By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Yes, I believe it refers to a dozen or so representative areas which is a better structure than any dozen fans off the street but the issue will still be to what extent those dozen accurately represent the greatest number of fans as opposed to expressing their own individual views?
It's the dilemma of all 'Focus' groups! But focus groups usually have a much more formal analysis to ensure that the sample is representative - perhaps the interview stage will aim to do this?
The CAB may well be an improvement on Fans Forums and Trust Research meetings but clear structures alone don't guarantee effective decision making and lots of talking doesn't guarantee satisfied customers.
Surely the issue will be to what extent this body accurately represents the views of the greatest possible % of our current and future fans rather than the involvement being limited to we very few individual voices on this forum?
or we could have retained 3 at the back with 5 in midfield which would have given an extra body in central areas which is where I think we were light on Tuesday - the dilemma is who the 3rd central midfielder is and whether he plays a holding role (if we have such a player?) with East & Gilmour further ahead or whether the 3rd midfielder is in a no 10 role (again who fits that bill).
I agree that Gilmour is usually our most effective midfield tackler, although he was seriously off his game on Tuesday, but I can't recall us using 3 in midfield this season - McNulty used to select 2 out of Gilmour, Henry & East. Having said that it's a change I would have made on Tuesday night.
I suppose I agree about tempting folk to return but is it really our aim to sell Man U as our football dream for the prawn sandwich fan rather than the gourmet dish that is supporting your own home team? ps - no I'm not attending any of these Premier league 'pieces of silver'.
maybe the difference is the extent to which the opposition nullify our strengths - "fair play to Braintree" as you say. Equally I'd agree we need to have a plan B, C etc before and during games against the Solihull's & Braintrees.
yes but if he does go inside as yesterday he leaves more space on our left (as Elldale noted above) - and Burger (who's not the strongest tackler) moving wider also extends his distance from East - there are down sides to every up; a change to 4 at the back & 3 in m/f might regain the initiative against sides who match us up (Solihull/Braintree).
Inevitably if our good form continues players will come onto the radar - the Hartlepool commentators mentioned they'd advise Gateshead to have a look at Ferguson
Agree - and why we need a plan B when opposition's do that - eg change of formation (& possible personnel) and try to outnumber through the middle. Possibly play Beckwith or Armstrong at LB & bring on Allarakhia for last 20 mins and play him centrally. Equally using Gilmour (with Allarakhia) as aerial cover for Beckwith against SM's big physical strikers (heading is the weakness of our back 3) meant we had an overcrowded back line and lost an out ball option - why not instead play Ferguson who's stronger in the air as part of a back 4 allowing 3 in the middle?
As the OP wrote - "they tend to sit tight and play on the break. Also skilled in the dark arts particularly killing time at every opportunity." True to the prediction they didn't disappoint but why then did we not change our formation - 2 in midfield struggled when it was through the middle that we'd likely have success (as with the goal) and why did we select our lightest weight players when it needed us to have dark arts too (eg Henderson). I'm not criticising the players for slow play when it was the formation (until the last 10mins) nor for mistakes when they were the result of opposition pressure. Good effort in the dying minutes but the changes should have been made before the game or at worst at half time.
Yes I've been pleasantly surprised by Armstrong but isn't he more of a full back without Allarakhia's attacking strength? Agree Gordon is more important as the right CB.
442's earlier post questions the personnel and timing of the RWB substitution. McNulty has tried various players as cover for TAR with debateable success - despite the relative strength in depth of this season's squad I'd say several players have no like-for-like cover - eg Allarakhia & TAR.
I'd say the latter - they had some joy down their right so he had a lot of covering to do; when he was subbed didn't look like he'd enjoyed the game much. Also Armstrong (who I didn't rate last season) did a good job when he came on marking their winger.