Reach as LWB

[Holmowl]

48 minutes ago, Bluesteel said:

Thorniley isn’t a wing back, nor is fox or Pudil.

 

Reach and Boyd are the closest we have and perhaps Matt Penney 

 

Thats exactly my reading too.

 

IWhen you haven’t got perfection you can only choose the best fit, and ours are Reach and Boyd.

 

Though Reach is pretty close to perfect as a LWB at this level. 

[doubleo]

24 minutes ago, bigash_swfc said:

Thorniley's posistion to lose now.

 

Likewise with Ash Baker at RWB. 

 

We have no options in CM at present. A drastic move would be sticking Liam Palmer in there purely for his energy.

I agree. They both played well.  I thought some Baker's crossing was good, just needed more targets in the box.

[frastheowl]

1 hour ago, Holmowl said:

 

At last some sense.

 

A Championship WB doesn’t need to be a world class full-back and world class winger. It’s a compromise role for an athlete who can cross a ball well and harry an attacker. 

  

Reach is perfect.

 

Plus, he’s not very good in midfield. 

 

That's all well and good...but if you play a wing back, who's natural ability and instinct is to attack, you need a centre half playing behind them to be quick and mobile enough to cover the inevitable space which will be left.

 

Which, in Pudil, we haven't. Don't get me wrong, Pudil is decent...but quick and mobile he is not. 

 

Picking a team isn't as easy as putting players in their best positions...you have to protect vulnerabilities as well as playing to strengths. As we saw at Wigan...playing Reach at wing back gives us a threat going forward (one assist and one second assist) but it exposes Pudil hideously.

 

It was no surprise Pudil looked far more comfortable on Saturday when he had two natural full backs playing in front of him. 

 

If we're going to play Reach at left wing back, which I agree is his best position, then either Thorniley or Fox needs to play left sided centre half. They might not be as good aerially or positionally as Pudil, but they'll have the speed and mobility to cover the spaces better than Pudil's old legs would.  

[Yellowbelly]

28 minutes ago, bigash_swfc said:

 A drastic move would be sticking Liam Palmer in there purely for his energy.

Why not? I think that’s a decent shout.

He started off there & his time at fullback has helped his tackling. May be a decent defensive minded partner for Bannan.

Not saying it’s the answer but worth a run out in the cup.

[Kopparberg]

Simply from comparing his good games at LWB to the ones in midfield, then he should be in midfield. 

 

Not a LWB for me, as much as I want him to be. 

 

Gives us much needed movement in midfield. 

 

Boyd or Thornily at LWB for me. 

[Holmowl]

3 minutes ago, frastheowl said:

 

That's all well and good...but if you play a wing back, who's natural ability and instinct is to attack, you need a centre half playing behind them to be quick and mobile enough to cover the inevitable space which will be left.

 

Which, in Pudil, we haven't. Don't get me wrong, Pudil is decent...but quick and mobile he is not. 

 

Picking a team isn't as easy as putting players in their best positions...you have to protect vulnerabilities as well as playing to strengths. As we saw at Wigan...playing Reach at wing back gives us a threat going forward (one assist and one second assist) but it exposes Pudil hideously.

 

It was no surprise Pudil looked far more comfortable on Saturday when he had two natural full backs playing in front of him. 

 

If we're going to play Reach at left wing back, which I agree is his best position, then either Thorniley or Fox needs to play left sided centre half. They might not be as good aerially or positionally as Pudil, but they'll have the speed and mobility to cover the spaces better than Pudil's old legs would.  

 

I don’t agree Reach doesn’t or can’t defend. After all he has played pretty well at LlB in many matches.

 

I think playing Joost as central CB made aPudil more exposed than you would get from Lees or Hutch in that role.

 

By contrast on the other flank in Boyd we have a WB who is better defending than attacking. 

[Pale Rider]

4 hours ago, nevthelodgemoorowl said:

You have just seen Thornley play the role expertly yet opt to pull back Reach out of his midfield role ? 

You obviously have no idea how the wing back role should be played. 

[frastheowl]

2 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

 

I don’t agree Reach doesn’t or can’t defend. After all he has played pretty well at LlB in many matches.

  

I think playing Joost as central CB made aPudil more exposed than you would get from Lees or Hutch in that role.

  

By contrast on the other flank in Boyd we have a WB who is better defending than attacking. 

 

It's not about whether he can or will defend. 

 

His natural instinct is to go forward. So in transitions he'll opt to go forward, rather than perhaps offer support, like Thorniley or Fox may choose to provide. 

