8 games unbeaten with a run of like 8 games that are all "winnable" before an incredibly difficult April/May, each game goes and the gap seems to widen above us and we really are looking at the end game now

We haven't beaten anyone by more than 1 goal since 8th November vs bottom of the league Port Vale (4-0) and our performances recently are mixed, good for a half here and there and needing moments in the last minute to scrape points whilst missing a ton of great chances, I think with this keeper we'd have seen more points earlier in season, in a part I think our performances where much better but we dropped points so much.

If we go into April, 16 unbeaten (that seems far-fetched to say lol), confidence may be sky high playing those teams but when we can't seem to take easy chances and kill games, it's gonna be one hell of a sweat-fest against these tougher teams.

I think part of me feels there's still a chance because nerves play a part, I just don't think given our last 5 games we will get top 2 because we will need Lincoln to have a big slip up whilst we almost go perfect,  if we have a lot of dropped points in these next 8 games, the worst case could be we surrender the playoffs like last season, but I doubt this, you can't be third all season, without really clicking either for it go wrong all of a sudden, if it is to be the playoffs those last 5 games are great preparation at least.

How do you see it going? gonna be nervy.

NEXT 8                              LAST 5

Blackpool  H                 Stockport H

Exeter City A                Cardiff A

Wycombe H                 Huddersfield H

Rotherham A               Bradford A

Doncaster H                Luton H

Port Vale A                  

Stevenage H               

Plymouth A                  

Edited February 18Feb 18 by Didledee
Stockport so good I named them twice

2 minutes ago, gonzo said:

That first half was just cross after cross in a lone striker who was marked to death. Plus a few belting corners from Dempsey.

Not signing a proper finisher could well come home to roost. 

Still have to play him mind. 😁

20 minutes ago, L/H White said:

Point stands in regards to not scoring more than once etc

totally agree

and conceding very few shots and goals

but we always do

like we hardly ever score in the first half either

but lots in 90 mins plus

and miss lots of chances

not been able to get it quite right on those respects for most of the season

good, but not enough for automatic, hopefully enough for the play offs, as demonstrated by current position

2 hours ago, desperado said:

You did watch us at Reading last week didn’t you?

2 forwards, Kenny missed a great opportunity after 1 min. More chances spurned.

I’m not against seeing it again, that formation and two forwards perhaps need more time, as does Kenny.

I’m really not quite sure why you are so insistent that SS has blocked this option from happening again, when he did it last week and has brought Kenny in to have an impact.

He’s only had Kenny available for a week ! 😂

 

You keep going back to the reading game yes Kenny did start but we have played one up front all season bar that game and it is telling that Toal, Johnston, Conway have all individually started more games than any of our forwards Dalby,Burstow, Mcatee ,Forss and Kenny

We have gambled this season on unproven strikers who have struggled when they play alone

Edited February 23Feb 23 by masi 51

Might be time to go 3-4-1-2

A back 3 of Toal, Forino & Johnston (as we've none better)
2 wingers (who have to come back and defend) either side or two from  Dempsey, Erhahon & Simons
1 of Sheehan / Rodrigues/ Apter as the link between CM & the forward line
2 from Dalby / Burstow / Kenny up top

1 hour ago, gonzo said:

That first half was just cross after cross in a lone striker who was marked to death. Plus a few belting corners from Dempsey.

Not signing a proper finisher could well come home to roost. 

What would a proper finisher have done with that sort of service though? They weren't chances, just balls to battle for.

We're not creating even 3 or 4 chances in a game that a proper finisher would thrive on. 

1 hour ago, masi 51 said:

You keep going back to the reading game

Yes! Because it was 7 days ago!

The way you started out on this two up front preference of yours, it was as if Schumacher hadn’t even considered it, never mind having used it 7 days ago! 😂

Yes, we haven’t seen it much and we understand you want to see it more.

But don’t come out with falsities like “He has that option.....but never uses it” when he did it last week. 

