Rotherham United (H)

[desperado]

1 hour ago, Ani said:

No I am saying that what he has tried so far has not worked. You seem happy to list the things he has done, why is it unreasonable to highlight things he has not done and wonder if they would help ? 
 

 

It’s not unreasonable to have that opinion, that’s not what I’m saying.

In response to my post you said you didn’t understand why he wouldn’t try your different approach.

I went on to try and explain why he might not adopt that approach.

You don’t have to agree with it, which clearly you don’t.

Let’s see what he does New Years Day - whichever way he goes I won’t mind as long as it ends up in a win. 
 

Edited December 28, 2025 by desperado

[frank_spencer]

Even away from home statistically (apart from the one that matters come full time) been on top in most games, sticking the ball in the net more frequently would solve most issues, Wycombe was our only one of the 4 losses where we scored.

[Johnnyrotten]

4 hours ago, Stig said:

Yes, the latter for me. I've said it a few times but the 4231 leaves us a bit too open away from home imo. 

Would always like to see Erhahon and Simons with either Dempsey or Sheehan. Win the physical battle first and foremost and have 3 in midfield. And then even have one of the wingers as a more workmanlike option like Forss.

Its a difficult one, because whilst we are "open", its hard to think of many goals home or away that haven't involved one of the wingers (Gale, ACD, Tutu) either assisting or scoring.  Without them we may have conceded less away from home but god knows how many we'd have scored.

Just my opinion, but there's no "Dempsey or Sheehan", Dempsey will always be competing with the no.10 or another midfielder, Sheehan is without question the first choice midfielder, proved beyond doubt this season for me.  The others are all hit and miss, home and away.  

And no Forss on the wing again (after Mansfield), not sure how he gets a workmanlike tag compared to anyone else, and output well below any other option out wide.

[Johnnyrotten]

3 hours ago, masi 51 said:

How can you justify two wingers away from home........I love Gayle and ACD but we need to be solid

The only justification is that they are the players most likely to score and/or assist.  Bearing in mind we don't have any strikers doing that, its a brave call to take away one of our few scoring options and still expect to win.

[gonzo]

3 hours ago, Tombwfc said:

 

That Derby team had basically the same number of 3-0s (7) as 1-0 wins (8). They won 13 times away from home, eight by two or more goals and finished with a GD of +41.

I only saw them play three times (vs us x2 and Pompey on TV) and admittedly they didn't look like 1970's Brazil. But equally I think there's a tendancy to make up narratives about teams we rarely watch. Derby were clearly a very good team and killed games off more often than not. That's the standard for getting automatic promotion. The more you let teams hang around at 1-0 the more likely you are to needlessly let points slip away (Reading being the classic example from this season as well as yesterday).

Where as that's true there's also a tendency to think we are crap and everyone else is bloody brilliant.

There's a balance.

Teams and fans will be watching us thinking we are decent.

 

[masi 51]

7 hours ago, desperado said:

I’ve provided quite a lot of detail, quotes from SS and analysis as to how  the right wingers, playing in the right way can provide solidity - more than enough justification.

You and others have banged the drum for an extra midfielder - again justification.

Two different opinions at the end of the day.

Not quite sure why you have to call out another poster as if it’s some bizarre concept he’s come up with that he has to justify.

It’s a straight choice between our manager’s choice and justification and some amateurs* on here who want to see something different 😊

*disclaimer - all fans opinions are valid, they are allowed to disagree with the manager and no debate is being stifled 😂

Our home record justifies two wingers......Our away record does not

 

[fester58]

4-2-3-1 at home and 4-3-2-1 away from home

3 central midfielders away from hone with 2 number 10s especially on the narrower pitches

[masi 51]

35 minutes ago, fester58 said:

4-2-3-1 at home and 4-3-2-1 away from home

3 central midfielders away from hone with 2 number 10s especially on the narrower pitches

No winger away???

Others will lambast you for this but i think it has merit....Solid and frustrate teams and beat them through quality and if the dice needs to be thrown put Gale and ACD on the last half hour

Edited December 28, 2025 by masi 51

[boltonboris]

How we keep the ball with no wingers? We need an extra man in midfield,  it is sacrificing the #10 before a wide player. 
 

A conventional 433 / 451 gives us more in midfield and lets us counter with some width. Without the ball, we can be as compact as we want and if it’s not working, it’s easier to tweak to get a man further forward without too many changes 

[Stig]

8 hours ago, Johnnyrotten said:

Its a difficult one, because whilst we are "open", its hard to think of many goals home or away that haven't involved one of the wingers (Gale, ACD, Tutu) either assisting or scoring.  Without them we may have conceded less away from home but god knows how many we'd have scored.

