London Irish
Well-known member
Richie Morris said:Ok.
Our passing game fell to pieces today when we decided it was a far better idea to lump the ball forward aimlessly.
Had McCammon been playing I am sure that he would have suited this style more then Hart.
BUT
We look far more dangerous when we play the ball on the ground and just because our passing game went to pieces does not mean we should resort to the long ball game.
What it should mean is that McGhee notices the midfield was struggling and introduces someone to counter this, i.e. Nicolas or Hammond. That way we can get the passing going again and threaten the other teams goal more.
The problem I find with McCammon is that he is completely one dimensional.
Defenders know that even if they cannot compete with him in the air, they can just drop off him because he will either flick it on to nobody, or try to control the ball and lets be honest, having the ball at his feet is not his strong point.
I think sticking a big bloke up front it an instinctive reaction to passes going astray and midfield struggling but ultimately the wrong one because the temptation then is to just continuously pump high balls up. High balls that then just result in the other team getting the ball back and the defence being under more pressure.
Reasoned points, but I have a slightly different take.
Our passing game didn't fall apart today because we suddenly decided to play route one, in fact, we were very faithful to the new McGhee approach today and that meant a few too many stray short passes under pressure in the 2nd half and a few moments when we invited too much pressure on our back 3 when they were playing around with the ball.
Rather, the reason why it broke down was because of the good performance of the Forest midfield. Forget about Andy Reid, in Kris Commons they have a player whose last transfer at £300,000 makes him worth at least 3 times our entire selection. It is no surprise that with opponents like this, at times we will have good days in midfield and at other times we will have indifferent ones - today was the latter.
What is truly one-dimensional is your views on McCammon and how a team can play off a targetman.
Having a guy who gives us a direct option doesn't necessarily mean we pump every ball in the air every time to him, the crucial thing is that it gives us different options to play the ball either long or short, and keeps our opponents guessing.
The classic example was our winning goal at Bramall Lane last week. McCammon's run took one defender with him and crucially held the guy marking Leon. It created the gap for Reid to slip his pass into - if you don't believe me, look at the goal again on Seagulls World and watch the Blades defender chase after McCammon and the other stay rooted to the spot as he watches his mate disappearing to the left of him. It's an example of how a targetman can distract defences to allow ball players like Reid and Knight to do their stuff.
And yes, there is also nothing wrong with scoring from direct movements (long balls) either! They all count! No one felt bad that, for example, that's how we got points at Leicester, Watford, etc. How did we get our pen today? A long ball pumped from defence into the box that drew the clumsy foul.
The key thing is not to be PREDICTABLE - and that's what we where today with a lack of variety in our play.
No disgrace that Leon spurned the pen chance given how many vital pens he's got for us, but it will create a discussion about whether we need a change of penalty taker.