FWIW I wouldn’t mind it. But I also believe there’ll be other selection options/formations (including one up front) that will get 3 points this season. 

 

Edited February 23Feb 23 by desperado

1 hour ago, ianofcleveleys said:

What would a proper finisher have done with that sort of service though? They weren't chances, just balls to battle for.

We're not creating even 3 or 4 chances in a game that a proper finisher would thrive on. 

On Saturday from the corners there were plenty of times the ball was bouncing round their box where you expect a Walker or McGinlay would have somehow got a foot to it.

Sorry for mentioning them….but…United have won 5 out of 6 under Carrick and just read he has made 2 team changes in total across those games, both down to injury. We make multiple changes every week it does not seem to be working. It felt after Wigan we were starting to play a more settled team but back to lots changes again. 

23 minutes ago, Ani said:

We make multiple changes every week it does not seem to be working. It felt after Wigan we were starting to play a more settled team but back to lots changes again. 

Until these draws turn into wins, these going round in circles fan solutions will keep happening.

There’s a few like you who think the side should have remained the same more often and others who are at the opposite  extreme of drastic changes in formation/ personnel.

Personally I think subtle changes in personnel and formation are required game to game, especially when performances (individual & team) are so inconsistent. (Although I think we keep forgetting our current form is pretty good!) 

I think it was fair play to SS adopting the 5 at the back, to address the awful form we had. But prior to the new signings, we scraped some good results playing poorly. 

To have carried on like that would, IMO, have been a huge gamble. I’m happy we’ve got the likes of CBT, Apter, Kenny & Rodriguez to alter formation and change things up from a side that was (without ACD) in danger of looking very one-paced and predictable.

 

8 hours ago, ianofcleveleys said:

What would a proper finisher have done with that sort of service though? They weren't chances, just balls to battle for.

We're not creating even 3 or 4 chances in a game that a proper finisher would thrive on. 

Well we'd have a different approach I'd say. With only Dalby up top you're pretty restricted to one type of service.

Either way it can't be Dalby ans Dempsey ever again.

2 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Either way it can't be Dalby ans Dempsey ever again

It is a head scratcher this one.

I appreciate I’m in the minority in understanding why SS played him here Saturday. I’ll not go on, as I’ll be repeating myself.

And I thought he had a good game there.

The other conundrum is getting what I think are our 3 best midfielders (Dempsey, Sheehan, Erhahon) into the line-up. 

Then you have Simons who hasn’t done a lot wrong - who some would have in straight away for Sheehan.

But I also agree that Dempsey/Dalby doesn’t look very potent up front.

How do we get our best players on the pitch?

Maybe it’s as @Traf and @masi 51said with 3 at the back.

All valid opinions. 

But to back up my posts from yesterday, I really don’t believe one formation and one unchanged team will be the answer this season. 

He will need to keep making subtle changes accordingly.

And let’s not forget, while it’s not ideal, finding our best solutions with our new players, will take some time and experimentation. 

 

26 minutes ago, desperado said:

It is a head scratcher this one.

I appreciate I’m in the minority in understanding why SS played him here Saturday. I’ll not go on, as I’ll be repeating myself.

And I thought he had a good game there.

The other conundrum is getting what I think are our 3 best midfielders (Dempsey, Sheehan, Erhahon) into the line-up. 

Then you have Simons who hasn’t done a lot wrong - who some would have in straight away for Sheehan.

But I also agree that Dempsey/Dalby doesn’t look very potent up front.

How do we get our best players on the pitch?

Maybe it’s as @Traf and @masi 51said with 3 at the back.

All valid opinions. 

But to back up my posts from yesterday, I really don’t believe one formation and one unchanged team will be the answer this season. 

He will need to keep making subtle changes accordingly.

And let’s not forget, while it’s not ideal, finding our best solutions with our new players, will take some time and experimentation. 

 

I don't mind the changes. Dempsey is just never a no 10. And Dalby needs someone better to play off him.

