Too many times when we did get the ball the man in possesion had no options and we ended up playing a long ball in teh air which was easily dealt with.
Is this because the famous 3-4-3 in fact turns into a 5-2-3 when densmore and doughty become full-backs, leving the two isolated in midfield?
I hope today will not encourage us from playing attacking football.
That was the point about yesterday - we didn't play that system we've been playing in recent matches. Densmore was in central midfield, so it was a 4-3-3 and it just didn't work. Neither Doughty nor Lane looked as comfortable as conventional full-backs as they have as a wing-back and right centre-back respectively. Densmore wasn't in the game and I feel that his presence shunted Danylyk out of his favoured position and that meant he had an unusually ineffective day.
Why did we change the system that's been working so well for us? My guess is that it's that old fault of worrying too much about the opposition (and it was a response to Hollins's promise to pack the midfield) instead of about ourselves. I hope we revert to 3-4-3 for NBS.
I also felt that the substitutions in the second half never quite got the attacking balance right. Johnson was again excellent when he came on but by removing Senior, instead of one of the three central midfielders, it meant we had no threat down the right. Then when Elam was switched to the right, we had no threat down the left. Today was a day when we missed Denham.
A couple of other things - are we sure Little was flagged offside on that glaring miss at the end of the first half? I thought the linesman was just signalling a goal-kick. And I'm not sure where people are coming from with the complaints about the ref. I thought he was fine and that we could have no complaints about the second goal - it was a mix up, rather like Johnson's goal at Salisbury.