Rovers v Hull

[Rockford's Love Child]

And Mullin came on for Ferrier, giving us that injection of pace, endeavour, spirit and industry that has been so lacking in Micky's recent trial-and-error attacking formations.

Ferrier actually played pretty well tonight. The system was actually the same in the first half as the second, so if it was a 'trial and error' formation it was clearly the right one.....

He is trying to find his best striking combination, and that obviously takes time. How can he know which combinations work at this level until he has seen them ?

I also thought Potter played well and scarcely gave the ball away once.

 

[Ooh Johnny Johnny]

Ferrier actually played pretty well tonight. The system was actually the same in the first half as the second, so if it was a 'trial and error' formation it was clearly the right one.....

He is trying to find his best striking combination, and that obviously takes time. How can he know which combinations work at this level until he has seen them ?

I also thought Potter played well and scarcely gave the ball away once.

I agree that Ferrier played well but he's never going to score enough goals as a lone striker. I didn't go to the Portsmouth game but have been to all the other games including all the friendlies this season - I believe that tonight's second half performance was probably the best that we've played this season. I don't think it's really a question of formation but of personnel. After tonight's second half showing, on Saturday, I'd like to see Connor playing just behind Mullin with Corey on the left, Morris on the right and Perkins and Gilmour in the centre (though the latter has still not been given his chance).

 

[Sparky]

Bolton conceded 5 tonight so surely we can score against them.

Banks is mentioned above and even last season he was up and down at times. Can’t forget those games against Oldham when he was bloody awful. Bolton will be my first game this season due to holidays but it’s no surprise he’s been ineffective so far

 

[Boz]

Like OJJ, I was surprised that Gilmour didn’t get any game time in this match. It’s puzzling how out of favour he appears to be at the moment.

Micky seems to cut Banks a lot of slack in comparison to others. In the absence of a defensive midfielder, we need those deployed in that area to show plenty of battling qualities, but don’t get that much from Ollie.

 

[Higgy]

RLC make the point MM needs to see the different combinations. Which was the piint made the other day when a Mullin/Ponticelli combo was suggested. It would seem Mullin may not be an outcast afterall based on his efforts tonight.

 

[keep the faith]

wow that was painful the 1st half reminded me of the Peterborough game I can take getting beat but to concede the goals in the way we did was criminal, 1st half we were all over the place only ray, ferrier, perkins & cory could hold their heads up, 2nd half we settled down and really took the game to hull had some good chances but just couldn,t score,love banks but would bin him for Gilmore

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I agree that Ferrier played well but he's never going to score enough goals as a lone striker. I didn't go to the Portsmouth game but have been to all the other games including all the friendlies this season - I believe that tonight's second half performance was probably the best that we've played this season. I don't think it's really a question of formation but of personnel. After tonight's second half showing, on Saturday, I'd like to see Connor playing just behind Mullin with Corey on the left, Morris on the right and Perkins and Gilmour in the centre (though the latter has still not been given his chance).

Ferrier played as a lone striker tonight partly to counter the opposition. He has a decent goalscoring record at his previous clubs when used across a front three. I personally don't think Jennings deserves to start ahead of him based on performances so far. We were actually playing well before Mullin came on, so I think you are exaggerating his significance; CBT was the key to most of our attacks in both halves. I would probably start with a front three of CBT, Mullin and Ferrier on Saturday, to preserve the extra man (Potter) in midfield.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Like OJJ, I was surprised that Gilmour didn’t get any game time in this match. It’s puzzling how out of favour he appears to be at the moment.

Micky seems to cut Banks a lot of slack in comparison to others. In the absence of a defensive midfielder, we need those deployed in that area to show plenty of battling qualities, but don’t get that much from Ollie.

Have you seen any of his performances this season ? I don't think he has been as poor as people are making out and he has an experience and physical presence which Gilmour does not, so you can see why Mellon would want to stick with him for the time being. We are three games into the season, not thirty, so plenty of time for Gilmour to get involved.

 

[bring back the cowshed!]

It's good to see some reasoned reports on this game. If the results have been disappointing, the performances have been better. However, we have yet to score a goal in the first 87 minutes of the four pre-season and three competitive games. That's the worry. We need to bang a couple in before the morale drops and the crowd turn on the team. It's early days yet, but at the moment every game is beginning to add to the pressure. I am hopeful and I will be patient. We have a good manager and our squad has enough quality to recover from this disappointing start.