A different story with a fit Ruben or dare I say it McAtee on sat. Fuck knows about Kenny.

Creating stuff if far from the biggest issue on sat, it's the complete head loss when they decided a few simple counter attacks. Both goals an absolute calamity. 

You don't see Lincoln conceding like that. 

54 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Well we'd have a different approach I'd say. With only Dalby up top you're pretty restricted to one type of service.

Either way it can't be Dalby ans Dempsey ever again.

Aye.

SS commented that we put loads of crosses in, which is good, but begs the question; why not play two strikers then?

48 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Well we'd have a different approach I'd say. With only Dalby up top you're pretty restricted to one type of service.

Either way it can't be Dalby ans Dempsey ever again.

As @desperado said, nothing much wrong with what Dempsey did on the day, all the things he usually does well, but if we're going to be as big on feeding the wingers and them crossing it as we were on Saturday we need to have another striker in there, closer to Dalby and sniffing around the second balls. 

If we're going to play through teams and weave patterns then fine with Dempsey or (presumably what he's here for) Rodriguez and one striker. 

We crossed the ball more on Saturday than at any time since the days of the Postman to Madine but asked too much of Dalby.  The question for SS to solve is are either Burstow or Kenny right for being that penalty area sniffer. 

Dempsey should have played alongside EE, as he had been doing previously. 

2 up top.

Results were good.

48 minutes ago, desperado said:

It is a head scratcher this one.

I appreciate I’m in the minority in understanding why SS played him here Saturday. I’ll not go on, as I’ll be repeating myself.

And I thought he had a good game there.

The other conundrum is getting what I think are our 3 best midfielders (Dempsey, Sheehan, Erhahon) into the line-up. 

Then you have Simons who hasn’t done a lot wrong - who some would have in straight away for Sheehan.

But I also agree that Dempsey/Dalby doesn’t look very potent up front.

How do we get our best players on the pitch?

Maybe it’s as @Traf and @masi 51said with 3 at the back.

All valid opinions. 

But to back up my posts from yesterday, I really don’t believe one formation and one unchanged team will be the answer this season. 

He will need to keep making subtle changes accordingly.

And let’s not forget, while it’s not ideal, finding our best solutions with our new players, will take some time and experimentation. 

 

In hindsight Sheehan would be the one to have left out for another striker on Saturday, and tbf some of the best halves we've played recently had a midfield 2 of Dempsey and Erhahon.

1 minute ago, Stig said:

In hindsight Sheehan would be the one to have left out for another striker on Saturday, and tbf some of the best halves we've played recently had a midfield 2 of Dempsey and Erhahon.

In one.

Irrespective of what folk feel about Sheehan or anyone else, why change a successful formula?

Didn't improve us.

Reward players who are doing well, and make others work hard and take their opportunity when injuries etc allow them back in.

17 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Dempsey should have played alongside EE, as he had been doing previously. 

2 up top.

Results were good.

 

12 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

In one.

Irrespective of what folk feel about Sheehan or anyone else, why change a successful formula?

Didn't improve us.

Reward players who are doing well, and make others work hard and take their opportunity when injuries etc allow them back in.

As I said yesterday, the 2nd half at Barnsley and 1st Half at Lincoln, we were poor with Dempsey and Erhahon, both halves were crying out for Sheehan.

And 2nd half v Lincoln he made a difference.

So it makes sense selecting Sheehan.

Just ridiculously frustrating that Sheehan, (alongside probably the whole squad!) don’t show consistency from one game to the other, for 90 mins.

It’s a right headache for SS.

I personally can see why sticking with Erhahon & Dempsey isn’t always the answer and he would change it to accommodate Sheehan. I don’t think it was/is always a successful formula. It’s working, as @Stig says for 45/60 mins, which isn’t a long-term solution for me. 

