Yep, Osadebe is definately a confidence player but he did a good job when he came on and nullified any threat on that side of the pitch, can’t believe someone behind where I sat booed him when he came on🙄.
We did fade badly after a very good first half where we perhaps should have scored more than the one goal. Not sure if it was a fitness thing or that we didn’t seem to react to the the changes they made. MT is still raw like many of the youngsters we have and will need time, but it was great to see us win and his reaction at the end.
1 Like
Should’ve just said ‘scroll up, you lazy bastard’!
My daughter heard boos when Osedebe and Taylor came on!!! Supporters??
Yes, as I said, Osadebe is the whipping boy and for no good reason. He always does his best.
This fitness issue is very odd. Certainly, something has happened after an hour or so of each game but I cannot believe it is down to fitness at this stage of the the season. Maybe that’s the reason why most managers make substitutions on the hour, to shake things up. With us, it’s as if we lose the plot rather than lose the ability to run.
I still feel we need a leader on the pitch. Labadie is the opposite of a leader, Kinsella leads by example but cannot organise the others. Taylor and Ward should be able to do the job but they are not playing well at the moment, which is an issue.
@Laundryman in what sense is Labadie not a leader? This is not meant as a criticism at all: I would be interested to hear what you mean, that’s all.
Is it in the sense that he is a bit of a ‘loose cannon’ - therefore he doesn’t necessarily set a perfect example? Or is it that he focuses only on his own job and is not active/vocal enough in encouraging others?
In terms of Monthe and Taylor, I still think that Sadler still has a role to play on the pitch. He is the same age as Ward and he showed great leadership qualities in a difficult season, last year.
Also, what kind of leader did you have in mind? A Bryan Robson type or someone a bit calmer? For me Martin O’Connor was a favourite of mine from yesteryear…
I think a serious problem is the make up of the midfield. We were dominated in possession (at home) against a really poor Stevenage side to be honest. That’s an issue - especially when our plan this season has been to play out.
In my humble opinion… that’s because the combination of Kinsella and Labadie isn’t right as the 2 in a 4231.
It’s one or the other for me. I have been saying this for about 3 years. We seem incapable of controlling a game, and we haven’t had a midfielder who can push up and occasionally pass through, or get in the box since Mantom. That’s a really big problem.
I think MT knows this, and that’s why he tried a more creative option in Osadebe in the 2 for a couple of games, but he’s clearly not got the ability to play that role, so Matt has had to resort to Labadie and Kins.
3 Likes
Great post @Thanatos and completely agree.
I think it’s caution over creativity from here on in. Got a feeling it’ll be drawsall again this season. At the end of the day. If Taylor recognises these squad shortfalls then he must play to the squads strengths. Newport have done it for years and it’s always had them in the mix.
Agree with some of that however on Saturday we saw a bit more directness with regards to balls going from the back. You can’t hold a midfield totally responsible for lack of possession when the ball is by passing them and as we have no one to hold the ball up therefore regularly gift possession to the other side.
I actually thought Kinsella and Labadie won possession back well at times otherwise it would have been even more dominant for Stevenage. They also worked well with the defence to to restrict Stevenage to mainly shots from outside the penalty box.
Yeah I agree with that - but I don’t think them pair just doing that is enough if we want to actually think about promotion.
The counter argument to why we were more direct is because Labs\Kins don’t work in a way that allows us to play through.
We need a bit more about us, I think.
I wonder if we can get Lavery back, he’s scoring for fun at the moment 
As I’ve said elsewhere I completely agree.
All of our successful sides have had a great number 4 in front of the back four. Goodwin, Bennett, Michael Dobson and Adam Chambers to name but four. But really importantly they’ve had a box to box number 8 alongside/in front of them and then that number 8 has either had a front two or a number 10 to link with.
Our best midfield ever in my opinion was Chambers in the 4, Evans in the 8 and Sawyers in the 10. That gave us everything we needed with Evans linking front to back and on occasion getting ahead of both Sawyers and Bradshaw whilst also knowing when to sit and support Chambers and the back four. For me, us missing out on promotion that season was because Evans left. We talk Smith, O’Driscoll etc but if Evans had stayed we’d have won the league. That’s how important that position is. When we won the league we are in now it was Dobson in the 4 and Keates in the 8. Think Keates scored double figures that season whilst also doing the body on the line thing in support of Dobson. A few seasons before, Keates did exactly the same for us in front of Tom Bennett.