Just my opinion, but there's no "Dempsey or Sheehan", Dempsey will always be competing with the no.10 or another midfielder, Sheehan is without question the first choice midfielder, proved beyond doubt this season for me.  The others are all hit and miss, home and away.  

And no Forss on the wing again (after Mansfield), not sure how he gets a workmanlike tag compared to anyone else, and output well below any other option out wide.

Our only away clean sheet of the season and 1 of only 2 wins came from a midfield 3 of EE, Simons and Dempsey, with Forss out wide (and Tutu on the other side).

All in all a team much more suited to winning the away battle. That's what I'd like to see more of, as opposed to dominating versus Wycombe but then losing the game in a 5 minute spell because we're too open

[desperado]

12 minutes ago, Stig said:

Our only away clean sheet of the season and 1 of only 2 wins came from a midfield 3 of EE, Simons and Dempsey, with Forss out wide (and Tutu on the other side).

All in all a team much more suited to winning the away battle. That's what I'd like to see more of, as opposed to dominating versus Wycombe but then losing the game in a 5 minute spell because we're too open

You are going to have folk coming on here saying that doesnt count because it was against 10 men.

But it’s a good point.

And if we are to play without ACD, despite me not thinking Forss is a winger, then Forss and another tucked in behind a number 9, is perhaps the solution.

I just can’t help thinking it leaves us a bit toothless.

But in this run of games where rotation  will be in play, it’s as good a time as any to play it again at Doncaster.

[desperado]

25 minutes ago, boltonboris said:

How we keep the ball with no wingers? We need an extra man in midfield,  it is sacrificing the #10 before a wide player. 
 

A conventional 433 / 451 gives us more in midfield and lets us counter with some width. Without the ball, we can be as compact as we want and if it’s not working, it’s easier to tweak to get a man further forward without too many changes 

Tends to be my way of thinking too.

But this is what we’ve tried more recently away from home isn’t it? (Huddersfield/Luton) 

Tutu and ACD wide and  bringing in more solid combinations in midfield, sacrificing the likes of Randal and Mcatee? 

Edited December 28, 2025 by desperado

[ianofcleveleys]

That switch from 433 to 451 was what Big Sam perfected with those at his disposal in our Prem years. The difference of course was the class of the players but they were also different types, more wide forwards than out and out wingers and more robust than our two.

With who SS currently has to play with, there's that case for Tutu being one of the wide players away from home, on the left instead of Gale, not sure we've a better option on the right hand side. Doesn't help on that side either that we aren't convincing at right back

 

Edited December 28, 2025 by ianofcleveleys

[boltonboris]

24 minutes ago, ianofcleveleys said:

That switch from 433 to 451 was what Big Sam perfected with those at his disposal in our Prem years. The difference of course was the class of the players but they were also different types, more wide forwards than out and out wingers and more robust than our two.

With who SS currently has to play with, there's that case for Tutu being one of the wide players, on the left instead of Gale, not sure we've a better option on the right hand side. 

 

Gales raw speed can really stretch teams though and we’d need that away from home. I think the obvious one is that we sacrifice Forss / Dempsey and play a conventional 3 of Simons, Sheehan, Erhahon. If only we had a proper good right back who could let ACD come off the line and offer more support to the striker. 
 

RB should be our first priority this window. Get the absolute best we can and it can have such an effect on what we do up front 

[ianofcleveleys]

3 minutes ago, boltonboris said:

Gales raw speed can really stretch teams though and we’d need that away from home. I think the obvious one is that we sacrifice Forss / Dempsey and play a conventional 3 of Simons, Sheehan, Erhahon. If only we had a proper good right back who could let ACD come off the line and offer more support to the striker. 
 

RB should be our first priority this window. Get the absolute best we can and it can have such an effect on what we do up front 

I can see that with the midfield three, and those three in particular. Know what you mean also re Gale, tricky one with him

[boltonboris]

Aye, away from home he’s looked like his feet are on the wrong legs on a few occasions. Hes inconsistent but that’s probably why he’s not playing at a higher level. 
 

Whats the solution to avoid Burstow being more isolated? Do we play on the counter? Are we strong enough defensively to do that? Again, as mentioned we’re a top full-back away from being able to change shape away from home to maintain solidity and offer support to Burstow, but we don’t have that.. what do we do in the interim period? Fuck knows…

[Tombwfc]

1 hour ago, desperado said:

You are going to have folk coming on here saying that doesnt count because it was against 10 men.