Edited February 24Feb 24 by desperado

9 hours ago, ianofcleveleys said:

What would a proper finisher have done with that sort of service though? They weren't chances, just balls to battle for.

We're not creating even 3 or 4 chances in a game that a proper finisher would thrive on. 

 

I'm not sure that's totally how it works. A striker isn't just a bystander who chances happen to. The good ones make things happen and turn half decent opportunities into attempts on goal. We've seen that when we've had good strikers and strikers in good form. If you put Haaland in any team in L1 he'd score 30+ goals regardless of who was passing him the ball.

If you put all of our strikers in the position Marriott was against us, how many tries would it take them to score? 

 

8 hours ago, desperado said:

Until these draws turn into wins, these going round in circles fan solutions will keep happening.

There’s a few like you who think the side should have remained the same more often and others who are at the opposite  extreme of drastic changes in formation/ personnel.

Personally I think subtle changes in personnel and formation are required game to game, especially when performances (individual & team) are so inconsistent. (Although I think we keep forgetting our current form is pretty good!) 

I think it was fair play to SS adopting the 5 at the back, to address the awful form we had. But prior to the new signings, we scraped some good results playing poorly. 

To have carried on like that would, IMO, have been a huge gamble. I’m happy we’ve got the likes of CBT, Apter, Kenny & Rodriguez to alter formation and change things up from a side that was (without ACD) in danger of looking very one-paced and predictable.

 

I have not seen anyone after a few win's calling for drastic changes. 
 

You mention subtle changes but if only that was the case, Cisoko starts one week not even on the bench next, McAtee showing some form (and I am not a fan) benched and then not in squad, Toal been rested , Forino the same. Midfield pick 2 from 4. On Saturday Dempsey (who I am a fan of) seemed to be in supporting striker role with Kenny and Burstow on the bench. Rodriguez and McAtee not even in squad. 
 

Clearly the element we do not know that SS does is around fitness so it is not about one off individual calls.(although it has been clear that CBT does not have more than 60 minutes in him so should be subbed earlier)  It is about a series of decisions SS has made and is making. We are are end of Feb and no one knows our best XI. I can accept with loan players coming in and getting upto full fitness that there will be an element of that but this has been the case all season. Same at end of last season, albeit players crying off with injuries did not help there. 
 

My point is the regular changes is not working as our objective was promotion and that now gone. Surely now is the time to develop a ‘best XI’ plus subs , consolidate a play off spot and take it from there ? 

22 minutes ago, Ani said:

I have not seen anyone after a few win's calling for drastic changes. 
 

You mention subtle changes but if only that was the case, Cisoko starts one week not even on the bench next, McAtee showing some form (and I am not a fan) benched and then not in squad, Toal been rested , Forino the same. Midfield pick 2 from 4. On Saturday Dempsey (who I am a fan of) seemed to be in supporting striker role with Kenny and Burstow on the bench. Rodriguez and McAtee not even in squad. 
 

Clearly the element we do not know that SS does is around fitness so it is not about one off individual calls.(although it has been clear that CBT does not have more than 60 minutes in him so should be subbed earlier)  It is about a series of decisions SS has made and is making. We are are end of Feb and no one knows our best XI. I can accept with loan players coming in and getting upto full fitness that there will be an element of that but this has been the case all season. Same at end of last season, albeit players crying off with injuries did not help there. 
 

My point is the regular changes is not working as our objective was promotion and that now gone. Surely now is the time to develop a ‘best XI’ plus subs , consolidate a play off spot and take it from there ? 

Good response.

I probably agree that a bit more consistency in selection would aid us.

But hard when the players themselves aren’t very consistent.

And as you say there are some very valid fitness/injury issues at play too.

I do think the best 11 scenario is (frustratingly) a while off yet, while we see how the newbies gel. 

Which takes me back to my point of sticking to the Wigan side would have been a gamble (especially after losing ACD) 

I don’t think the regular changes now are comparable to the regular changes he was making in the autumn. For me they are necessary until we find a solution to turn these draws into wins, which I think will involve some contribution from the new lads, while getting a midfield/defence combination that prevents the sloppy goals - the holy grail! 

