One hundred and ten large

I'm afraid that the tightening of the defence has to come at the expense of goals for. Why else would we have our two most prolific strikers on the bench? It seems we can have a tight defence or a good attack, but he still hasn't cracked getting the two married together. More goals and assists from midfield would solve some of this but they just don't score enough as a unit and it is definitely the weak area once again. If last season is anything to go by, we won't get a decent midfielder in until it's too late.

Well, Amond reportedly wasn't fully fit and (I assume) Bogle hadn't looked up to scratch in training.

We did win 4-0 the week before with Pittman/Tomlinson so not a surprise they started again. Both did OK on the day without really achieving too much though Pittman took his goal well.

Just a pity that neither Bogle or Amond looks to be any good in the air because I think we'd struggle to play with those two up front together without Monkhouse on the wing to win some headers. If we can dominate possession against a team, you'd have to think that Arnold and Marshall ought to be able to create more problems for the opposition with their pace, but we need to get a toehold in the game and struggle with this a lot of the time, especially without somebody to win a few headers up front.

Quoted from Maringer

Well, Amond reportedly wasn't fully fit and (I assume) Bogle hadn't looked up to scratch in training.

We did win 4-0 the week before with Pittman/Tomlinson so not a surprise they started again. Both did OK on the day without really achieving too much though Pittman took his goal well.

Just a pity that neither Bogle or Amond looks to be any good in the air because I think we'd struggle to play with those two up front together without Monkhouse on the wing to win some headers. If we can dominate possession against a team, you'd have to think that Arnold and Marshall ought to be able to create more problems for the opposition with their pace, but we need to get a toehold in the game and struggle with this a lot of the time, especially without somebody to win a few headers up front.

They are good enough in the air if the crosses are good. The problem arises for the manager when the ball is hoofed up early and these two are expected to get a head on it to stop it coming straight back. The answer to this is simple - don't hoof the ball up. It's up to the manager to pick and coach the rest of the team to give them good opportunities to score goals. If they get those chances instead of being expected to make their own all the time they will score a hat full.

To me it makes no sense, in fact it is a ridiculous waste of money, to sign two good goalscorers and leave them on the bench purely because they are not able to provide the sort of brick wall in the middle of the park that the manager believes is number one priority for a striker. By all means leave them out if they are missing too many chances but not because they can't do a defensive job half way down the pitch. A decent coach builds a team to cover weaknesses as well as use strengths.

The long ball by the full backs to monkhouse didnt take long to appear did it.

We look such a better team when we pass it but the instructions seem clear to me, hoof it up to monkhouse.

But they aren't instructions, are they? Hurst has repeatedly (over the past few seasons) said he wants the ball to be passed more, but it is the players who tend to whack it long too often.

In defence of the defenders (ho ho), you'd have to say that the movement from our midfield and forwards is often pretty poor especially when the distribution of the defenders isn't the best in any case. They often have little choice but to whack it upfield though I do get frustrated with the slow and predictable way we play it around at the back in our own half at times. A player under no pressure often passes it sideways to one of his defensive colleagues who is then being closed down when he receives the ball and so invariably passes back to McKeown to whack upfield.

If the first player had just held onto the ball a bit longer and forced the opposition players to do something, we'd have a better chance of retaining possession and passing it upfield. You watch tonight - I guarantee we'll see several occasions where one of the centre halves or full-backs is under no pressure but passes it inside to a player under more pressure - a pass for the sake of passing instead of achieving anything - leading to us to play it back to McKeown for a whack upfield.

Ultimately, I don't think we have good enough distribution or movement in the squad to pass the ball in a way that, say, Mills' teams are set up to play. However, I'm in agreement we should be passing it a lot more intelligently and a lot better than we usually manage. Noticeable that we passed it around loads in pre-season in no-pressure games and tend to do the same once we get a comfortable lead against teams. When the game is tight, on the other hand, it ends up being the safety first whack upfield all too often.

Maringer well surely the players dont knock it long without an instruction to do so ?

There will be times when the ball has to go long but for me the way we are doing it seems to be a clear instruction

I agree in pre season we passed it so well which makes it more frustrating as to why we havent seen any when it matters.

Hurst has certainly commented that he likes the team to pass the ball and has (gently) criticised them for whacking it long too often in some games.

I'd imagine some might get the idea he's keen on the long ball because he isn't windmilling his arms on the touchline, trying to control the game from the side of the pitch like some managers do.

We know Hurst isn't someone to either overly praise or overly criticise his players and he obviously prefers to keep any criticism behind closed doors. This is fine by me and it has obviously helped with the good feeling within the squad, but it would still be nice if the players did attempt to pass the ball a bit more often when the time is right to do so.

Quoted from barralad

Well I'd call it a complete lack of self-restraint.

Ian do you remember sitting next to me at Braintree when we lost 5-0 ?

You shouted at John Fenty telling him this was unacceptable,

You showed a total lack of self restraint and showed me up,
,
While I just sat there being a good supporter  

Much better to spout off on here than to the man that funds the club don't you think ?

You are  TRUST member now so you have turned full circle and defend the manager at every opportunity ,

I feel better now I have got that off my chest,

At the end of  the day we all want Town to be successful ,

If we are promoted then the manger will stay until a better offer comes along.

It's only us die hard supporters that are Town for life..

Quoted from grimsby pete

Ian do you remember sitting next to me at Braintree when we lost 5-0 ?

You shouted at John Fenty telling him this was unacceptable,

You showed a total lack of self restraint and showed me up,
,
While I just sat there being a good supporter  

Much better to spout off on here than to the man that funds the club don't you think ?

You are  TRUST member now so you have turned full circle and defend the manager at every opportunity ,

I feel better now I have got that off my chest,

At the end of  the day we all want Town to be successful ,

If we are promoted then the manger will stay until a better offer comes along.

It's only us die hard supporters that are Town for life..

Well i am surprised he didnt clap em off  

You can tell if Hurst is worried about the opposition he plays Mackreth and Monkhouse rather than Arnold or Marshall.