 

[Boz]

Have you seen any of his performances this season ? I don't think he has been as poor as people are making out and he has an experience and physical presence which Gilmour does not, so you can see why Mellon would want to stick with him for the time being. We are three games into the season, not thirty, so plenty of time for Gilmour to get involved.

Not seen any games yet and I understand the merit of having Banks' height in an otherwise vertically-challenged midfield. It would be interesting to see his match stats in terms of ground covered, challenges put in etc. Cook and the pair who started up front v Rochdale were criticised by the manager for their work rate yet the perception is that Banks strolls around the pitch and doesn’t attract similar comment. I take the point about Gilmour, though thought he could have been brought on ahead of Ponticelli, who reports suggest was out of his depth.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Not seen any games yet and I understand the merit of having Banks' height in an otherwise vertically-challenged midfield. It would be interesting to see his match stats in terms of ground covered, challenges put in etc. Cook and the pair who started up front v Rochdale were criticised by the manager for their work rate yet the perception is that Banks strolls around the pitch and doesn’t attract similar comment. I take the point about Gilmour, though thought he could have been brought on ahead of Ponticelli, who reports suggest was out of his depth.

The statistics for ground covered are all recorded and monitored, which suggests that Banks does cover more ground than some people believe rather than 'strolling around'. In any case, Banks and Gilmour are completely different players. Gilmour's game is all about dribbling and tight interplay, not getting his head up and spraying passes like Banks. Without Ollie we lose that from our game and again last night he produced a couple of sublime fifty / sixty yard passed, in addition to decent ball retention.

 

[Ian]

The problem with Banks is his style of play can look a tad lazy at times. He's not a workhorse like Perkins but as RLC mentions above he's there for the passes. We don't have any else in the team that can dish it around like Banks.

 

[Higgy]

Not a fan of 50/60 yard passes. - ok when they come off. Possesion wise i woyld much rather see somebody like Gilmour always finding space to receive the ball and doing something neat and clever with it. For me that's more important than the odd Hollywood ball. So long as Gilmour would put a foot in when required we could leave the ball winning physicality to others. If we retain possession then less of a requirement.

 

[Ooh Johnny Johnny]

I'm very uncomfortable criticising such a good-natured and affable lad but I'm not convinced that his sublime passes outweigh his misplaced ones nor that he puts in enough tackles. I personally think he is a 'luxury' in this team at this level.

I'm not a fan of the over-use of stats in football (and in life generally). They do have their place in the modern game but over-reliance can be dangerous. There has to be that intangible ingredient that conjures up something special, ensures that the team wins game (sheer quality) and keeps the spectator coming back for more.

 

[ADD]

Lots of good reports/ comments already.... from my perspective yes we had a few decent passages of play in the first half but we were massively outplayed first half by Hull's reserves which is a concern. RLC's description of Kamikaze defending was spot on. Davies at fault for first. Rides looked out of his depth first half but did improve second half. I thought Manny was ok but unlike some posters here I still think he is not playing with the composure he had last season and looks nervous at times. Ray looked good and is starting to get more assertive but the first goal came when he was in no mans land in front of the scorer as the cross came in and went over his head. Wilson I thought also looked tactically naive at times in the first half but also looked much more composed as the game wore on.
Midfield was reasonably solid considering. Banks for me is a difficult one and explains why he is becoming a little bit Marmite to the fans. Yes same great raking long balls but again last night he played so many little flicks first time which look great when they come off but in most cases they do not. I thought Gilmour if not starting at least should have been given 45 minutes last night to see how he fitted in with Potter and Perkins. CBT was class - one turn was majestic leaving the defender completely trailing in his wake... and considering his lack of pre season was very energetic!
Ferrier was being constantly fouled but I thought did ok. The fact that Mullin came on rather than Payne was interesting - maybe Payne already having some fall outs. Problem with Mullin is he seems always to do well when coming on as sub but less so on the few occasions he started. Given our lack of funds I feel if MM is not that keen on him which he isn't he should be allowed to move on before the end of the window.
Finally I get why MM doesn't start with 2 up front up to a point but I don't think it is the way forward - we now do not have Nors who could do that but many times last night Ferrier had absolutely no outlet when the ball came to him.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Not a fan of 50/60 yard passes. - ok when they come off. Possesion wise i woyld much rather see somebody like Gilmour always finding space to receive the ball and doing something neat and clever with it. For me that's more important than the odd Hollywood ball. So long as Gilmour would put a foot in when required we could leave the ball winning physicality to others. If we retain possession then less of a requirement.

