If any partnership in a team needs consistency it is central defence. Who is dropping, who is pushing, who is ready to receive a pass, who is going to just smash it?
Playing a different formation and a different partnership week after week will not help our best defender. But it will come. Caleb in Taylor in the mix is a new dimension and suggests a central 3, lets see how it works this time around.
Sorry @glasshalfempty don't agree. Joe Low arguably the first name on the teamsheet for me. One poor game shouldn't change that. I'd play him with either Taylor or Skura next match.
I'm very wary of repeating myself, because not only is it boring and irritating, it also starts feeling like a vendetta.
My judgement is based purely on footballing ability and performances. As fans we all make them. So does the manager, it's his job.
When faced with the biggest game of last season, a Wembley final, Matt Bloomfield chose a centre-back pairing of Chris Forino-Joseph and Nigel Lonwijk. Joe Low was an unused substitute.
My opinion seems not too far from those of others here, in so far as I can see us deploying the following in defence depending on opposition/tactical formation
back 4 - Grimmer-Low-Taylor-Harvie (subs Hartridge LCB/LB, Pattenden RB)
back 5 - Pattenden-Low-Taylor-Hartridge-Harvie (subs Grimmer RCB/RWB, Skura CB)
The benefit of those mentioned above is it gives us height, a fair turn of speed & agility. We need the coaching team/manager to make the decision to stick with the same players so they build a rapport that should lead to consistency & elimination of the silly mistakes that have plagued us so far.
From preceeding post I dont expect you to agree with much if any of the foregoing.
I'm really not convinced by Hartridge, but by the accounts from some West Brom fans I've spoken to, Taylor is a very very good player.
We have a good game against Rotherham and our midfield trio is the best in the league, we have a poor game and pick up a point away from home against Blackpool (decent side by the way), and our manager has got it all wrong. Football fans really are fickle.
I think MB's game management has improved significantly. There was a time that when we'd be winning a game, we would have thrown on Tjay de Barr to "rough them up". Now we are switching formations and identifying problems, quite effectively. The manager obviously identified that Scowen needed to do a job higher up, perhaps to mark someone specific. How do we know that we wouldn't have lost if MB hadn't done that??
I absolutely agree that we need to stick with the same players so they can build a rapport. Consistent team selection leads to consistent performances. We haven't had consistent performances however, too many players are yet to find their form.
I don't think Matt Bloomfield is going to return to a back five, save for the odd game, so a back four it is. Btw, your suggested back four and mine only differs by one player. Skura for Low.
Of course not, we have other choices now. Declan Skura was man of the match vs Swansea City. Caleb Taylor arrives with some pedigree. Both are better options than an out-of-form Joe Low.
I was referring to the fact you cited Forino and Lonwijk as being better than Low. We are not in a position to play either of those two, so the whole point seemed at least moot-ish, if not outright moot.
I’m sure this debate is getting tedious to other posters so this is my final comment. You are correct about the Wembley final but that was a purely tactical decision by the manager to counteract the pace of Peterborough’s forwards and no slight on Low’s ability. I don’t have the stats to prove it but my guess is that Low has been in the starting X1 for almost every game since he joined us.
It was also very effective. If you remember the goals, they were not from Peterboro getting in behind us - which is what they are good at. We actually stifled them to a degree. Ricky Jade Jones is probably the quickest striker in the league, and he barely touched the ball. We matched them on the day, in an awful game of football, and lost to a freak goal.
Why don't we bring up the substitution of Vokes and Taylor that had a major impact within a minute!!??
What about when Nathan Bishop has recovered from his ankle injury, regained fitness and, for the second time in over two years, becomes available for selection?
Comments
I don’t agree.
I don't normally agree with your other half, but I do here!
Does that exchange between @glasshalffull & @glasshalfempty amount to a chocolate bar (as in a glass and a half)?
If any partnership in a team needs consistency it is central defence. Who is dropping, who is pushing, who is ready to receive a pass, who is going to just smash it?
Playing a different formation and a different partnership week after week will not help our best defender. But it will come. Caleb in Taylor in the mix is a new dimension and suggests a central 3, lets see how it works this time around.
Half full? Half empty?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lwD9SepA-uk
Sorry @glasshalfempty don't agree. Joe Low arguably the first name on the teamsheet for me. One poor game shouldn't change that. I'd play him with either Taylor or Skura next match.
