ranger_syntax 3,874 Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 IMHO, we tried to play 3 at the back to keep them at bay. We tested it against St. Johnstone. Tav on the right worked in the League Cup game, so he was kept in right midfield, or, if you want to say it, right wingback position. Since Wallace was out and Hodson not in there, someone could/would be regarded as left wingback. Be that Windass or McKay. That neither played that much defensively, more like wingers than fullbacks, was part of the circumstances. If someone else saw us in a straight 4-3-3 again, with WIlson as left back, no problem. IMHO, the cool head provided by Hill and both Kiernan and Wilson either side of him could be the way ahead in some games this season, but not all. Windass at wingback? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davie P 4 Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 MW brought Hodson (a right back) in despite knowing that Tav was there. Perhaps he saw Tavs occasional lapses as a defender. Hodson deputised for both this season and did admirably either way. Who knows why MW did not select him from the start, IMHO, he simply used both Tav and Windass as wingbacks ahead of a back three (BTW, Wilson can deputise as a left-back too) and trusted Windass more here, in an attacking sense. It was obviously tragic that it was another Tav defensive blackout which allowed Sinclair sneak in at the back ... and he got an earful straight away. Tav is a valuable member of the squad, but I don't think he should be in every starting line-up right now. IMO that was a large part of the problem. Wilson was basically playing left back, when he should have been on the left of the central defence. He had no real wing back in front of him. I can recall McKay dropping back a few times but essentially, Wilson was dragged out of position to fill the vacuum on the left hand side. I don't remember Windass on the left hand side of the field, particularly defensively, at all? Kiernan should never be left exposed on a one-on-one situation, as he has no concept of positional sense (or pitch geography, as MW would call it) and with players of the quality of Dembele, and more particularly Sinclair attacking him, Kiernan again looked like a fish out of water. Not sure when he is going to "learn from this" as he did exactly the same in the SCF against Hibs. I thought Hodson was tailor made for this game, particularly when Tav has been so ordinary this season. Hill was steady, but got turned a few times by Dembele and with no pace at the back we were immediately opened up. I do think that MW has been unlucky with injuries as you would have imagined that Rossiter would have provided some solidity in the centre of midfield, but overall, we just looked like conceding every time they attacked. Foderingham really saved the team's blushes on the day, while McKay showed his undoubted qualities. Everyone else was anonymous. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,363 Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 (edited) Windass at wingback? Both Windass and McKay essentially failed to take up that responsibility, as both are more wingers/attackers than fullbacks. Not that hard to grasp. Consequently we lacked on that side, as Davie P illustrated above. That said, Wilson wasn't exactly overran. Edited January 3, 2017 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 just heard the after game press conference. A week off! FFS19 points behind,playing awful pedestrian football bar two games all season, fitness levels are no better than any other side and technically we cant even attack or defend corners but they deserve a week off! Sums it up. MW's losses me a wee bit more each week. Need to see some serious changes in work ethic and approach in the coming weeks. Couldn't care less if he succeeds in retaining 2nd place if this small club mentality continues. We should be embarrassed by our performances. The mentality the manager encourages explains the lacklustre performance most weeks. A fucking holiday jesus christ. Please go and buy our way out cause we sure as feck aint able to rely on our work ethic to do it. The funny thing about fitness is that a week off of training can actually make you fitter - IF you've been training constantly for months. To become fitter you need to train and rest, train and rest - effectively breaking down the muscles and letting them rebuild stronger. When you train constantly you build up fatigue levels that prevent your muscles rebuilding and also bring your form down due to tiredness. If you are very fit and been training for a while, a week's rest will be beneficial and while you regain freshness you won't lose fitness. Resting more than week, and you will start to have a detraining effect - slight at first and then becoming noticeable after two weeks. For optimum fitness and freshness, an athlete would ideally increase intensity for 3 weeks and then have an easy week and then repeat a few times, and then before a big event they taper off their training off to allow fatigue levels to drop. This is how they do it in athletics and cycling as fitness is the most important factor and competitions are spread out and don't have equal importance - meaning they can compete in lesser ones without being at their best and not being too bothered if they don't do so well. In football, this is very difficult due to how relentless the fixture list is with all games being important, and it's where a winter break is very good for the game, and should help prevent injuries due to over training. To really take advantage of modern knowledge