhunter.
I guess he won't be as mobile as Curtis, but may be able to do a job in defence.
Nick Chapman?
Nice edit!
Cheeky that @micra