Another tactical humiliation. Are you willing to listen yet?
You may not believe this but I actually quite like 4-4-2. Sadly it only works when you play two wingers. You named two "wingers" but they were a disguise cos they didn't play as wingers. They worked on a pivot and operated fundamentally as midfield players.
Not once, even in a first half we dominated, did our "wingers" take on defenders, get around the back and put in telling crosses.
If wingers don't take men on and therefore force the central defenders to move out of position there is no point in playing them.
Two wingers such at this at Leicester is impossible (without Goal-Smith) because we don't have such people. Hammill, as I've said many times is not strong enough or fast enough. Sylla just doesn't have the inclination to go by people generally.
With me so far?.
Sadly too, our wingers are not good enough as alternative midfield players. Hammill quite often picks the right passes, tries to keep the ball low but rarely hits them with enough pace. Sylla, well I'll come to him later.
The point is whether you like 4-4-2 or not the system has to fit the players available.
So, let's start at the back.
Nils played left back and was, again, a disaster. In the first half he was positionally good, made some excellent interceptions but he flattered to deceive. On one occasion (just as at Watford) he was completely skinned and the resulting cross could easily have cost us a goal.
Furthermore his distribution was always a second or so too slow because he had to turn onto his right foot...and infield thus cramping play. A final problem was that most of his forward passes were floated in the air. Hard to control and easy for defenders to counter. No good.
In the second half he was awful. Skinned once as a warning and then again for the goal. Conclusion (as I told you so many times my fingers ached) he is not a left back. Sadly after tonights evidence I wouldn't play him at centre-back either. He is easily beaten if a fast forward runs at him and turns him. It is a fatal weakness.
McCarthy has a bit of the City spirit about him and with Dublin looked generally okay tonight. Perfectly adequate.
Stearman wasn't at his best (seemed to misjudge headers in the floodlights) but, again, okay and was usually fast enough and combative enough to cover his errors. Maybury could play (it matters not to the system) but the only change that HAS to be made is at left back where Sheehan MUST to come in because otherwise we simply give ourselves an unnecessary handicap.
If Hammill is left out (which he should be) we need width on the left, we need passing ability there too but there is the vital third point... We NEED Sheehan as a dead ball specialist. We could easily have won the game in the first half. We had three close-to-goal free kicks which were taken by various players and all from positions which Sheehan would have relished.
Result: one was blasted against a nearby defender and two were lifted far too high and well over the target. All utterly wasted because the people who took them should never be entrusted with free kicks.
It was three good chances squandered - and none on target. Potentially Sheehan had the ability to score from all of em.
Next midfield. Having Hughes and Kisnorbo in midfield with two supplementaries (Sylla and Hammill) just wasn't sufficient in the second half last night. We were unable to apply our full press for long enough (tiredness from Saturday?) and were overwhelmed by the tactical decision of Cotterill to swamp midfield and pass.
We needed another specialist midfielder. Tiatto was the man I wanted and what happened tonight suggested I was right. It was only after he came on (and other things were changed) that we rained attacks on Burnley during the closing stages.
But we don't want him at left back (for lots of reasons I won't explain). He is safer and more effective as a DISCIPLINED left midfielder...if he plays fairly and if he is willing to help Sheehan provide width and penetration.
That gives us a middle three.
Finally comes the front three...and there are options.
First though it is a cardinal sin to waste Hume's talents and use him for 25 minutes or so. This guy is talented, energetic, skillful, threatening and a good team player. Furthermore he can play wide or in the centre. He needs to be in the team.
With Hammill out some width would come from Sheehan/Tiatto on the left. As yet there is no rightside width.
But Sylla DID last the pace tonight and he did make some penetration along with Hume when the two were in tandem.
So the options are there. You CAN play Sylla right midfield and two up front. You could also play the three main strikers and leave Hume to make the rightside width. Or you can play Sylla plus two up front.
I am not altogether sure it would matter which option you choose but my initial preference would be to have Kisnorbo, Hughes and Tiatto in midfield; Hume in front of them and Hammond (or Chambers) and MDV up front. Sylla would be a tactical option from the bench.
This would have Hume providing the rightside width but would leave us with three strikers on the field.
This, I think is important because our strikers are not potent enough in pairs.
So there you are: 4-3-3 with Hume in the hole and more potential width than ever you were getting from two phantom wingers. Just I suggested weeks ago
This team would have little chance of defeat because it would hardly ever concede more than a goal and having three strikers would virtually guarantee at least one goal and therefore one point.
Once Goal-Smith is back I'd play Hume in midfield ahead of two from Kisnorbo/Hughes/Tiatto and Goal-Smith in a free-role up front with Hammond/MDV.
I'm sorry to have been so long winded about this but we need to get our team right BEFORE we start considering the tactics.
And there are lessons galore to be learned in that department.
Saturday's team:
Douglas;
Stearman or Maybury, McCarthy, Dion, Sheehan;
Kisnorbo, Hughes, Tiatto;
Hume;
Hammond/or Chambers, MDV
Subs: Sylla, Joey, Gerrbrand, Williams, Hammond or Chambers (cos I think he's allowed).
Why Chambers? He may be young but he would have taken a couple of those chances tonight - especially the first half one that fell to Hammond when he had only the keeper to beat. Meat and drink that to Chambers. He is the most natural striker at the club.
Please have the good grace to listen because another defeat to no goals for us would not go down well Sunday. "