 

This is fine, and could be a positive (as we saw in his attacking contributions at Wigan) and create overloads...but the areas which will be exposed need consideration. 

 

Boyd falls into a similar category to Reach...his natural inclination is to attack. Where as Baker, Thorniley and Fox's natural thought is to defend. Palmer does neither, which makes him a terrible choice for wing back (he was a much better full back when he had protection in front of him).

 

[oldishowl]

Having seen our two league games so far I wouldn’t play Reach at wing back next game. 

 

Not saying he isn’t potentially our best wing back if all things were equal , I just don’t think we can afford to play him there at the moment.

 

Having said that he was not good enough at Wigan, neither did enough defensively nor created enough problems going forward.

Gave Pudil very little help.

 

Whether people like it or not we are not a good enough team to have wing backs who simply bomb forward.

 

They need to defend , we need to make sure we don’t concede and if that means we end up with 5 at the back a lot of the time, tough.

I would play Thorniley.

 

Given our current available players Reach is the only one we have who is capable of the running to link midfield and attack. Whether that be part of a three man midfield or wide as one of a front 3, like he played yesterday , depends on what system we play.

I feel he just contributes more to the team this way.

 

I would rather play 433 than play Reach at wing back at the moment.

 

 

[Groundhopping Owl]

I partially agree, I always want Reach to take this role in the team, but at present I'm not sure he's up to it. He's certainly got the engine, passing and crossing ability to do it, but his defending is so weak that he ends up being targeted. I'm not saying that wing backs need to be world-class defenders, but Reach's tackling in particular is so weak that it ends up causing you real problems, we saw that at Wigan last week.

[handworth52]

boyd should have played wing back ,has jos got something against him? he is defo not his favourite ,but neither is westwood 

[brando]

5 hours ago, Drewswfc said:

Bang on this. Thornley looked spot on yesterday. Pelepussy needs replacing never seems to get there to the tackle and when he gets the ball wants to much time. Can't Boyd play central midfield?

Boyd would surely be better than Pelepussy need to get rid,needs ages on the ball and you don't get it in this division

[oldishowl]

4 minutes ago, brando said:

Boyd would surely be better than Pelepussy need to get rid,needs ages on the ball and you don't get it in this division

 

I think this is Pelupessy’s problem.

 

He always needs a touch of the ball, cannot see a pass early enough to move it first time so often gets caught in possession.

 

When he does move it first time tends to give it away, like that fancy flick yesterday.

 

 

[frastheowl]

 

The issue we have with Reach is if we continue to play 3-4-3 (or 5-2-3/5-4-1) as we did yesterday, and don't play him at left back/left wing back, then where does he fit in?

 

Forestieri HAS to play coming off the left hand side. 

 

Reach did a job yesterday in the right wing, but he's a winger wants to get to the byline. But he hasn't a right foot, so he's stifled somewhat. Also, Joao is much more of a threat coming from the right flank. 

 

Can he play in the midfield alongside Bannan? Possibly. Especially if Hutchinson plays in a hybrid ball winning midfield/centre half he did yesterday. But it'd be a pretty brave decision, and may put too much defensive responsibility on Bannan. 

[oldishowl]

11 minutes ago, frastheowl said:

 

The issue we have with Reach is if we continue to play 3-4-3 (or 5-2-3/5-4-1) as we did yesterday, and don't play him at left back/left wing back, then where does he fit in?

 

Forestieri HAS to play coming off the left hand side. 

 

Reach did a job yesterday in the right wing, but he's a winger wants to get to the byline. But he hasn't a right foot, so he's stifled somewhat. Also, Joao is much more of a threat coming from the right flank. 

 

Can he play in the midfield alongside Bannan? Possibly. Especially if Hutchinson plays in a hybrid ball winning midfield/centre half he did yesterday. But it'd be a pretty brave decision, and may put too much defensive responsibility on Bannan. 

 

I understand what you are saying but for me Reach would always be in our team.

He is up there with Bannan , Lees, Hutch, FF as a must play.

If you couldn’t fit him in anywhere else he would play wing back but I agree that with 3 centre halfs we might get away with him and Bannan in the centre.

 

I cannot envisage a team where Pelupessy starts and Reach doesn’t irrespective of positions. You need your best players on the pitch.

[Holmowl]

2 hours ago, frastheowl said:

 

The issue we have with Reach is if we continue to play 3-4-3 (or 5-2-3/5-4-1) as we did yesterday, and don't play him at left back/left wing back, then where does he fit in?

