david in sweden Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 (edited) Even allowing for the fact that we've had our 3 most experienced strikers away from the club for half the season, have our current lads done that badly.? OK ...!!!! I know we have one of the lowest goal tallies in the CCC, but look at what we loaned out. Rasiak has been available to Watford for half the season and he's scored 3-4 (?) Stern John has more or less been a regular in Bris. City side and got only ...2 and Saga got ...5, in his stay in Denmark. Of our goalscorers McGoldrick has 7 in the league and 2 more in League Cup. Surman has scored 5 ..and even BWP has 3. The main fault has been that in previous years, Midfielders have weighed in with a few goals whereas; Holmes and Lallana (both injured a lot) have 5 between them, of the rest 4 were from loan players, and only Perry and Skacel has scored (of the defenders) and Stern John ( 1 before he left.) In terms of goal tally; McG, Surman and Lallana are at least as good as those who were loaned out. Statistically at least, we'd scarcely have done better if they (the loan-ees) had been here all the time.! Sure I'd like to see more goals , but all things considered maybe it wasn't SO bad to loan out these guys ? Edited 12 January, 2009 by david in sweden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 12 January, 2009 Author Share Posted 12 January, 2009 (edited) Even allowing for the fact that we've had our 3 most experienced strikers away from the club for half the season, have our current lads done that badly.? OK ...!!!! I know we have one of the lowest goal tallies in the CCC, but look at what we loaned out. Rasiak has been available to Watford for half the season and he's scored 3-4 (?) Stern John has more or less been a regular in Bris. City side and got only ...2 and Saga got ...5, in his stay in Denmark. Of our goalscorers McGoldrick has 7 in the league and 2 more in League Cup. Surman has scored 5 ..and even BWP has 3. The main fault has been that in previous years, Midfielders have weighed in with a few goals whereas; Holmes and Lallana (both injured a lot) have 5 between them, of the rest 4 were from loan players, and only Perry and Skacel has scored (of the defenders) and Stern John ( 1 before he left.) In terms of goal tally; McG, Surman and Lallana are at least as good as those who were loaned out. Statistically at least, we'd scarcely have done better if they (the loan-ees) had been here all the time.! Sure I'd like to see more goals , but all things considered maybe it wasn't SO bad to loan out these guys ? Edited 12 January, 2009 by david in sweden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Porter Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 We've lacked experience in the final third all season. No one making the right sort of runs or getting into goal scoring positions. Hopefully now with Saga up there we might start seeing these things more often and hopefully the goals will come. Now we have all our attacking players fit and available hopefully they will settle and work well together. Up until this point our strikers have been pretty poor although it's a bit unfair to moan too much about someone like McGoldrick playing his first proper season as a lone striker in a poor side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy_Porter Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 We've lacked experience in the final third all season. No one making the right sort of runs or getting into goal scoring positions. Hopefully now with Saga up there we might start seeing these things more often and hopefully the goals will come. Now we have all our attacking players fit and available hopefully they will settle and work well together. Up until this point our strikers have been pretty poor although it's a bit unfair to moan too much about someone like McGoldrick playing his first proper season as a lone striker in a poor side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stax Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 I still believe we are short on goals i was hoping Stern John would return this month but no chance of that. Im glad Saga is back but i still believe we are gonna need more fire power if we are gonna stay up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stax Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 I still believe we are short on goals i was hoping Stern John would return this month but no chance of that. Im glad Saga is back but i still believe we are gonna need more fire power if we are gonna stay up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 The trouble for me is that DmcG is so goddam LAZY. Never makes a decent run, doesn't offer a 'defend from the front' mentality that is so important, doesn't close down their strikers, and boy is he slow. He's also not got vision and can't see a pass when another player is in another position better than his own. This is what makes me a bit more optimistic about our chances if we can keep hold of Saga and we're not only playing him to put him in the shop window. He does a lot of the above. If we could get another in - a real harrying, annoying type like Paul Dickov, I reckon that would be much better than a languid, nonchalant player who seems to play for himself and the torso he loves so much. Rant over. Short answer is that our strikers are not good enough but would be even worse if we sold Saga to make a quick buck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 