Goodness me mooneyman, is this a truce or just a temporary break in hostilities?
Wow Antony Blinken must have been busy.
Award this post a CDM
I'm very wary of repeating myself, because not only is it boring and irritating, it also starts feeling like a vendetta.
My judgement is based purely on footballing ability and performances. As fans we all make them. So does the manager, it's his job.
When faced with the biggest game of last season, a Wembley final, Matt Bloomfield chose a centre-back pairing of Chris Forino-Joseph and Nigel Lonwijk. Joe Low was an unused substitute.
My other half looks VERY different to @glasshalffull I'll have you know.
@glasshalfempty as you say other opinions are available...
My opinion seems not too far from those of others here, in so far as I can see us deploying the following in defence depending on opposition/tactical formation
back 4 - Grimmer-Low-Taylor-Harvie (subs Hartridge LCB/LB, Pattenden RB)
back 5 - Pattenden-Low-Taylor-Hartridge-Harvie (subs Grimmer RCB/RWB, Skura CB)
The benefit of those mentioned above is it gives us height, a fair turn of speed & agility. We need the coaching team/manager to make the decision to stick with the same players so they build a rapport that should lead to consistency & elimination of the silly mistakes that have plagued us so far.
From preceeding post I dont expect you to agree with much if any of the foregoing.
I'm really not convinced by Hartridge, but by the accounts from some West Brom fans I've spoken to, Taylor is a very very good player.
We have a good game against Rotherham and our midfield trio is the best in the league, we have a poor game and pick up a point away from home against Blackpool (decent side by the way), and our manager has got it all wrong. Football fans really are fickle.
I think MB's game management has improved significantly. There was a time that when we'd be winning a game, we would have thrown on Tjay de Barr to "rough them up". Now we are switching formations and identifying problems, quite effectively. The manager obviously identified that Scowen needed to do a job higher up, perhaps to mark someone specific. How do we know that we wouldn't have lost if MB hadn't done that??
Surely that still makes Joe Low our best current CB of the three?
I absolutely agree that we need to stick with the same players so they can build a rapport. Consistent team selection leads to consistent performances. We haven't had consistent performances however, too many players are yet to find their form.
I don't think Matt Bloomfield is going to return to a back five, save for the odd game, so a back four it is. Btw, your suggested back four and mine only differs by one player. Skura for Low.
Of course not, we have other choices now. Declan Skura was man of the match vs Swansea City. Caleb Taylor arrives with some pedigree. Both are better options than an out-of-form Joe Low.
I was referring to the fact you cited Forino and Lonwijk as being better than Low. We are not in a position to play either of those two, so the whole point seemed at least moot-ish, if not outright moot.
I’m sure this debate is getting tedious to other posters so this is my final comment. You are correct about the Wembley final but that was a purely tactical decision by the manager to counteract the pace of Peterborough’s forwards and no slight on Low’s ability. I don’t have the stats to prove it but my guess is that Low has been in the starting X1 for almost every game since he joined us.
It was also very effective. If you remember the goals, they were not from Peterboro getting in behind us - which is what they are good at. We actually stifled them to a degree. Ricky Jade Jones is probably the quickest striker in the league, and he barely touched the ball. We matched them on the day, in an awful game of football, and lost to a freak goal.
Why don't we bring up the substitution of Vokes and Taylor that had a major impact within a minute!!??
Just for those like me who were curious about those stats.
2023/24
L1 - 30 (4)
FAC - 2 (0)
LC - 2 (0)
EFL - 2 (1)
TOTAL: 36 (5) / 58 (62%)
2024/25
ever present (100%)
ridiculous, low is class and will play in the prem in the future
And he is still only 22.
Low is quality but I’d be amazed if he played in the premier league.
What about when Nathan Bishop has recovered from his ankle injury, regained fitness and, for the second time in over two years, becomes available for selection?
The Blackpool people are brilliant Had a wonderful time long into the night. The brotherhood and sisterhood of Association Football is unmatched
@glasshalfempty it would be weird having sex and an image of Allan Parry popped into your head
It is. It really is.
Especially if you were Allan Parry.
Would it be weird if you were having sex with Allan Parry and his image popped into your head? I guess that’s probably position dependent!