Gavin Tomlin

[Conrad]

I reckon Tomlin has got on wrong side of Micky, we won't see him again.

 

See post #9.

[1340BC]

#Saintviant SPOT ON!!

[Boslem Boy]

I'd love to see that formation given a go. Dodds in behind Pope, two flying wide men in Tomlin and Jeno. That type of personnel and shape arguably saw our best performances last year.

 

On yesterday's performance I think we have to play a formation that includes Lee Hughes. His goal scoring record for us in 1 goal every 2 games, something that Dodds can't or has ever been able to produce.

I appreciate that given his age Hughes may/will struggle to play 50 odd games a season but we would be mad not to play him as and when he has the fitness to compete.

To play Dodds over Hughes IMO is just plain stupid.

[Jinkin John Jeffers]

On yesterday's performance I think we have to play a formation that includes Lee Hughes. His goal scoring record for us in 1 goal every 2 games, something that Dodds can't or has ever been able to produce.

I appreciate that given his age Hughes may/will struggle to play 50 odd games a season but we would be mad not to play him as and when he has the fitness to compete.

To play Dodds over Hughes IMO is just plain stupid.

 

Completely agree. Dodds in the side ahead of hughes is a strange idea.

[valiant_593]

Been saying all season Hughes has to play, he is our only striker that has consistently scored goals every season. Has to play defenders look worried when he's on the pitch. As decent as Williamson looks he just dosent strike me as a goal scorer. Hughes and pope up top with JMW and Tomlin on the wings if fit against Posh.

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

I reckon Tomlin has got on wrong side of Micky, we won't see him again.

 

Anything to sunstantiate that wild statement or yet more random words to beat the management team with?

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

Been saying all season Hughes has to play, he is our only striker that has consistently scored goals every season. Has to play defenders look worried when he's on the pitch. As decent as Williamson looks he just dosent strike me as a goal scorer. Hughes and pope up top with JMW and Tomlin on the wings if fit against Posh.

 

I doubt we would do that against a team such as Posh as it is four out and out forward players with no one really to drop back and help out in midfield.

 

If as is suggested a more flexible 4-2-3-1 system is to operate it has to be either Pope or Hughes with Tomlin or Loft or Doods supporting as the second striker.

[Beza]

mo looks like a **** rob Taylor at the moment

mo plays like a gout attack, very painful.

[Andyregs]

You should pick a side to beat the team you are playing, not the last team you last played. That's why I always thinks it's crazy saying you don't change a winning team. If it's not the right side to win the next game then you do. Against a weaker team then two strikers maybe the way to go, but against most I really prefer the 4-2-3-1, as it's way more flexible. Can mean 5 in midfield if needed, or very attacking when needed. The only problem it leaves is whether it's Hughes or pope. Personally a Hughes fan but can understand why pope is chosen by most (though I have no idea why Williamson would be picked ahead of either, instead of used as an impact sub). It does require Dodds pulling his finger out of his backside though and consistently doing what we know he can do.

[Mark-Valiant]

Doesn't look like Ashley Vincent's having a very good time of it this season at Cheltenham either. Only started 1 game in the JPT plus 6 sub appearances.

 

Cheltenham fans views on him here.

 

http://http://www.robinsnestforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=14629

[Boslem Boy]

You should pick a side to beat the team you are playing, not the last team you last played. That's why I always thinks it's crazy saying you don't change a winning team. If it's not the right side to win the next game then you do. Against a weaker team then two strikers maybe the way to go, but against most I really prefer the 4-2-3-1, as it's way more flexible. Can mean 5 in midfield if needed, or very attacking when needed. The only problem it leaves is whether it's Hughes or pope. Personally a Hughes fan but can understand why pope is chosen by most (though I have no idea why Williamson would be picked ahead of either, instead of used as an impact sub). It does require Dodds pulling his finger out of his backside though and consistently doing what we know he can do.

 

Your post is confusing me.

 

You state that "you should pick a side to beat the team you are playing"

 

You go on to say that "but against most I really prefer 4-2-3-1. as it's way more flexible."

 

You then finish your comment by stating "The only problem it leaves is whether it's Hughes or Pope ( I presume you mean as the lone striker) You then claim "I have no idea why Williamson would be picked ahead of either" & you finish by stating "it does require Dodds pulling his finger out of his backside."

 

So, in one sentence you're saying that we should pick a team with the opposition in mind - fair enough, I understand your logic.

 

But in the next sentence you state that we should play a particular formation (most games, despite the opposition & despite the players we pick! - Players make formations, not the other way round.

 

You finish your post by stating you don't know if you would pick Hughes or Pope. Williamson is "an impact sub" and Dodds is not "consistent." - so as it stands you don't know who you would play upfront in your formation?

 

Andyregs please correct me if I've misunderstood your post. But you're saying that we should pick a side to beat the team we're playing against, we should also stick to the same formation picking the same players because the rest of the squad are not good enough?

 

Fact: Adams (& Page) do pick a side to beat the team we are playing. They don't always get it right but certainly in recent games they've done well and changed players & formations during games.. Williamson/Birchall against Coventry. Lines/Loft/Griff against Tranmere. Hughes against Bristol. During those games we have used wingers, we have used sheer pace, we have used wide midfielders who can read the game & roam, we've also used experience to unsettle defenders.

