Match Thread: Stevenage v Lincoln City

[Scotimp]

The post match interviews were interesting: MS spoke of Jensen having his shirt pulled and his arms pinned, while TJ stated how direct and aerially dominant Stevenage were. Reminds me of teams Steve Evans used to turn out. Oh, wait...

 

[Bucksimp]

The post match interviews were interesting: MS spoke of Jensen having his shirt pulled and his arms pinned, while TJ stated how direct and aerially dominant Stevenage were. Reminds me of teams Steve Evans used to turn out. Oh, wait...

It was good to see MS mention the need for our young players to be more
'street wise'.
If he wasn't aware of it before the 'Evans' treatment, he certainly is now.

 

[Luke Imp]

I seem to recall MK saying something along the lines of us needing physically bigger players. We then went out and recruited the likes of Jensen, Hackett, Burroughs, Hamilton and Mitchell who are all big lads.

Now, a quarter of the way through the season the club are saying we want to dominate possession and produce players that possession based sides will want to buy. We've recruited a new head coach who theoretically fits in with that aim.

The problem is we've spent a lot of money on a squad full of players who don't fit with that style of play. There's been some muddled up thinking somewhere along the line.

We've not just brought in cloggers though - Erhahon, Hamilton, Hackett are fine on the ball - and it isn't doesn't have to be physicality *or* technical, it can be both.

I think the biggest point isn't necessarily the technical capabilities of the players (not suggesting they're all outstanding on the ball because they aren't) but the lack of any attacking patterns of play. We don't look like a side who've been coached in that respect and generally play in a very rigid system.

 

[johnolbe]

We've not just brought in cloggers though - Erhahon, Hamilton, Hackett are fine on the ball - and it isn't doesn't have to be physicality *or* technical, it can be both.

I think the biggest point isn't necessarily the technical capabilities of the players (not suggesting they're all outstanding on the ball because they aren't) but the lack of any attacking patterns of play. We don't look like a side who've been coached in that respect and generally play in a very rigid system.

Absolutely this and that was the biggest gripe with MK, we had no attacking intent or plans bar last years hoof up Poole as a wingback.
On Saturday when we had the chance to counter in the 2nd half Stevenage were sprinting back to cover and from the same starting positions we would have no one in the box when we had a crossing chance. It’s also about heart and desire to bust a gut to make that extra effort to get in the box. We are a very slow, safety first structured team with very little pace or flair ( without Bishop and Hackett ) and Mandy going AWOL. Hamilton is the only spark that drives us forward and that is why we are so boring to watch. MS. has a big job changing the mindset of this group around.

 

[Sincilbanks]

Absolutely this and that was the biggest gripe with MK, we had no attacking intent or plans bar last years hoof up Poole as a wingback.
On Saturday when we had the chance to counter in the 2nd half Stevenage were sprinting back to cover and from the same starting positions we would have no one in the box when we had a crossing chance. It’s also about heart and desire to bust a gut to make that extra effort to get in the box. We are a very slow, safety first structured team with very little pace or flair ( without Bishop and Hackett ) and Mandy going AWOL. Hamilton is the only spark that drives us forward and that is why we are so boring to watch. MS. has a big job changing the mindset of this group around.

I found it very noticeable that in the 90th minute when Stevenage broke on the counter and their foremost man who had the ball was sprinting forward, by the time he had got to the box and was shaping to hit it there were two other Stevenage players arriving in the box, that's pretty impressive considering they were 1-0 up and cruising to a comfortable win at that point...

 

[berksimps]

I found it very noticeable that in the 90th minute when Stevenage broke on the counter and their foremost man who had the ball was sprinting forward, by the time he had got to the box and was shaping to hit it there were two other Stevenage players arriving in the box, that's pretty impressive considering they were 1-0 up and cruising to a comfortable win at that point...

Their attacking movement second half was soooo much more proactive and organised than ours. They defended and attacked as a team, whereas we just defended as one and seemingly had no idea how to create the slightest attacking threat.

 

[APHLCFC]

We've not just brought in cloggers though - Erhahon, Hamilton, Hackett are fine on the ball - and it isn't doesn't have to be physicality *or* technical, it can be both.

I think the biggest point isn't necessarily the technical capabilities of the players (not suggesting they're all outstanding on the ball because they aren't) but the lack of any attacking patterns of play. We don't look like a side who've been coached in that respect and generally play in a very rigid system.

You're right, it's clear that there has been very little work done on how we are planning to attack as a team. That's a massive part of the problem. Hopefully the new man can improve that.

I do think the profile of player we have been signing recently is also problematic if you want to play fast attacking possession based football. We don't have anyone with the pace to be a threat in behind, we don't have anyone who can trick his way past a couple of defenders and open things up. We have a squad full of players who are all pretty decent on the ball by and large but are steady.

Opposition teams know that we won't attack with pace and we'll slowly probe sideways and back again waiting for a gap to appear, so they find it easy to get back into position and say break us down.

The players are a young group and what they are now doesn't have to be what they are forever, we've got MS in now who can hopefully improve them and get them playing the way the board want.

I just feel that if you want a certain style of play your recruitment of players should reflect that andI don't think ours does.

 

[Luke Imp]

You're right, it's clear that there has been very little work done on how we are planning to attack as a team. That's a massive part of the problem. Hopefully the new man can improve that.

I do think the profile of player we have been signing recently is also problematic if you want to play fast attacking possession based football. We don't have anyone with the pace to be a threat in behind, we don't have anyone who can trick his way past a couple of defenders and open things up. We have a squad full of players who are all pretty decent on the ball by and large but are steady.

