7 minutes ago, Wullie said:

He plays 2 in midfield (most of the time) when they are all fit

He has but also a 3 I’m sure when all fit it’ll be Sheehan pivot Dempsey/Thommasson/Matete more often than not. So you now understand his rationale for 2 starting yesterday? Perhaps he knows more than you do. 

Edited November 24, 20241 yr by Mounts Kipper

14 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Hes only got 3 fit midfielders, forced him to start with 2 because Thomasson wasn’t lasting full game…. Isn’t that obvious? 

He had 5 fit midfielders to choose from yesterday. Let's not pretend injuries are making him go for this 2 midfielder nonsense.

Thankfully he abandoned it at half time and put McAtee into midfield which is better than 2 but still not as good as having 3 midfielders imo. 

4 minutes ago, Stig said:

He had 5 fit midfielders to choose from yesterday. Let's not pretend injuries are making him go for this 2 midfielder nonsense.

Thankfully he abandoned it at half time and put McAtee into midfield which is better than 2 but still not as good as having 3 midfielders imo. 

Name these midfielders? You know specialist centre mids. 

1 minute ago, Mounts Kipper said:

He has but also a 3 I’m sure when all fit it’ll be Sheehan pivot Dempsey/Thommasson/Matete more often than not. So you now understand his rationale for 2 starting yesterday? Perhaps he knows more than you do. 

He's the manager, yes he knows more then me, but the stats (and he says he is a stats man) show that in the league, when he plays 2 in midfield he has a win rate of 50%, with 3 it is 60%, but more importantly his loss rate in a 2 is 40%, in a 3 it is 10%, so having 3 in midfield (and they don't have to be midfielders) is statistically a better success ratio

 

Just now, Wullie said:

He's the manager, yes he knows more then me, but the stats (and he says he is a stats man) show that in the league, when he plays 2 in midfield he has a win rate of 50%, with 3 it is 60%, but more importantly his loss rate in a 2 is 40%, in a 3 it is 10%, so having 3 in midfield (and they don't have to be midfielders) is statistically a better success ratio

 

FFS!! He had only 3 fit…one of whom been out 6 weeks..  when he has 5 centre mids available and plays 2 and we lose come back.

1 minute ago, Mounts Kipper said:

FFS!! He had only 3 fit…one of whom been out 6 weeks..  when he has 5 centre mids available and plays 2 and we lose come back.

Poor argument there, you saying he has only had 2 fit midfielders in the 10 fixtures he has played with only 2?

5 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Name these midfielders? You know specialist centre mids. 

Thomason, Matete, Sheehan, Arfield, Sharples.

Play the first 3 and then swap one of the other 2 or Lolos or McAtee in the more advance 10 role for Thomason if needed. 

Don't start with a 2 man midfield, lose control of the game and then have to do a rescue job by reverting to a 3.

Just now, Wullie said:

Poor argument there, you saying he has only had 2 fit midfielders in the 10 fixtures he has played with only 2?

Perhaps he’s pondered the stats from first 10 games and wants to play 3 but he ain’t got 3 so he is forced to play 2… he will be well aware of the win stats with 2 and took a calculated risk yesterday..  like I say come back when we’ve a full compliment of centre mids, and he’s played only 2 and we’ve lost… not sure why you continue to argue about yesterday as he was forced into only 2…and he was right Thomasson off after 60 and replaced by a fresh matete who was involved in setting up the winner. 

3 minutes ago, Stig said:

Thomason, Matete, Sheehan, Arfield, Sharples.

Play the first 3 and then swap one of the other 2 or Lolos or McAtee in the more advance 10 role for Thomason if needed. 

Don't start with a 2 man midfield, lose control of the game and then have to do a rescue job by reverting to a 3.

Airfield shite… Lolos not much better, Sharples not ready, and the first 2 ain’t proper centre mids if they were good enough in first place. Your argument weve 5 capable CM on bench is crap. Evatt played it spot on and we won. 

2 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Airfield shite… Lolos not much better, Sharples not ready, and the first 2 ain’t proper centre mids if they were good enough in first place. Your argument weve 5 capable CM on bench is crap. Evatt played it spot on and we won. 

I agree that the three you mention aren't perhaps where we need them to be.

We could still have played the 3 in there yesterday though. 

Yes we won, but I don't agree that that means Evatt played it spot on.

One of those non-provable situations.

3 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Airfield shite… Lolos not much better, Sharples not ready, and the first 2 ain’t proper centre mids if they were good enough in first place. Your argument weve 5 capable CM on bench is crap. Evatt played it spot on and we won. 

Ok if you think the midfield options are rubbish that's your opinion. But can you not see the point I'm making is that only playing 2 in midfield isn't working and didn't work yesterday...? It was only when he reverted to McAtee as the advanced midfielder in a 3 that we were on top in the second half.

So put McAtee there if in a 532 if the other options aren't up to your expectations. Starting with a 2 man midfield and 3 strikers spread could have lost us the game yesterday.

6 minutes ago, Stig said:

Ok if you think the midfield options are rubbish that's your opinion. But can you not see the point I'm making is that only playing 2 in midfield isn't working and didn't work yesterday...? It was only when he reverted to McAtee as the advanced midfielder in a 3 that we were on top in the second half.

