A wins a win

[Baboo]

Crickey - think I agree with every single word of Sackcloth's.
I rate Midson but to compare his goal scoring potential to Craddock's is in my opinion way off the mark. Craddock is obviously not being played in his best position, but every now and again knocks a quality pass or two. People don't seem to spot this. Four goals in 9 games ain't bad. Or don't penalties count? (No no - I don't want to re-awaken the Duffy debate)

Beano 5 league goals in 12 games. (None were pens though)

[headless_pnub]

Five goals in 9 games is even better.

[Baboo]

Five goals in 9 games is even better.

Better than ...... ????

[headless_pnub]

Better than four. At least last time I checked it was.

[Snake]

Craddock may be able to finish, but I don’t think he’s going to get many chances playing on left side of midfield. For me he was disappointing again on Saturday, and I’d rather see Midson alongside Constable with Green in the hole behind.

Sick and tired of 4-5-1 and I bet Beano is as well.

watch the goals dry up if Craddock is dropped

I don’t want him to be dropped, just not playing so deep.

One up front is not entertaining - end of. I really don’t care who plays with Beano in Their half so long as it’s someone with a Yellow shirt on his back.

We had a good spell in Division Four a long time ago under Atkins and nearly got to the play-offs with the same kind of formation that Wilder uses but I’d rather see a good game of football (even if we lose) for the price of my ticket.

[Hog]

Ah! Yellow shirts! Remember them?

[recordmeister]

I do think a lot of this debate is about definitions: what sort / type of player should play in a said role.

For me, the player in the middle of a front 3 should be an out and out goal scorer, fox in the box. The two wide players should be just that wide players. The big issue with a front 3 is that you end up with a striker playing out wide, neither scoring nor providing and getting stick for doing neither, badly. But then wide players get the same treatment for not getting in the box and scoring. TBH, I'm not really sure what players in those positions should be doing! What constitutes a &quotgood day at the office&quot for them?

As for the three in the middle of the park...

At least with a back 4, they know their jobs. Well, at least when defending. Going forward however...

[ty cobb]

Well I stick by my view of Craddock being dreadful on Sat, he gave the ball away, pulled out of tackles, didn’t get involved and generally looked a bit un-interested – people near me were of the same opinion as well.

This doesn’t make him a bad player, he clearly knows where the goal is and was highly rated at Luton. What he doesn’t seem to be is a left winger.

I don’t mind 4-5-1, it got us promoted last season and it keeps us solid at the back but I wish Wilder would buy players to fit it rather than players to try and fit it – Midson and Craddock seem to be best as part of a front 2 yet they are both used out wide (or not at all in Midsons case).

I don’t understand the criticism Beano is getting on here though, you can’t have a fox in the box (Franny Jeffers?) as the middle one of 3 as he wouldn’t win anything in the air and the ball would just come straight back, you need a Beano to battle for the ball, win things in the air and generally make things uncomfortable for their back line. He is also the most instinctive goal scorer I’ve seen at the club for years, he nearly always gets his shots on target and you rarely see him miss a good chance.

As for Wright being at fault for the goal – the bloke was running onto it to head it on due to the excellent cross (down to the amount of space he had) pretty much impossible ball to defend.

My complaints are relatively minor though, I don’t think we should completely change the system as we’re doing ok at the moment – we should’ve won a couple more games (Macc and Stockport spring to mind) and had we have done we’d be sitting pretty.

And Northampton were very poor – they offered nothing in the last third and did nothing with the amount of possession we allowed them.

[boris]

I'm not really that big on systems - professional footballers should be able to play well in any system - but I think that those who say the two wide players in a front 3 should be wingers are utterly wrong. The width in a 4-3-3 is (or should be) provided by the two full-backs bombing on the two forward players (and the two wider midfielders) should therefore be narrower to give the fullbacks that space to get forward. So the role of the two wider forwards should be mainly to support the central striker and to provide an outlet for when he is holding up the ball, or to latch on to headed flicks, etc. The problem we have, as I see it, is that the two full-backs aren't acting as surrogate wingers (hence why we need Batt back, and possibly Kinni) and therefore the two forwards are playing too wide to compensate.

Of course, this could all be bollocks. However, I don't really care as long as we win.

EDIT: and their goal was definitely down to Purkiss getting drawn too centrally and not being able to close down their crosser quickly enough, plus what on earth was Heslop doing ambling around aimlessly? Also, that must have been one of the softest pens we've ever been awarded - if there's any justice N'hampton's appeal against the sending off should be successful (the goalie already had the ball in his hands when Clist went down, plus contact by Johnson was minimal, plus Clist wasn't heading goalwards so I'm not sure how that could have been an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

[Joey's Toe]

EDIT: and their goal was definitely down to Purkiss getting drawn too centrally and not being able to close down their crosser quickly enough, plus what on earth was Heslop doing ambling around aimlessly? Also, that must have been one of the softest pens we've ever been awarded - if there's any justice N'hampton's appeal against the sending off should be successful (the goalie already had the ball in his hands when Clist went down, plus contact by Johnson was minimal, plus Clist wasn't heading goalwards so I'm not sure how that could have been an obvious goalscoring opportunity.

Quite agree with that. I was sat directly in line with it in the SSU, and my immediate reaction was that it was not a pen. Watching the replay, it's unquestionably a soft one, if a pen at all, and certainly not worthy of a sending off.

[boris]

The appeal was unsuccessful - Johnson misses tonight's game v Ipswich. Probably not a real loss as Northants will lose that anyway, and the player will be back for their more important League games.

[recordmeister]

The appeal was unsuccessful - Johnson misses tonight's game v Ipswich. Probably not a real loss as Northants will lose that anyway, and the player will be back for their more important League games.

Don't you miss even more games as a result of an unsuccessful appeal?

[boris]

Only if the FA deem the appeal to be frivolous.

[Baboo]

Better than four. At least last time I checked it was.

What about 2 &amp 3 &amp 6 ?

Er, what point were you making. I seem to have missed it.

[headless_pnub]

Better than four. At least last time I checked it was.

What about 2 &amp 3 &amp 6 ?

Er, what point were you making. I seem to have missed it.

I'll get back to you on that!

Four goals in 9 games ain't bad.

I was just pointing out he'd scored five, t'is all. Sorry for the confusion.