Opposition teams know that we won't attack with pace and we'll slowly probe sideways and back again waiting for a gap to appear, so they find it easy to get back into position and say break us down.

The players are a young group and what they are now doesn't have to be what they are forever, we've got MS in now who can hopefully improve them and get them playing the way the board want.

I just feel that if you want a certain style of play your recruitment of players should reflect that andI don't think ours does.

That point there is why I'm a little surprised we've not seen more of Shodipo. When you've got Mandroiu on one side, you can't then play a similar paced player on the other if you can avoid it (Bishop, Smith), albeit Mandroiu/Sorenson have linked up well at times this season. Shodipo is a bit hit and miss but he gets into some half decent areas at times.

 

[APHLCFC]

That point there is why I'm a little surprised we've not seen more of Shodipo. When you've got Mandroiu on one side, you can't then play a similar paced player on the other if you can avoid it (Bishop, Smith), albeit Mandroiu/Sorenson have linked up well at times this season. Shodipo is a bit hit and miss but he gets into some half decent areas at times.

Absolutely. I remember when people where debating who should play alongside Kane for England at the Euros. Southgate kept picking Sterling when people wanted Grealish or Foden but Southgate made the point that we needed a threat in behind it is too easy for the opposition to organise as the play is all in front of them.

If you look at our current options then Shodipo, while not being a great option does at least have the pace and I would have thought would be a better option than Smith as one of the 2 wide men. Possibly Duffy as well.

Again, this just shows to me that the squad lacks the right sort of plays to play the way we want to.

 

[Sincilbanks]

Absolutely. I remember when people where debating who should play alongside Kane for England at the Euros. Southgate kept picking Sterling when people wanted Grealish or Foden but Southgate made the point that we needed a threat in behind it is too easy for the opposition to organise as the play is all in front of them.

If you look at our current options then Shodipo, while not being a great option does at least have the pace and I would have thought would be a better option than Smith as one of the 2 wide men. Possibly Duffy as well.

Again, this just shows to me that the squad lacks the right sort of plays to play the way we want to.

We've been playing a 5 at the back and for me it goes back to the wing-backs we have currently. Sorenson's effort is immense but he really can't beat a man to get behind the defence (although he did once v Stevenage but not once they adapted at half time) and Burroughs can't do it effectively either. Mandriou can but not really while he is wide left, Reeco-Hackett is more than capable of beating a man (or two or even three) but pretty much all that comes from inside rather than outside and crossing the ball in.

That leaves us either a rapid counter attack with a long ball out to Sorenson into space or little one-two's on the edge or around the area between either the wide men or the wing-backs. One kind of relies on being a goal up or playing a team determined to press high and the other generates the kind of football where we are "playing in front of the opposition" which seems to wind a lot of fans up around me at home games who start shouting "get it in the box" as we do the horseshoe thing across their back 9 or 10. With wing-backs who can get to the byline by either pace or a trick the opposition have to respect that threat, right now they don't really have to...

 

[APHLCFC]

We've been playing a 5 at the back and for me it goes back to the wing-backs we have currently. Sorenson's effort is immense but he really can't beat a man to get behind the defence (although he did once v Stevenage but not once they adapted at half time) and Burroughs can't do it effectively either. Mandriou can but not really while he is wide left, Reeco-Hackett is more than capable of beating a man (or two or even three) but pretty much all that comes from inside rather than outside and crossing the ball in.

That leaves us either a rapid counter attack with a long ball out to Sorenson into space or little one-two's on the edge or around the area between either the wide men or the wing-backs. One kind of relies on being a goal up or playing a team determined to press high and the other generates the kind of football where we are "playing in front of the opposition" which seems to wind a lot of fans up around me at home games who start shouting "get it in the box" as we do the horseshoe thing across their back 9 or 10. With wing-backs who can get to the byline by either pace or a trick the opposition have to respect that threat, right now they don't really have to...

I would agree with your observations. If you're playing with wing backs they need to carry the threat you talk about and as you say, ours don't.

It all keeps coming back to the same issue. We haven't recruited the right type of players to play attacking, possession based football.

 

[Red Wimp]

I would agree with your observations. If you're playing with wing backs they need to carry the threat you talk about and as you say, ours don't.

It all keeps coming back to the same issue. We haven't recruited the right type of players to play attacking, possession based football.

Out of interest, what sort of football does suit the type of player we’ve signed?

 

[Sincilbanks]

Out of interest, what sort of football does suit the type of player we’ve signed?

Out of possession, rapid counter attacking...

 

[APHLCFC]

Out of interest, what sort of football does suit the type of player we’ve signed?

Well! I think our best performances with this squad have come when we've been set up to defend. They seem like they're pretty good at keeping their positional discipline, sticking to a game plan and putting their bodies on the line. Largely in line with what the previous manager seemed to prioritise.

 

[HitherImp]

Well! I think our best performances with this squad have come when we've been set up to defend. They seem like they're pretty good at keeping their positional discipline, sticking to a game plan and putting their bodies on the line. Largely in line with what the previous manager seemed to prioritise.

True, but this gifts possession to the opposition and allows them multiple chances at goal. We have to be lucky every time, they only have to be lucky once....

We need to have the possibility of a well-supported fast break if we can get some possession out of our stalwart defending, with the emphasis on well-supported. It's no good having Duffy/Shodipo/Lasse go rocketing off down the touchline if there's no-one coming through the center to take the incoming ball.

If I understand his mentality right, Skoobs emphasises playing as a team driving forward and moving as a unit. It'll take a while to make this change stick, but I feel the players can do this. Not to mention that playing more positive football has its own rewards in terms of player engagement.