The reason Buckley’s teams never won promotion is that all of our midfielders were 8s. Glorious at times and when going forward but it wasn’t until Goodwin replaced Childs under Coakley did we achieve the balance required to grind out results in the kind of pragmatic way required to be successful.
On Saturday we played with two 4s. Which is good to protect your back four and will probably be enough to eek out enough points to finish third bottom or a bit better.
But in doing so you don’t get those zone 14 chances or options. Think where Frank Lampard snaffled scores of goal or where Keates popped up on numerous occasions, or Shakespeare or Mantom.
So our 10 (Earing on Saturday) is either isolated and reduced to feeding off the scraps of second balls from our 9 or has to come far deeper than is productive. And your 10 coming deep isn’t necessarily a problem (Sawyers often came very deep) provided there is an 8 pivoting the other way and getting beyond him.
Our midfield dilemma at present is based around four players. Between Labadie, Kinsella, Perry and Bates do we have a really good 4 and a really good 8? Could Kinsella become a Keates and become far more of a marauding link than merely a shield? Or could Bates or Perry do that role whilst having the strength and discipline to do the ugly bits a good 8 has to do? The best 8s seamlessly revert from a last ditch tackle in their own box to popping up in the opposition box to score.
It is the engine room of the team. Part of the reason we aren’t quite functioning is because we are a tad uncalibrated in that area. Taylor caught between and betwixt his instinct (which is probably Ladabie and Perry) and the pragmatic reality that Kinsella has to be part of any fourth division side that isn’t quite humming but needs guts, legs, attitude and ugly points.
I get why some suggest that Ladabie and Kinsella could work in a 4231. But you still need to link, transition and switch between the 2 and the 3. The way we set up now with the personnel we have the reality isn’t 4231 it is 64. The four really detached from the six. So we end up attacking in a really predictable box shape. Centre half to full back with a hopeful ball into a channel with the hope the winger makes it and get it into the box with the lottery-Esque hope we find a player in the middle of the goal mouth. Whilst there is a Graydon-like approach in there you need to make that play with larger numbers and far more precision and quality. Graydon had two up top and wingers who burst lungs to be a third man in the box when we attacked down the opposite side (Wracks goal record speaks for itself). If that is the way we plan to score goals in this team then we need literally three times more people getting into the box. So I’m not sure it is the way we plan to score goals because we play a lone striker and a 10. Which suggests us trying to break lines which needs that box to box number 8.
Early days and the encouraging thing is that Taylor is showing signs of adaptability and working out the puzzle as he goes rather than sticking to a method that clearly wasn’t working.
19 Likes
F**k me that was ace. I feel like pep guardiola now.
*doffs cap 
3 Likes
You’re thinking of Shayne Lavery at Blackpool. He is scoring regularly this season and looks a good find for them.
“Our” Lavery, Caolan, has made two short substitute appearances for Bradford and, as you’d expect, hasn’t scored.
6 Likes
She did. Upper tier. Only a few I reckon but def’ boos. Mindless…
Ahhh…I see…
As I said elsewhere too… put more eloquently than I 
But this is why I’ve had this seemingly negative impression of Kinsella over the years. It is his not him specifically - but the combination in the midfield which is the problem.
I think more and more people are seeing it now.
3 Likes
Good post but I thought Labadie was more of a box to box midfielder than we have seen so far. The guy is recovering from an injury and we have yet to see what he can do when fully fit. If I am right on that then we should be ok. I also wonder about the youngster Willis. Perhaps try him alongside either Kins or Labs in the Papa Johns . I thought at one time Bates could do the job and if he can recover his form he is another option so we have a number of possibilities.
Hope you’re right.
Looking at Labadie’s stats he has scored 48 in 380 appearances. About one in eight or six/seven a season if he plays the majority of games. Which is far better than the 1 in 50 Kinsella grabs.
So you may well be right. Obviously players are liberated or stymied by the job their manager asks of them and certain game situations. On Saturday it was defo two 4’s but that maybe because we scored early and that was the “hold on” shape we planned. If it was I guess it worked but it was a long time out of possession and left the top of the pitch isolated.
I reckon we’ll adopt the same from the get go on Saturday.
1 Like
That’s really poor. I know it’s not his game, but….
1 Like
Kin’s game is to break up the opposing team threat, trust me there is enough there to keep anybody busy 