Chelmsford v Rovers

[Boz]

Now 1-4, a second for Jake Kirby from a breakaway set up by Mangan.

 

[Sparky]

Sounds like Kirby has found his level again! That's him in the starting 11 for the next few weeks!

4 goals so far and still none from a striker

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

A great result. It sounded like Buxton was excellent, while Harris, Mangan and Kirby also played well.

It is easy to mock Kirby but when he turns out against the lesser sides he scores. Norwood and Mangan on the other hand.......

 

[Sparky]

Pleased Harris did well as we've missed him. Interesting Buxton took a lot of free kicks which bodes well.

Just a shame mangan didn't get a goal. In all seriousness I'm glad Kirby did well but he needs to show it more, especially at home.

 

[Boz]

It will give Micky some things to think about, choosing the starting xi for Bromley. Buxton had a good game, played in an unfamiliar position at left wing-back, Kirby did well, I actually think he is better equiped to play at the apex of the diamond than Tollit, though Ben the better player. Mangan worked very hard, despite not scoring, he is more of a team player than Norwood.

A bit surprised that MM didn't use any of the subs. Mekki/Dawson to supply ammunition for Stockton, who had a quiet game or Clarke/Croughan for match experience,

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Kirby did well, I actually think he is better equiped to play at the apex of the diamond than Tollit, though Ben the better player. Mangan worked very hard, despite not scoring, he is more of a team player than Norwood.

Yes, I agree. Kirby does better away from home when he has space to run in to, as his athleticism is his strength. It sounded like a great run for the fourth goal tonight. Would it be worth playing him just off Cook on Saturday and dropping Norwood ?

 

[Sparky]

Agree with Boz re the subs. Once we went 4-1 up I was amazed he didn't bring one of the Adams on to rest one of the midfielders or front men for Saturday.

A good win though and Wembley one step closer

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I think the formation tonight must have been 4-3-1-2, despite what they said on the radio. It did not sound like Maynard was playing centre half ?

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Agree with Boz re the subs. Once we went 4-1 up I was amazed he didn't bring one of the Adams on to rest one of the midfielders or front men for Saturday.

We would have had to change formation to bring a winger on, which is probably why he left it as it was.

 

[Boz]

Micky's usually fond of formation changes though

Leaving the formation as it was, the only change he could make would be Croughan for Kirby and as Jake was playing well, that wasn't going to happen. In my view, there would have been some merit in changing formation to introduce a winger as it would have given them some game time and balls into the box might have brought Stockton into the game more.

Whether the players needing resting by using subs is a moot point. Of that starting xi, only Scott Davies and probably Lee Vaughan are certain to start v Bromley.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

You would not change from a midfield three to a two when you were winning away from home in the second half though. It would just invite pressure, and Chelmsford were on top for periods of the second half. I think Micky got that one right.

 

[Boz]

I think you can argue it either way. Looking at the game in isolation, Micky probably did the right thing in ensuring a comfortable win by making no changes. Although I doubt Chelmsford would have managed to get 3 goals in about 25 minutes. However MM might have learned more about his players by making the changes.

 

[bring back the cowshed!]

Full marks to Micky for taking a risk which paid off handsomely. We are through, most of the first team will be fresh for Saturday and - most importantly - he's had a look at some of the fringe players and looked at different combinations at the front and the back. It was quite a gamble playing a weaker team against a side who nearly beat our strongest team a few days ago, but Micky obviously thought it was worth taking. From the reports of some strong performances tonight it will mean some tough selection decisions for Micky on Saturday and make the team even more difficult to predict than usual.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

In his interview Micky said we started with five at the back, including Maynard, then switched to a back four. Presumably it was a 523 formation, then 442.

Interesting to compare the number of systems we have used under Mellon with the 451 we churned out every week under Brabin.

 

[Boz]

In his interview Micky said we started with five at the back, including Maynard, then switched to a back four. Presumably it was a 523 formation, then 442.

Interesting to compare the number of systems we have used under Mellon with the 451 we churned out every week under Brabin.

This wasn't clear from the radio commentary, wonder at what point did he adjust things. It sounded like Chelmsford were on top in the opening stages, so maybe then. Makes the lack of substitutions more puzzling.

I agree that MM is more tactically versatile than Brabin. However sometimes it feels that the players are shoe-horned into the preferred formation like the diamond, rather than fitting the formation around the players best position

 

[bring back the cowshed!]

I agree that MM is more tactically versatile than Brabin. However sometimes it feels that the players are shoe-horned into the preferred formation like the diamond, rather than fitting the formation around the players best position

Fair point, Boz. But perhaps that is one of the reasons we have built such a large squad, as Micky can now pick specialists for every formation. It's the only explanation I can find for Adam Dawson's almost complete absence from the action.

 

[Claret Rob]

No 2nd bite of the cherry for us tonight! We started well enough but once you notched the 1st goal we were in trouble. 2nd half we had a go but you ran deserved winners. All the best for the season in the league and v Barrow. Enjoyed meeting you.

 

[bring back the cowshed!]

No 2nd bite of the cherry for us tonight! We started well enough but once you notched the 1st goal we were in trouble. 2nd half we had a go but you ran deserved winners. All the best for the season in the league and v Barrow. Enjoyed meeting you.

Thanks, Rob. Good luck with your team's promotion attempt. But I hope you will understand if I say I hope we are not in the same league next year.

 

[Boz]

Fair point, Boz. But perhaps that is one of the reasons we have built such a large squad, as Micky can now pick specialists for every formation. It's the only explanation I can find for Adam Dawson's almost complete absence from the action.

Sort of agree BBTC, though the Connor Jennings situation when MM would rather loan him out than pick at the top of the diamond puzzles. Dawson was signed before we had Tollit and hasn't impressed on his rare games, though he was involved in the winner v York. However, there's plenty of choice for the manager.

 

[Ian]

I think he's still pretty much experimenting with the squad. More easy to do when you have plenty of options available.