So put McAtee there if in a 532 if the other options aren't up to your expectations. Starting with a 2 man midfield and 3 strikers spread could have lost us the game yesterday.

I’ll give you that, but he isn’t a centre mid either, was an emergency measure and it worked…. Thankfully. 

12 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Perhaps he’s pondered the stats from first 10 games and wants to play 3 but he ain’t got 3 so he is forced to play 2… he will be well aware of the win stats with 2 and took a calculated risk yesterday..  like I say come back when we’ve a full compliment of centre mids, and he’s played only 2 and we’ve lost… not sure why you continue to argue about yesterday as he was forced into only 2…and he was right Thomasson off after 60 and replaced by a fresh matete who was involved in setting up the winner. 

Using yesterday as an example as that is the most recent match, my opinion of Evatt is based on this season plus the run from Feb to the playoff final, and I am now more convinced he isn't working. It's an opinion based on the facts when I look at them.

 

More then happy we beat them yesterday, but it was a struggle against a poor side.

We have Cambridge away, Mansfield home, Bristol Rovers away, Wigan home, Wycombe away, Barnsley home and then Lincoln home, and I still expect us to be about where we currently are based on form this season.

4 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

I’ll give you that, but he isn’t a centre mid either, was an emergency measure and it worked…. Thankfully. 

He's played Mcatee in the midfield 3 behind the strikers a number of times this season so hardly revolutionary. Evatt yesterday consciously decided the 2 man midfield is a better option than a player slightly out of position, which ignores all the evidence we've seen so far this season 

27 minutes ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Airfield shite… Lolos not much better, Sharples not ready, and the first 2 ain’t proper centre mids if they were good enough in first place. Your argument weve 5 capable CM on bench is crap. Evatt played it spot on and we won. 

I’m not saying we had loads available but you can’t dismiss them because you think they  are shite. They are still fit and available and players he’s bought 

19 minutes ago, Big E said:

I’m not saying we had loads available but you can’t dismiss them because you think they  are shite. They are still fit and available and players he’s bought 

Maghoma was shit as well, remember? 

53 minutes ago, Stig said:

Thomason, Matete, Sheehan, Arfield, Sharples.

Play the first 3 and then swap one of the other 2 or Lolos or McAtee in the more advance 10 role for Thomason if needed. 

Don't start with a 2 man midfield, lose control of the game and then have to do a rescue job by reverting to a 3.

Arfield hasn’t looked settled when he’s played, sharples isn’t ready for league one football. You could add dempsey to that list but the other 3 don’t think have been fully fit at any one time.

I was pleased with and for SSA when he made his debut, but we can't rely on him as an option in the league just yet 

Apparently there's a young lad called Morley at Wycombe who is a very useful midfielder and had a storming game yesterday for the team that is 5 points clear at the top of the league.

1 minute ago, passmosster said:

Apparently there's a young lad called Morley at Wycombe who is a very useful midfielder and had a storming game yesterday for the team that is 5 points clear at the top of the league.

Who was moved on specifically because we were wanting to go with a midfield 2. Madness

If Dempsey, Thomasson and Sheehan are all fully fit and he plays 2 in midfield I might make a banner 

One other thing yesterday was how Blackpool tried to start at 100mph and once we matched that we dominated the game. Instead of messing about the back wish we could play wit pace more often . 

Edited November 24, 20241 yr by Ani

1 hour ago, Mounts Kipper said:

Airfield shite… Lolos not much better, Sharples not ready, and the first 2 ain’t proper centre mids if they were good enough in first place. Your argument weve 5 capable CM on bench is crap. Evatt played it spot on and we won. 

He is the manager.........The buck stops with him  It was him who signed Dempsey  cracking player at this level but suffers two/three injuries a season. It was him who sent Morley out on loan and then signed both Lolos and Arfield who as you say are not up to it.

He got away with it because Thomason and Schon dug deep and dragged the team through.

While we are on about yesterday he once again got away with no keeper on the bench. Just a matter of time this will come back to bite him as Baxter is another who gets injured every season at some stage.

Yesterday was great and it will have turned some of the Evatt doubters back on side, but for some like me can see that nothing changed

12 minutes ago, masi 51 said:

He is the manager.........The buck stops with him  It was him who signed Dempsey  cracking player at this level but suffers two/three injuries a season. It was him who sent Morley out on loan and then signed both Lolos and Arfield who as you say are not up to it.

He got away with it because Thomason and Schon dug deep and dragged the team through.

While we are on about yesterday he once again got away with no keeper on the bench. Just a matter of time this will come back to bite him as Baxter is another who gets injured every season at some stage.

Yesterday was great and it will have turned some of the Evatt doubters back on side, but for some like me can see that nothing changed

Fuck all has changed. We barely scraped over the line against a relegation candidate in appalling form and but for wasteful finishing from them would've lost.

He should be sacked immediately and nobody with half a brain would lose a moment of sleep about it. 

57 minutes ago, Stig said:

Who was moved on specifically because we were wanting to go with a midfield 2. Madness

He went cos he wants to start

With 2 or 3, that wouldnt be the case with us

8 minutes ago, Casino said:

He went cos he wants to start

With 2 or 3, that wouldnt be the case with us

It might not have been at the time he went, if the idea of the move was to play himself back into contention it's reasonable to assume that he's done that