 

I don't think you need to be Pep to work out why we looked solid playing virtually an entire game against 10 man Mansfield.

You could draw our team & formation out of a hat and I'd expect us to look good in that situation.

[Whitesince63]

11 hours ago, Johnnyrotten said:

The only justification is that they are the players most likely to score and/or assist.  Bearing in mind we don't have any strikers doing that, its a brave call to take away one of our few scoring options and still expect to win.

They’re only the most likely to score because we’re giving them the ball more though. Why not drop one winger and instead play two strikers together playing more through the middle? I think that would actually suit Randall better because he could thread his through balls to them without getting battered up top by big defenders and we’d still have the wide threat from say ACD on the wing. Attacking through both the centre and wide would possibly open up more opportunities to score and certainly put more pressure across opposition defences. 

[gonzo]

As Burstow said earlier in the season, get ball it to the area and he'll be there.

A lot boils down to old inverted wingers cutting inside and taking a touch or 3 too many and the moments gone.

We need a bit of variation from the wingers. Have a run sometimes, bang straight in others and get the overlapping full backs involved for wider crosses. Trouble is with the latter both our fullbacks were running in treacle on Sat.

 

[Johnnyrotten]

2 hours ago, Stig said:

Our only away clean sheet of the season and 1 of only 2 wins came from a midfield 3 of EE, Simons and Dempsey, with Forss out wide (and Tutu on the other side).

All in all a team much more suited to winning the away battle. That's what I'd like to see more of, as opposed to dominating versus Wycombe but then losing the game in a 5 minute spell because we're too open

Don't get me wrong I want us to be more solid away as much as you do, I just then wonder how we score a goal.  We are saying Gale (or Tutu) is sacrificed for most away games, because clearly ACD isn't realistically missing many games, for good reason.  

Just on the being too open thing, its never black and white, are we saying that if we play your preferred formation the opposition never attack?  Clearly not, we could play 10 at the back or 10 in midfield and there will be a 5  or 10 minute spell of pressure, as @desperado pointed out after the game, we conceded against the run of play partly because 2 players slipped.  We can be as solid as we want but crosses are still going to come in occasionally and we just have to deal with them, I'm unsure how that is prevented just by not having a winger.  The balancing act is how much more the opposition can attack knowing their fullbacks don't have to think about the threat posed by us having 2 lightning wingers.  Its give and take, but I respect the discussion is a valid one. 

We can't seriously consider the win at Mansfield as evidence of being solid, we aren't comparing like with like if we're including games v 10 men bottom 8 teams. I don't think that aids the discussion, I know what I saw and Forss on the right wing was not working either offensively or defensively IMO (happy with Tutu though, our best option at RB for me because of the shortcomings of the other 2, but effective on either wing too).

[Johnnyrotten]

2 hours ago, desperado said:

You are going to have folk coming on here saying that doesnt count because it was against 10 men.

Correct, 100% 😀

[Rizlar]

It’s a tough one to sort this away form we all have different ideas in how to solve it but I trust SS to sort it out and it maybe a case of putting things right in the transfer window . 

[desperado]

56 minutes ago, Tombwfc said:

 

I don't think you need to be Pep to work out why we looked solid playing virtually an entire game against 10 man Mansfield.

You could draw our team & formation out of a hat and I'd expect us to look good in that situation.

Knew it 😂

While your ridiculously exaggerated point has some merit, sides with 10 men have and always will cause problems for teams with 11 men, denying them 3 points.

Anyway it’s slightly away from the main topic of conversation. Regardless of the merits of that 3 points, that side is the closest SS has come to dropping a winger and bolstering up the midfield behind, the type of tactic and formation lots are calling out for on this thread.

What’s your answer/suggestion to sort our away form out? 

[Eddie]

If you’re facing us and you see ACD and Gale on the bench then you’re buzzing.

Forget the formation bollocks, you are absolutely delighted to see our 2 match winners sat with their fucking joggers on.

Personally I don’t think too much is wrong with it, but would go with the midfield 3 of Sheehan, EE and Simons and let Gale / ACD do the job of getting close to Burstow (and expect him to get back to early season form where he can actually hold the ball up for more than half a second).

Edited December 28, 2025 by Eddie

[Farnywhite]

4 minutes ago, Rizlar said:

It’s a tough one to sort this away form we all have different ideas in how to solve it but I trust SS to sort it out and it maybe a case of putting things right in the transfer window . 

Problem is  he as had half a season to put it right snd continues to do excacly the same  thing every away game formation wise . We have had a full squad to pick from nearly every week so I can’t see a transfer window  making much difference