....why Ade selected the team he did on Saturday? That's not just an idle or flippant question, but more specifically the wing backs. Let's do the easy bit first, Garmston is injured and Ogilvie looks a solid defender, so no issue. But it's the right side that totally baffled me. We get a decent point at Doncaster and the first game at home gave us a chance to show we can create chances and maybe even score! Now O'Neil might be OK defensively, but he creates nothing going forward. Wagstaff on the other hand, has pace, excellent crosser, scores goals, and is a pretty decent positional defender. O'Neil did nothing when he got forward. Wagstaff was on the pitch for five minutes, took a great position wide of Martin who chose to shoot instead, then put the ball back in the box for the disallowed goal. I just can't fathom that selection, especially at home. Surely Wagstaff has to play, he has proven quality at this level not to mention two championship medals as proof. So, can anyone explain it, or at least offer the argument for O'Neil (who by the way I have absolutely no problem with)?
Can someone explain.....
- Thread starter Medley
- Start date
nibbles
Vital Football Hero
Wagstaff is injury-prone. I suspect he was carrying a knock or wasn't 100% fit.
If fit I suspect that he would have played on the right of the three in midfield which is more akin to his natural position in my opinion.
Playing wingback is probably the toughest position on the pitch in terms of fitness. Requires a lot of sprinting up and down the pitch.
If Wagstaff was fully fit then I would be very worried about the team selection.
If fit I suspect that he would have played on the right of the three in midfield which is more akin to his natural position in my opinion.
Playing wingback is probably the toughest position on the pitch in terms of fitness. Requires a lot of sprinting up and down the pitch.
If Wagstaff was fully fit then I would be very worried about the team selection.
PapaBurgundy
Vital Youth Team
I agree. Same old Pennock with square pegs in round holes. Why are we persevering with 3-5-2 when we don't have anyone available who can play wing back??
O'Neill looks a decent enough player, but he's a right back. He doesn't get forward effectively enough. The exact same can be said of Ogolvie. Both look solid defenders, so play 4-4-2 with them as full backs!
If Garmston was fit then yes he'd be ideal to play left wing back. Same goes for Wagstaff. But they're not, so why is he still playing it? Especially when we're at home - because at the moment, with the personnel available, it's more of a 5-3-2 anyway.
Too rigid, too defensive. If we don't get a creative midfielder, a winger and a striker in before the end of the window we will go down without a whimper.
O'Neill looks a decent enough player, but he's a right back. He doesn't get forward effectively enough. The exact same can be said of Ogolvie. Both look solid defenders, so play 4-4-2 with them as full backs!
If Garmston was fit then yes he'd be ideal to play left wing back. Same goes for Wagstaff. But they're not, so why is he still playing it? Especially when we're at home - because at the moment, with the personnel available, it's more of a 5-3-2 anyway.
Too rigid, too defensive. If we don't get a creative midfielder, a winger and a striker in before the end of the window we will go down without a whimper.
From Southend fans' comments, O'Neill was their 3rd choice right back, which is why they were not too sad to see him go. All praised his commitment though which is the type of player Ade has gone for this summer.
I didn't go to Doncaster / Reading but from reports from Gills fans he did well as a centre back in those games.
PapaBurgundy
Vital Youth Team
Exactly. He is solid and defensively sound. He can be a good right back or a good right centre back in a 3. He is not a wing back. Same goes for Ogolvie. I don't think we have enough squad depth to play with wing backs if our first choice options aren't available.
LancsGordoRoad
Vital Champions League
I`d like to see Gills play a 4-4-2 formation, especially at home. We totally lack invention, which is frustrating when the squad`s best passer of the ball remains firmly sat on the bench. Time for Max to spend some time on the bench and give Darren Oldaker a lengthy run in the team. A 4-4-2 would also see Wagstaff on the pitch more often; he and Oldaker would, at least, improve delivery to the front men and create more goal scoring opportunities.
Trouble is we do not play 3-5-2 , we line up with five at the back, which is ok if your wing backs actually play as wing backs, but the don't. Neither can produce a fast sprint to be available to attack from the wing. I can't remember O'Neil making one break in the second half, Ogilvie is equally immobile. Playing at home we should never start with five across the back.
nitram77
Vital 1st Team Regular
I think the reason Ade plays the formation he does is because he's the governor so can, or is he ? the negative tactics look very much like the negative formation of a previous manager.
As we are asking questions, why in a team so lacking in speed has List not even featured on the bench ?
As we are asking questions, why in a team so lacking in speed has List not even featured on the bench ?
Thanks for all your comments. I can say two things without fear of argument:
1) Wagstaff was fully fit, no injury or even a niggle
2) of the 3 goals we have conceded, including the Reading game, two of them have a big question mark over O'Neil losing his man (watch the highlights and see)
I'll be at MK really hoping to see Wagstaff starting. If not, I fear everything going forward will rest with Martin, and as much as he has ability, he can't do it on his own, and the front boys, whoever he chooses, will be starved of any supply, save for long throws. My cup remains half full, but we surely can't carry-on with the seven defensive minded players Gills 75 correctly identified.
1) Wagstaff was fully fit, no injury or even a niggle
2) of the 3 goals we have conceded, including the Reading game, two of them have a big question mark over O'Neil losing his man (watch the highlights and see)
I'll be at MK really hoping to see Wagstaff starting. If not, I fear everything going forward will rest with Martin, and as much as he has ability, he can't do it on his own, and the front boys, whoever he chooses, will be starved of any supply, save for long throws. My cup remains half full, but we surely can't carry-on with the seven defensive minded players Gills 75 correctly identified.
