Micky Adams tactical flexibilty?

[Brighton Breezy]

It seems to me, where as Wilkins at least worked on two formations the players were comfortable switching between during matches, Adams sticks rigidly with his 442.

If it is not worked, he changes the players, not the formation.

Resulting in him getting out-thought during games, us getting outplayed and players having to switch positions two or three times a game.

So Old School is HURTS.

 

[Fourteenth Eye]

Adams doesnt have a plan B ....FACT

 

[Freddie Goodwin.]

That's why we are often so bad in the 2nd half. The opposition look & learn and then switch their play.

look at Tuesday, 'boro stopped the threat of Carole and then our forwards had no service.

 

[BensGrandad]

That's why we are often so bad in the 2nd half. The opposition look & learn and then switch their play.

look at Tuesday, 'boro stopped the threat of Carole and then our forwards had no service.

This has been a problem in most games our management get out thought at half time.

 

[Djmiles]

That's why we are often so bad in the 2nd half. The opposition look & learn and then switch their play.

look at Tuesday, 'boro stopped the threat of Carole and then our forwards had no service.

If points were given after 45 minutes, we would currently be on....28 points!

We have had our fair share of poor 2nd halves, but had a fair share of good ones too (Cheltenham (A), Leicester (H), Hartlepool (H))

 

[e77]

While I agree with you premise that MA is tactical limited, we did play 433 in the last two games.

 

[Uncle C]

While I agree with you premise that MA is tactical limited, we did play 433 in the last two games.

With that many players on the pitch we should have bloody won.
Adams out.

 

[dougdeep]

Adams doesnt have a plan B ....FACT

I'm not sure he has a plan A.

 

[Zebedee]

Adams doesnt have a plan B ....FACT

I'm not sure that he even has a Plan A, sad as I am to have to say so.

 

[NMH]

While I agree with you premise that MA is tactical limited, we did play 433 in the last two games.

No we didn't - if 433 was on the pitch, I'm sure I would have recognized him.

 

[One True BHA]

While I agree with you premise that MA is tactical limited, we did play 433 in the last two games.

Just because 3 strikers were on the pitch doesn't mean we played 433. It was quite obviously a 442 with Forster starting on the right (pathetic management) and then he moved up top and Andrew playing left wing. Andrew is a target man centre forward and to play him left wing is just embarrassing. I genuinely would have done a better job on the touchline than Adams yesterday. Everyone could see that we needed to change things with about half an hour to go but as time went on he still just left it as it was. I guess he had just accepted defeat. Joke.

 

[NS Herald]

Just because 3 strikers were on the pitch doesn't mean we played 433. It was quite obviously a 442 with Forster starting on the right (pathetic management) and then he moved up top and Andrew playing left wing. Andrew is a target man centre forward and to play him left wing is just embarrassing. I genuinely would have done a better job on the touchline than Adams yesterday. Everyone could see that we needed to change things with about half an hour to go but as time went on he still just left it as it was. I guess he had just accepted defeat. Joke.

Spot on - your 2 main scroing assets from the win over Hartlepool and he plays them out of position - when will people on here realise the words Micky Adams and tactical sense don't go together!!!!

All you have to do is look at what he's done with Virgo all season and you can clearly see he simply wants to accomodate certain players regardless of whether they are in the right position or whether other people could do a better job.

Until he changes this stupid f***ing approach we are well and truly f***ed

 

[steward 433]

While I agree with you premise that MA is tactical limited, we did play 433 in the last two games.

To be fair i reckon i could have defended better than the back four in the last two games!!!!!!

 

[steward 433]

No we didn't - if 433 was on the pitch, I'm sure I would have recognized him.

 

[e77]

To be fair i reckon i could have defended better than the back four in the last two games!!!!!!

The campaign starts here!

 

[e77]

Just because 3 strikers were on the pitch doesn't mean we played 433. It was quite obviously a 442 with Forster starting on the right (pathetic management) and then he moved up top and Andrew playing left wing. Andrew is a target man centre forward and to play him left wing is just embarrassing. I genuinely would have done a better job on the touchline than Adams yesterday. Everyone could see that we needed to change things with about half an hour to go but as time went on he still just left it as it was. I guess he had just accepted defeat. Joke.

To be honest it sort of turned into a hybrid of the two.

Carole getting the ball in the defensive third of the pitch worries me.

 

[BensGrandad]

J I genuinely would have done a better job on the touchline than Adams yesterday. Everyone could see that we needed to change things with about half an hour to go but as time went on he still just left it as it was. I guess he had just accepted defeat. Joke.

Who was on the bench that he could have brought on to get us the 2 goals needed to get a draw. Having started with the 3 strikers, to keep them all happy, we didnt have any others to bring on.

 

[One True BHA]

Who was on the bench that he could have brought on to get us the 2 goals needed to get a draw. Having started with the 3 strikers, to keep them all happy, we didnt have any others to bring on.

It's not just about that though is it? He could have brought on Birchall or Livermore to change the midfield to see if we could start winning it in the middle and creating chances. When losing you don't just look to see what strikers you have on the bench. You can't throw five on and play two on the wing, one in the middle and two up top. Although that wouldn't surprise me anymore with the shit Adams comes up with.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

He could have gone three at the back, put Andrew upfront and introduced Cox on the left.

He could have introduced Livermore to use his experience in midfield.

He could have replaced Carole, who was having a SHOCKER crossing wise, for Birchall who has a superb delivery.

Just TRYING something when what was on the pitch was clearly not working would have been a START.

 

[Trigger]

His tactics are about as flexible as Rik Waller and Jo Brand having a bunk up.