Re: Daryl McMahon
Posted: Wed Oct 07, 2020 10:54 am
We played quite a high line first half and still didn't really get anyone forward to support McCallum. There isn't enough legs in midfield, Johnson isn't a wing back and Weston delivery was very poor other than the set piece.
I think the shape first half was fine, I'd be happy to stick with 352 but I'd probably bring Eleftheriou back in and put Johnson in the back 3 in the absence of Croll. In midfield I think Deering ahead of a more defensive 2 was fine although the other 2 aren't really up to it for me - Rance is defensive apparently but lets his man go all the time, Brundle keeps giving the ball away.
Alternatively we could go 442 and try to play some wingers, but aside from possibly McQueen who have we got who could beat a man out wide? Nobody unless Saunders is fit but that's a big ask for the kid to be our main supply line in his debut season.
Basically, I feel the same as I did a few weeks ago - the squad doesn't have enough variation, enough pace, or enough physical size. No matter what system we pick, there are positions that we don't really have a shoo-in for.
I think the shape first half was fine, I'd be happy to stick with 352 but I'd probably bring Eleftheriou back in and put Johnson in the back 3 in the absence of Croll. In midfield I think Deering ahead of a more defensive 2 was fine although the other 2 aren't really up to it for me - Rance is defensive apparently but lets his man go all the time, Brundle keeps giving the ball away.
Alternatively we could go 442 and try to play some wingers, but aside from possibly McQueen who have we got who could beat a man out wide? Nobody unless Saunders is fit but that's a big ask for the kid to be our main supply line in his debut season.
Basically, I feel the same as I did a few weeks ago - the squad doesn't have enough variation, enough pace, or enough physical size. No matter what system we pick, there are positions that we don't really have a shoo-in for.