of training, a manager should really have a good, interchangeable squad that can be rotated according to the fatigue of the players, changing a few every week to give them a rest from the match and lower intensity training, over a four week cycle. That way you could keep players in much better form. I assume the more savvy ones will do this with the training, if not the match, due to the importance of results and the variation of skill levels. Psychologically, I think we all intuitively know that if you are not doing so well at work, working you harder is not going to help and a break can allow you to reset your mindset and become more motivated to do better afterwards. We all need a break at times, to spend time with family, friends or just on our own, and get away from the pressures of work for a short while. Footballers are surely not different there. This is the perfect time for it, seeing as we have a winter break. A week off will do the players a hell of a lot of good physically and mentally. I don't agree with some of MW's thinking at times, but I'm fully in agreement here. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooponthewing 1,139 Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 https://twitter.com/MDembele_10/status/815943556040916996 http://i.imgur.com/CayfVFZ.jpg The Scot Squad will bury this, as usual, unless someone makes an official complaint. It will not be classed as bigotry or a hate crime under the SNP government. We know that so the squad will ignore. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 Both Windass and McKay essentially failed to take up that responsibility, as both are more wingers/attackers than fullbacks. Not that hard to grasp. Consequently we lacked on that side, as Davie P illustrated above. That said, Wilson wasn't exactly overran. At no point was Windass expected to be playing wingback. That's the point being made. Your suggestion that he was expected to play there at times is incorrect. Windass has never even played on the left hand side - he either plays through the middle or on the right. I don't think he has played on the left hand side for any team in his career. With Tav playing right wingback the only other wingback is left.... and Windass wasn't being deployed there. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 3,874 Posted January 3, 2017 Share Posted January 3, 2017 At no point was Windass expected to be playing wingback. Windass at wingback? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,363 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 At no point was Windass expected to be playing wingback. That's the point being made. Your suggestion that he was expected to play there at times is incorrect. Windass has never even played on the left hand side - he either plays through the middle or on the right. I don't think he has played on the left hand side for any team in his career. With Tav playing right wingback the only other wingback is left.... and Windass wasn't being deployed there. Anyone playing left midfield that day was expected too help the left flank's defense. It is not that hard to grasp. Whether he you call him leftback, left midfielder, wingback or whatever. Perhaps people do not take every word literally and as cast in stone. I for one would expect such flexibility in thinking and not such lame repetitive baublery as presented above. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 Anyone playing left midfield that day was expected too help the left flank's defense. It is not that hard to grasp. Whether he you call him leftback, left midfielder, wingback or whatever. Perhaps people do not take every word literally and as cast in stone. I for one would expect such flexibility in thinking and not such lame repetitive baublery as presented above. So are you trying to say that a left winger who is expected to track back and help defensively is considered a left wingback ? That makes absolutely zero sense to me. You can't have a left midfielder, left winger and left wingback in the same team. Indeed, the term wingback would normally be used for an overlapping fullback (at least in my view). Anyway, pointless continuing when you shift goalposts anyway 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,363 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 So are you trying to say that a left winger who is expected to track back and help defensively is considered a left wingback ? That makes absolutely zero sense to me. You can't have a left midfielder, left winger and left wingback in the same team. Indeed, the term wingback would normally be used for an overlapping fullback (at least in my view). Anyway, pointless continuing when you shift goalposts anyway You know that that's essentially rubbish, but not unlike you to throw that in. If you align our players of Saturday in a 3-4-3 line-up, which I assumed we were playing, you'd end up with ... Foderingham Kiernan - Hill - Wilson Tavernier - Holt - Halliday- Windass Miller - Garner - McKay ... Windass was leftish midfield. And that - for me - is the wingback position in this line-up. Whether the player listed there is actually a leftback, left defender, wingback, winger or not - or even does not play an actual wingback during the game. It is not quantum mechanics to figure that line of thought out. Maybye people saw it differently, but I was not under the impression that WIlson was really playing left-back, so no real 4-3-3 as per usual. So 3-4-3 with the "positions" as above. I can't make that any clearer and if that's not enough, so be it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.