The trouble for me is that DmcG is so goddam LAZY. Never makes a decent run, doesn't offer a 'defend from the front' mentality that is so important, doesn't close down their strikers, and boy is he slow. He's also not got vision and can't see a pass when another player is in another position better than his own. This is what makes me a bit more optimistic about our chances if we can keep hold of Saga and we're not only playing him to put him in the shop window. He does a lot of the above. If we could get another in - a real harrying, annoying type like Paul Dickov, I reckon that would be much better than a languid, nonchalant player who seems to play for himself and the torso he loves so much. Rant over. Short answer is that our strikers are not good enough but would be even worse if we sold Saga to make a quick buck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Martini Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Besides that DMG has played on the wing on several occasions as well, that should be taken in to account when judging his goal tally. But even though I think DMG has potential he drifts in and out of matches to often and I think even if Saga perhaps scores less then DMG we will be better as a team with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Martini Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Besides that DMG has played on the wing on several occasions as well, that should be taken in to account when judging his goal tally. But even though I think DMG has potential he drifts in and out of matches to often and I think even if Saga perhaps scores less then DMG we will be better as a team with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egreog Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Yes........ quite probably the most inept, ineffectual, half interested strike force in the history of SFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
egreog Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Yes........ quite probably the most inept, ineffectual, half interested strike force in the history of SFC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 We have only had one striker this season and he is learning his trade. The others Pekhart and Robertson have not been good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 We have only had one striker this season and he is learning his trade. The others Pekhart and Robertson have not been good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Yes........ quite probably the most inept, ineffectual, half interested strike force in the history of SFC It's no Neil Shipperley and Gordon Watson... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Yes........ quite probably the most inept, ineffectual, half interested strike force in the history of SFC It's no Neil Shipperley and Gordon Watson... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 .. all things considered maybe it wasn't SO bad to loan out these guys ? No, it was disastrous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyNorthernSaints Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 The strikers have not been good enough and the side needs an experienced centre forward to lead the line and score goals. Saying that the service to the strikers has been poor as well. McGoldrick might score 15 by the end of season but that will not be enough others start scoring. Some shooting practice and shots from outside the box might be worth a try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Even allowing for the fact that we've had our 3 most experienced strikers away from the club for half the season, have our current lads done that badly.? The main fault has been that in previous years, Midfielders have weighed in with a few goals whereas; Holmes and Lallana (both injured a lot) have 5 between them, of the rest 4 were from loan players, and only Perry and Skacel has scored (of the defenders) and Stern John ( 1 before he left.) I think this statement is open to debate. Even when WGS was here our midfield was woeful in terms of goalscoring, we relied on Beattie and Ohmygod. We have not had good goalscoring midfield for a number of seasons now. But to answer your question, loaning out 3 experienced strikers and relying on boys to play as a lone striker was a total disaster. It takes a lot of experience and not a small amount of strength to play as a lone striker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulwantsapint Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 DMG is lazy but we have had players up front who cover every blade of grass & cant score sorry Ormerod or Lallana We have had real lazy ****ers that have scored for fun Rasiak even MLT ( not DMG is in MLT league ) Who was midfielder to reach double figures with goals? not counting MLT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelkel31 Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 The trouble for me is that DmcG is so goddam LAZY. Never makes a decent run, doesn't offer a 'defend from the front' mentality that is so important, doesn't close down their strikers, and boy is he slow. He's also not got vision and can't see a pass when another player is in another position better than his own. This is what makes me a bit more optimistic about our chances if we can keep hold of Saga and we're not only playing him to put him in the shop window. He does a lot of the above. If we could get another in - a real harrying, annoying