 

So basically the club have been doing exactly what you claim they haven't been doing................................. or am I confused?

 

Feel free to correct any errors I've made.

[Andyregs]

Your post is confusing me.

 

You state that "you should pick a side to beat the team you are playing"

 

You go on to say that "but against most I really prefer 4-2-3-1. as it's way more flexible."

 

You then finish your comment by stating "The only problem it leaves is whether it's Hughes or Pope ( I presume you mean as the lone striker) You then claim "I have no idea why Williamson would be picked ahead of either" & you finish by stating "it does require Dodds pulling his finger out of his backside."

 

So, in one sentence you're saying that we should pick a team with the opposition in mind - fair enough, I understand your logic.

 

But in the next sentence you state that we should play a particular formation (most games, despite the opposition & despite the players we pick! - Players make formations, not the other way round.

 

You finish your post by stating you don't know if you would pick Hughes or Pope. Williamson is "an impact sub" and Dodds is not "consistent." - so as it stands you don't know who you would play upfront in your formation?

 

Andyregs please correct me if I've misunderstood your post. But you're saying that we should pick a side to beat the team we're playing against, we should also stick to the same formation picking the same players because the rest of the squad are not good enough?

 

Fact: Adams (& Page) do pick a side to beat the team we are playing. They don't always get it right but certainly in recent games they've done well and changed players & formations during games.. Williamson/Birchall against Coventry. Lines/Loft/Griff against Tranmere. Hughes against Bristol. During those games we have used wingers, we have used sheer pace, we have used wide midfielders who can read the game & roam, we've also used experience to unsettle defenders.

 

So basically the club have been doing exactly what you claim they haven't been doing................................. or am I confused?

 

Feel free to correct any errors I've made.

 

Not confusing at all. You quoted bits and left other bits out which give it context, whether on purpose or not I don't know. Firstly there is a difference between 'the team' you pick and 'the formation' they play in. Secondly I said that against weaker teams we could play two forwards but against most 4-2-3-1 would be preferable, because they are probably stronger and this formation would give us most options? Can't see what's confusing? And I totally disagree hat with a full squad, that players make the formation nit the other way around. You pick (or should pick) a tactic to approach the game and then pick the players to play it. So perhaps it's not me who is confused. I stated that Dodds fits the support role but needs to pull his finger out and that Williamson wasn't good enough to start. I'd prefer Hughes but understand why people would pick pope. Pretty clear? Why is it people get so precious about Adams that even sharing an opinion on formation gets twisted to suppose I'm criticising. Get a grip man!

[Ben]

Been saying all season Hughes has to play, he is our only striker that has consistently scored goals every season. Has to play defenders look worried when he's on the pitch. As decent as Williamson looks he just dosent strike me as a goal scorer. Hughes and pope up top with JMW and Tomlin on the wings if fit against Posh.

 

[Boslem Boy]

Not confusing at all. You quoted bits and left other bits out which give it context, whether on purpose or not I don't know. Firstly there is a difference between 'the team' you pick and 'the formation' they play in. Secondly I said that against weaker teams we could play two forwards but against most 4-2-3-1 would be preferable, because they are probably stronger and this formation would give us most options? Can't see what's confusing? And I totally disagree hat with a full squad, that players make the formation nit the other way around. You pick (or should pick) a tactic to approach the game and then pick the players to play it. So perhaps it's not me who is confused. I stated that Dodds fits the support role but needs to pull his finger out and that Williamson wasn't good enough to start. I'd prefer Hughes but understand why people would pick pope. Pretty clear? Why is it people get so precious about Adams that even sharing an opinion on formation gets twisted to suppose I'm criticising. Get a grip man!

 

I'll make this simple so that you don't confuse yourself further.

 

You state "And I totally disagree that with a full squad, that players make the formation not the other way round."

 

Any coach or training manual or whatever you want to use as an example show - it is the players that make the formation. Formations don't make the player!

 

Doug Loft played wide against Tranmere, he drifted in and he went on walk abouts. Tranmere struggled to mark him. Loft (the playrer) made that formation work by doing what he did. You can't really expect me to believe that the formation we played that day made him the player he was during that game?

 

Lets go back to the 90's and the season we played 4-5-1 away from home and it was pretty successful. Tony Naylor made that formation work because of his selfless play, his non stop running the channels & his ability to get behind defenders. Could (for example) Lee Mills have played that role - no of course not.

 

Therefore like I said, players make formations. That's why MA did away with trying to play 3 at the back, our defenders could'nt adapt to the formation. You can play a 4-4-2 or a 3-5-2 all day long but if your players can't adapt, then your formation won't work.

[Robbie Earle's Perm]

Why is it people get so precious about Adams that even sharing an opinion on formation gets twisted to suppose I'm criticising. Get a grip man!

 

I know you love quotung that line but i really don't see what its got to do with the conversation you two are having unless it is to try and confuse not only the poster but a lot more of us besides.

 

Or is it because you are obsessed with him more than the people who like, want and rate him are?