24 minutes ago, Ani said:

I have not seen anyone after a few win's calling for drastic changes. 
 

You mention subtle changes but if only that was the case, Cisoko starts one week not even on the bench next, McAtee showing some form (and I am not a fan) benched and then not in squad, Toal been rested , Forino the same. Midfield pick 2 from 4. On Saturday Dempsey (who I am a fan of) seemed to be in supporting striker role with Kenny and Burstow on the bench. Rodriguez and McAtee not even in squad. 
 

Clearly the element we do not know that SS does is around fitness so it is not about one off individual calls.(although it has been clear that CBT does not have more than 60 minutes in him so should be subbed earlier)  It is about a series of decisions SS has made and is making. We are are end of Feb and no one knows our best XI. I can accept with loan players coming in and getting upto full fitness that there will be an element of that but this has been the case all season. Same at end of last season, albeit players crying off with injuries did not help there. 
 

My point is the regular changes is not working as our objective was promotion and that now gone. Surely now is the time to develop a ‘best XI’ plus subs , consolidate a play off spot and take it from there ? 

Yeah, I'm not a Cissoko fan, but his last game was possibly the best he's had for us and then wasn't in the squad on Saturday.

Perhaps the squad is too big. Lincoln have a smaller squad, so have less scope for "rotation".
Whilst people (myself included) have criticised our back line this season, our defensive record is good and that might be because we've only really used Christie, Tutu, Toal, Forino, Johnston & Conway extensively.

11 hours ago, Traf said:

Might be time to go 3-4-1-2

A back 3 of Toal, Forino & Johnston (as we've none better)
2 wingers (who have to come back and defend) either side or two from  Dempsey, Erhahon & Simons
1 of Sheehan / Rodrigues/ Apter as the link between CM & the forward line
2 from Dalby / Burstow / Kenny up top

Think you and me are not too far apart. Would go with that back 3 and have them defend and not worry about pushing forward.

A four would have to include Conway wide left to give that protection on the left where i see Johnston as a weak link when playing on the left. Apter/Tutu/ Blackett on the right and the central two i agree with you two from Erhahon Simons and Dempsey

The 10 would be fought out between Sheehan, Rodriquez and Mcatee and two forwards from Dalby/Burstow/Kenny

 

Sheehan would have been lost at Lincoln.

They were simply a better team, and still are, as the table shows.

Barnsley and Blackpool show a bit of frailty in the team's mentality. 

Barnsley's first was a freakish deflection too.

Sheehan wasn't present in one, and was in the other.

The one he wasn't, we still won, and saw the game out relatively comfortably. 

The one he was, we didn't.

We don't have any one player that is good enough to have such a massive impact in his availability or not.

We do have a decent squad, and by design or necessity, got a formation that was working.

Now SS has got the bingo machine out.

45 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Sheehan would have been lost at Lincoln.

They were simply a better team, and still are, as the table shows.

Barnsley and Blackpool show a bit of frailty in the team's mentality. 

Barnsley's first was a freakish deflection too.

Sheehan wasn't present in one, and was in the other.

The one he wasn't, we still won, and saw the game out relatively comfortably. 

The one he was, we didn't.

We don't have any one player that is good enough to have such a massive impact in his availability or not.

We do have a decent squad, and by design or necessity, got a formation that was working.

Now SS has got the bingo machine out.

We lose at Lincoln without Sheehan coming on.

45 minutes ago, Tonge moor green jacket said:

Sheehan would have been lost at Lincoln.

2nd half he played well, contributed to the goal.

We finished strongly there, with Sheehan pulling the strings, after largely being inferior previously.

Match winner at Wigan and home to Rotherham.

But yes I agree no one player consistent enough to be a guaranteed starter - Dempsey and Erhahon included.