type like Paul Dickov, I reckon that would be much better than a languid, nonchalant player who seems to play for himself and the torso he loves so much. Rant over. Short answer is that our strikers are not good enough but would be even worse if we sold Saga to make a quick buck. youve spotted this and called it lazy, ive spooted this and stated its lack of confidence and too high expectation on him, the problem is has the manager spotted this at all and done anything to correct it, going by the way he handles match days the answer is no, and this is the problem with our young team, not having things that are wrong pointed out to them so that they can learn. it is true that his strike rate is maybe not quite good enough, but it is his first season as a starter, he will learn, the biggest reason for our lack of goals is down to the poor amount of movement along the front line, largely down to the fact that we often play with one up top, its now wonder we dont score much at home is it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Smith Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Even allowing for the fact that we've had our 3 most experienced strikers away from the club for half the season, have our current lads done that badly.? OK ...!!!! I know we have one of the lowest goal tallies in the CCC, but look at what we loaned out. Rasiak has been available to Watford for half the season and he's scored 3-4 (?) Stern John has more or less been a regular in Bris. City side and got only ...2 and Saga got ...5, in his stay in Denmark. Of our goalscorers McGoldrick has 7 in the league and 2 more in League Cup. Surman has scored 5 ..and even BWP has 3. The main fault has been that in previous years, Midfielders have weighed in with a few goals whereas; Holmes and Lallana (both injured a lot) have 5 between them, of the rest 4 were from loan players, and only Perry and Skacel has scored (of the defenders) and Stern John ( 1 before he left.) In terms of goal tally; McG, Surman and Lallana are at least as good as those who were loaned out. Statistically at least, we'd scarcely have done better if they (the loan-ees) had been here all the time.! Sure I'd like to see more goals , but all things considered maybe it wasn't SO bad to loan out these guys ? So, on this rationale, if Nigel Pearson had been retained, we'd ne top of the league. Look at his record, gaols for, goals against and points and we would be running away with the league. Oops, sorry, I thought you were joking. But you;re serious aren't you. You seriously believe that we were better off with DMG and Robertson, rather than John, Rasiak and Saga! 'My eyes are dim I cannot see, I have not brought my specs with me, I have not brought my specs with me'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Scored the least goals had the most shots. You decide what that means..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjinksie Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Even allowing for the fact that we've had our 3 most experienced strikers away from the club for half the season, have our current lads done that badly.? OK ...!!!! I know we have one of the lowest goal tallies in the CCC, but look at what we loaned out. Rasiak has been available to Watford for half the season and he's scored 3-4 (?) Stern John has more or less been a regular in Bris. City side and got only ...2 and Saga got ...5, in his stay in Denmark. Of our goalscorers McGoldrick has 7 in the league and 2 more in League Cup. Surman has scored 5 ..and even BWP has 3. The main fault has been that in previous years, Midfielders have weighed in with a few goals whereas; Holmes and Lallana (both injured a lot) have 5 between them, of the rest 4 were from loan players, and only Perry and Skacel has scored (of the defenders) and Stern John ( 1 before he left.) In terms of goal tally; McG, Surman and Lallana are at least as good as those who were loaned out. Statistically at least, we'd scarcely have done better if they (the loan-ees) had been here all the time.! Sure I'd like to see more goals , but all things considered maybe it wasn't SO bad to loan out these guys ? our strikers are sh!te we need someone who can get 20 goals plus a season, such as stern or rasiak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Scored the least goals had the most shots. You decide what that means..... Thats it in a nutshell. Were creating, arguably one of the better midfields in the CCC, but no-one who is a clinical finisher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelkel31 Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 Thats it in a nutshell. Were creating, arguably one of the better midfields in the CCC, but no-one who is a clinical finisher. conclusive proof that you can spin statistics any way you want, anyones whos seen a large amount of games will tell you that we have created very few good chances, our shots are mostly from outside the box, and almost exclusively outside the six yrd box! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 anyones whos seen a large amount of games will tell you that we have created very few good chances, our shots are mostly from outside the box, and almost exclusively outside the six yrd box! I think that is the symptom ,not the cause. We have lots of long range shots exactly because we dont have a striker who gets in position in the six yard box and knocks in from a few yards (oh and also knows the offside rule). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Village Saint Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 our strikers are sh!te we need someone who can get 20 goals plus a season, such as stern or rasiak. Uh no. At their current rate they will get 10 between them. However, there is a lad at Southampton who already has 9 and gets better with every game so will probably end up with 20. His name is David McGoldrick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 since I have been going; 73/74 Channon 21 74/75 Channon 20 75/76 Channon 20 76/77 MacDougall 23 77/78 Boyer 17 78/79 Holmes 8 79/80 Boyer 23 80/81 Moran 18 81/82 Keegan 26 82/83 Danny Wallace 12 83/84 Moran 21 84/85 Moran 12 85/86 Armstrong 10 86/87 Clarke 20 87/88 Clarke 16 88/89 Rod Wallace 12 89/90 Le Tissier 20 90/91 Le Tissier 19 91/92 Shearer 13 92/93 Le Tissier 15 93/94 Le Tissier 25 94/95 Le Tissier 19 95/96 Shipperley/ Le Tissier 7 96/97 Le Tissier 13 97/98 Le Tissier/ Ostenstad 11 98/99 Le Tissier/ Ostenstad 7 99/00 Pahars 13 00/01 Beattie 11 01/02 Pahars 14 02/03 Beattie 23 03/04 Beattie 14 04/05 Crouch 12 05/06 Fuller 9 06/07 Rasiak 21 07/08 John 20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 biggest prblem is that we never have enough players in the box when we do manage to get the ball in there, unless you pressurise defenders in the CCC you rely on great strikes rather than picking up the half chances Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 since I have been going; 73/74 Channon 21 74/75 Channon 20 75/76 Channon 20 76/77 MacDougall 23 77/78 Boyer 17 78/79 Holmes 8 79/80 Boyer 23 80/81 Moran 18 81/82 Keegan 26 82/83 Danny Wallace 12 83/84 Moran 21 84/85 Moran 12 85/86 Armstrong 10 86/87 Clarke 20 87/88 Clarke 16 88/89 Rod Wallace 12 89/90 Le Tissier 20 90/91 Le Tissier 19 91/92 Shearer 13 92/93 Le Tissier 15 93/94 Le Tissier 25 94/95 Le Tissier 19 95/96 Shipperley/ Le Tissier 7 96/97 Le Tissier 13 97/98 Le Tissier/ Ostenstad 11 98/99 Le Tissier/ Ostenstad 7 99/00 Pahars 13 00/01 Beattie 11 01/02 Pahars 14 02/03 Beattie 23 03/04 Beattie 14 04/05 Crouch 12 05/06 Fuller 9 06/07 Rasiak 21 07/08 John 20 7 at half way stage puts him on target to be up with many other seasons top scorers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 wasted so much time with Pekhard and Robertson. Patterson should have played in all the games those two appeared in. BWP should also have played up front offering genuine pace. As regards McGoldrick I am glad we have stuck by him, but he needs to get in the box far more IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kelkel31 Posted 12 January, 2009 Share Posted 12 January, 2009 I think that is the symptom ,not the cause. We have lots of long range shots exactly because we dont have a striker who gets in position in the six yard box and knocks in from a few yards (oh and also knows the offside rule). a lone striker will not be able to get in the box in the same way that a pair of players working together can, they have to rely on the wing players and supporting midfielders doing that for him as he is often pulled out of position looking for the ball and to link up play, we havent had the right wingers most of the season with holmes out and thus the idea breaks down. weve played alot of players in makeshift positions and although the faults are obvious, nothing has been done to change them on the training field or in a match. theres been too much time blaming the individuals for whats gone wrong with the team this year when they are being let down themselves by the coaching team. everyones can be a manager in the pub, forums and on our sofas, theres been alot of correct criticism on here where we spot faults with the teams play, but theres no point us seeing them if the people that count dont, or dont do anything when they do. theres alot of sympathy for jan with the supporters, but being dealt a bad hand, not getting the rub of the green but at some stage you have to start saying what has he done to change or improve things! i for one would like to see him spend less time in the technical area thinking, and more time pulling players over to the touchline and giving the advice, god knows sitting next to the dugout i know there are many little changes to a players positioning and awareness of where to look for players in space that would have gained us a hell of alot of points at home this season if he would just open his mouth, i dont think hes not good enough technically, i just think he hasnt got the character we need at the moment, for one why cant we get someone to attack the ****ING FAR POST! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughieslastminutegoal Posted 13 January, 2009 Share Posted 13 January, 2009 Even allowing for the fact that we've had our 3 most experienced strikers away from the club for half the season, have our current lads done that badly.? OK ...!!!! I know we have one of the lowest goal tallies in the CCC, but look at what we loaned out. Rasiak has been available to Watford for half the season and he's scored 3-4 (?) Stern John has more or less been a regular in Bris. City side and got only ...2 and Saga got ...5, in his stay in Denmark. Of our goalscorers McGoldrick has 7 in the league and 2 more in League Cup. Surman has scored 5 ..and even BWP has 3. The main fault has been that in previous years, Midfielders have weighed in with a few goals whereas; Holmes and Lallana (both injured a lot) have 5 between them, of the rest 4 were from loan players, and only Perry and Skacel has scored (of the defenders) and Stern John ( 1 before he left.) In terms of goal tally; McG, Surman and Lallana are at least as good as those who were loaned out. Statistically at least, we'd scarcely have done better if they (the loan-ees) had been here all the time.! Sure I'd like to see more goals , but all things considered maybe it wasn't SO bad to loan out these guys ? Ok you've convinced me. Even though we have one of the lowest goal tallies in the CCC, our stikers have done OK. I mean, our two main strikers have scored - oooo, what is it now, 10 between them. (But you are right, the ones we loaned out all year haven't scored for us either so the ones we kept must have been better). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Under Weststand Posted 13 January, 2009 Share Posted 13 January, 2009 I think its more about the system than the strikers. We may have the most shots etc but how many are from real goal scoring positions & how many are speculative long range efforts? Also the system of one up front won't work with DMG (not saying with the right service or a different system he wouldn't do the buisness). For that roll you need a big strong HARD WORKING player who will die for the cause, hold the ball up & bring into play the two wingers & allow the attacking midfielders time to get into the box. from the little I've seen so far this season that's been the main problem the lack off chances actually in the penalty box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 13 January, 2009 Share Posted 13 January, 2009 Agree that we need experience up front. But let's assume that the formation/style is not going to change, so do any of the three (Rasiak, John, Saga) actually fit into the system? Hypothetically If we had a blank sheet of paper would we actually pick any of those 3 to play up front in the style that we seem to be landed with? Saga to me is more of a player who brings in a big CF (like his time with SJ) but not so good when he was paired with GR. Will he and DMG actually form a partnership? Or would should we have a different player in that role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 13 January, 2009 Author Share Posted 13 January, 2009 wasted so much time with Pekhard and Robertson. Patterson should have played in all the games those two appeared in. BWP should also have played up front offering genuine pace. As regards McGoldrick I am glad we have stuck by him, but he needs to get in the box far more IMO.[/quote I think that JP has taken enough stick for choosing " too many " Academy lads, and maybe Paterson wasn't ready even then, so he took in a couple of players who had at least played in someones first team. There are different types of strikers; those put themselves about and disrupt defenders; ala George Kirby, KEVIN Davies (although Ron could take care of himself, too.) AND then the poachers who pop up out of nowhere and put away half-chances. George O'Brien (59-65) was a class act at this as was Marian Pahars. Without a bit of muscle upfront, we aren't going to make chances and I think that's the trouble. Hopefully Saga can make himself felt and give some extra support to McG and Surman. The introduction of Paterson seems to have been a last ditch effort to try and find someone, especially as Jamie White sadly disappointed when he came in. (shows the diff. between reserve football and the CCC level.) Paterson was just getting some playing time before his dismissal v Man U. (I have the video - YES it was a hard tackle, but he went in one-footed and the impetus of the challenge hit the guys leg, too. If that was a red card, then Jonny Evans can count himself lucky he got away with a yellow). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 13 January, 2009 Share Posted 13 January, 2009 since I have been going; 73/74 Channon 21 74/75 Channon 20 75/76 Channon 20 76/77 MacDougall 23 77/78 Boyer 17 78/79 Holmes 8 79/80 Boyer 23 80/81 Moran 18 81/82 Keegan 26 82/83 Danny Wallace 12 83/84 Moran 21 84/85 Moran 12 85/86 Armstrong 10 86/87 Clarke 20 87/88 Clarke 16 88/89 Rod Wallace 12 89/90 Le Tissier 20 90/91 Le Tissier 19 91/92 Shearer 13 92/93 Le Tissier 15 93/94 Le Tissier 25 94/95 Le Tissier 19 95/96 Shipperley/ Le Tissier 7 96/97 Le Tissier 13 97/98 Le Tissier/ Ostenstad 11 98/99 Le Tissier/ Ostenstad 7 99/00 Pahars 13 00/01 Beattie 11 01/02 Pahars 14 02/03 Beattie 23 03/04 Beattie 14 04/05 Crouch 12 05/06 Fuller 9 06/07 Rasiak 21 07/08 John 20 MacDougall. That brings back memories. He is the most forgotten striker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londonsaint1604 Posted 13 January, 2009 Share Posted 13 January, 2009 What strikers are these? If you mean is mcgoldrick THAT bad then I would say no because, as you point out, he has scored a few goals and some have been very important. He is a lazy ****er though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumpofshipperley Posted 13 January, 2009 Share Posted 13 January, 2009 The problem is DMG is playing a side that's lacking any confidence and he's playing up front on his own. He needs support, from a second striker primarily. The number of players we get into the oppositions penalty box is a joke, and no one ever makes a run to the front post. Need to drill the basics of forward play back into the side. Reverting to 4-4-2 and giving the players less to think about would be a good start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now