 

Forestieri HAS to play coming off the left hand side. 

 

Reach did a job yesterday in the right wing, but he's a winger wants to get to the byline. But he hasn't a right foot, so he's stifled somewhat. Also, Joao is much more of a threat coming from the right flank. 

 

Can he play in the midfield alongside Bannan? Possibly. Especially if Hutchinson plays in a hybrid ball winning midfield/centre half he did yesterday. But it'd be a pretty brave decision, and may put too much defensive responsibility on Bannan. 

 

Agree on most of this.

 

Forestieri HAS TO come in from left.

 

We need 3 up top therefore, so Joao right.

 

Reach is a left-winger. But he did a very decent job at LB, so how can he not be a LWB?

 

Leaves two questions...who plays RWB, Palmer or Boyd? Well for me it’s easy, Boyd.

 

And who partners Bannan? Jones or Joey. One a bit past his best but the other just not good enough, so Jones.

 

Boyd Jones Bannan Reach

 

Joao Nuhiu FF

[bigash_swfc]

4 hours ago, Yellowbelly said:

Why not? I think that’s a decent shout.

He started off there & his time at fullback has helped his tackling. May be a decent defensive minded partner for Bannan.

Not saying it’s the answer but worth a run out in the cup.

 

True mate. 

 

Liam Palmer in CM for the cup game.

 

Wildsmith

O'Grady Neilsen Van Aken

Preston Hunt Palmer Jones Boyd

Fletcher Matias

 

Borokuv on bench

[frastheowl]

1 hour ago, Holmowl said:

 

Agree on most of this.

 

Forestieri HAS TO come in from left.

 

We need 3 up top therefore, so Joao right.

  

Reach is a left-winger. But he did a very decent job at LB, so how can he not be a LWB?

  

Leaves two questions...who plays RWB, Palmer or Boyd? Well for me it’s easy, Boyd.

  

And who partners Bannan? Jones or Joey. One a bit past his best but the other just not good enough, so Jones.

 

Boyd Jones Bannan Reach

 

Joao Nuhiu FF

 

I agree with you...that on paper, Reach HAS to play. But football isn't played on paper. He's a key player for us. But have we learnt nothing from our past three seasons of trying to shoehorn our best players into a system? Sometimes, somebody has to miss out. I'm not saying Reach should miss out...but there's implications to consider if he plays either left wing back or centre midfield in a two. 

 

Like I've said earlier though...Boyd and Reach at wing back, totally leaves our centre halves exposed. Had we got a better calibre of centre half, then I be in full agreement. But we haven't, and it's for that reason why Jos has opted for a back three. It's defensive suicide...similar to what we committed at Wigan. 

 

For me, a compromise is playing Reach at left wing back, and Thorniley/Fox at left centre half. Pudil plays centre of the three and Lees remains on the right, with a full back at the side of him...Baker at this current moment.

 

Baker---Lees---Pudil---Thorniley------------

-----------Pelupessy---Bannan---------Reach

----Joao-------------------------Forestieri-----

--------------------Fletcher---------------------

 

We'd end up with something like that (I'd personally play Jones instead of Pelupessy), which could have a nice balance to it. 

 

 

[Lionel Fessi]

9 hours ago, CF83OWL said:

Surely this is the most obvious position for Reach in the current formation?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Constantly change my mind about where he should play, he cannot defend and when he plays wide drifts into the middle far too much however I feel like he's too valuable going forward to sacrifice him at LWB. I mean who else can we play in the midfield apart from Reach that has that attacking drive?? We can't depend entirely on Bannan to be our only creative outlet.

 

One of Pudil/Fox/Thorniley surely has to be able to job for a little while in that role until we can bring somebody in during the loan market? Again another dilemma we are in highlighted be our awful transfer business, we have needed a steady LB for the last three seasons and yet we find ourselves without one so we have to force one of our best players into a position where he is under utilised...sounds like CC all over again!

 

 

[Costello 77]

We're trying to mask our deficiency at the back... speedsters will target Pudil this season because his legs have gone imo.

Lees is a good defender but he's not a leader.

We're trying to play a system that we haven't got the players for.

 

I really hope the youngsters do well because dragging players into positions they're not suited to won't end well.

 

I think that KL and his forced absence has been underrated by some..he popped up all over the pitch and drove us forward.. difficult player to replace.

 

I'd like to see us go to four at the back with Hutchinson screening....it won't be popular but it's the best use of our limited resources imo.