If it wasn't for Banks' long range passing, Norwood would barely have scored a goal last season. He had more assists than any other player.

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

I'm very uncomfortable criticising such a good-natured and affable lad but I'm not convinced that his sublime passes outweigh his misplaced ones nor that he puts in enough tackles. I personally think he is a 'luxury' in this team at this level.

I'm not a fan of the over-use of stats in football (and in life generally). They do have their place in the modern game but over-reliance can be dangerous. There has to be that intangible ingredient that conjures up something special, ensures that the team wins game (sheer quality) and keeps the spectator coming back for more.

It has done pretty well for Mellon, with five promotions to his name. And I think he is perfectly capable of reading a game as well.

 

[ONIGP]

I agree with much of what ADD has said and most of the other reports. Aside from the 20 second goal we started far too slowly. Hull looked like an U21/23 team and were very sharp and neat, zipping the ball around at pace - to be honest we couldn't get close to them in the first half. We weren't given any time on the ball and weren't quick enough to close them down. It reminded me a little of a few seasons back when we went through a phase of bad first halves only to pick things up after the break. The change in tempo from us was so astonishing after half time that is was annoying. Why couldn't we have come out of the traps like that? Ok, Hull had a comfortable lead but suddenly we were closing them down and playing quicker balls ourselves to players who had made space. This is surely a lesson that is easily learned!

In terms of individual performances I actually thought Ferrier was our mom; his work rate was good (almost Nors-like!), he was always available and never gave the ball away cheaply. CBT was impressive and is lightning quick; his final ball wasn't bad but if it can improve further he can be a star at this level. I thought Mullin did really well when he came on, didn't stop and was a real pain in the a*** harrying their defence - that said he was coming into a side that had already raised the tempo. Early days yet but my initial feel is that we probably saw our best 2 strikers last night. Perkins played well but the fact that he struggled to keep up in the first half highlights the problems that Banks and Potter had. Playing against nippy midfielders is not Banks's forte and it never will be - he is too long limbed to be "sharp" and it will always lead to him making risky challenges, playing low percentage passes and generally getting frustrated. He needs space but when he plays a slightly more advanced role and it's against pacey opposition he doesn't get that. I do think Gilmour would have been a lot more suited to the game last night but hindsight is a wonderful thing!

A few of our players "grew" into the game last night (Ridehalgh, Morris, Wilson) but this was as we pegged back the opposition and were less on the back foot. Our defence was shocking for all 3 goals and Ridehalgh in particular had a nightmare opening 30 minutes. I don't really know where to go in terms of suggestions as to how we improve! A few obvious thoughts though; don't play the ball out from the back from goalie's possession when you have a team who are clearly looking to close you down, don't try to beat the man when you receive the ball in close proximity and are the last line of defence. To be honest Hull had done their hard work in the first half so didn't put as much energy into closing us down in the second half, which made a big difference. We don't have a massive group of defenders so MM has got to get this right on the training ground. My feeling is that they are never going to be division's best defence but they can improve sufficiently not to be the liability that we have seen in our opening 2 home games.

Bolton on Saturday is starting to feel like a "must win" already, which is crazy so early in the season!

 

[p checkley]

onigip - that's a very good write up of the game. Those saying Mullin to start instead of Ferrier are wrong. Together maybe, but Ferrier is better. CBT was very useful but you are quite right - midfield was awful first half (except for Perkins who worked hard). I think we will make notlob suffer on Saturday though

 

[Rockford's Love Child]

Returning to Banks, it is not really an option to 'dislike long passes'. In any midfield at least one player has to be able to switch the play to an advancing full back, or play a ball in behind an opposition defence, and in our team Banks plays that role, which I think is why Mellon values him. Only Potter can match his range of passing in the squad, and the 'Banks role' is vital to any team.

With regard to the strikers, I think Mullin probably does deserve a starting place on Saturday after his cameo last night, but I am still not convinced he will produce consistent performances if he starts games. Yes, he can be explosive for twenty minutes as a substitute, but I only saw him have one convincing ninety minute performance last season (Morecambe away) and in a number of other matches he was anonymous. I also don't accept the argument that he was 'too similar to Norwood', as their playing styles are actually vastly different.

I think the 433 formation has actually developed well over the last couple of games, and our attacks in the second half were fluid and pacy. We might not be so effective if we revert to 442, even against more limited opposition like Bolton's kids.