More Than Frustrating

There’s been the time to reflect on Tuesday night’s game, but after cutting and dicing it, further reflection etc there’s just no getting away from both the disappointment. I thought before the game that the postponement of Saturday’s match if anything upped the ante; whereas before the weekend we were eyeing two (on paper) winnable home games and potentially six points to lift us from mid-table obscurity (yes, I know it’s early days), now there was just one. One we really needed to win. We didn’t, and with three points from four games it all looks very different from when we routed Plymouth a few weeks ago, with that result looking increasingly like an aberration rather than a portent of things to come.

No point now in going into too much detail on the game itself, just general impressions then questions (for me) arising.

The team selection was interesting to say the least, seemingly a result of parental duties, niggles, and some reaction to the Bolton game. Of the recently injured – Egbo, Sessegnon, Inniss, Aneke – only Inniss was included, with Lavelle dropping out again and no place yet for the returning Thomas. In addition Chin was given a start and Clayden a rest, while in midfield Dobson was retained but Morgan dropped and with Fraser unavailable McGrandles and Payne – the two Garner signings of which we have seen little of so far – were given the opportunity, with a place on the bench for Forster-Caskey. Blackett-Taylor was chosen to start, with Jaiyesimi in reserve and Kirk not included in the squad, while Leaburn was chosen for the central role over Stockley. It seems from subsequent comments from Garner that the latter had a small injury problem ahead of the weekend and he didn’t want to risk him for fear of doing more long-term damage.

Forest Green I’d say started the better, but we soon assumed control and it was clear that in CBT (ably assisted down the left by both Chin and Payne) and Rak-Sakyi we had weapons they couldn’t deal with, their wing-backs getting overwhelmed. We scored a decent goal before 10 minutes were up: Clare diverted a ball forward from them, Dobson picked it up, fed it into Payne, who advanced with menace and then played it square to CBT, going into the box and up against one guy. He was allowed to go inside and with the gap opened up struck the ball unerringly into the net. If we could score that easily surely there would be more to come.

That we didn’t extend the lead didn’t seem to be a major problem as half-time approached. Forest Green’s forwards had caused one or two problems but on possession, chances, and goal threat we were streets ahead. Then a crossfield ball out to their left, in behind Clare. Still no real danger as the cross looked simple for Wollacott. It should have been, but whether he tried to catch or punch he only made marginal contact and it dropped to their guy, who promptly stabbed it back into the net. A howler for sure, coming on the back of at least some culpability for Bolton’s equaliser, something to work on getting right. But even level at the break it didn’t seem serious, surely we weren’t not still going to go on and win the game.

The second half was an entirely different affair. Forest Green tightened up, more intent on getting behind the ball and crowding out our wider forwards. We did nothing in response for too long, despite it being increasingly apparent that it was no more a war of attrition and we were not threatening inside their box, while Blackett-Taylor was visibly tiring. We did eventually change things, with first Morgan replacing McGrandles and not long after Stockley and Clayden on for Leaburn and Chin. And when Jaiyesimi came on for Blackett-Taylor we seemed to switch to three at the back, with Rak-Sakyi moving more central alongside Stockley.

Fact it that through the second half we created little, just a couple of half-chances (a Stockley shot parried by their keeper’s arm, Rak-Sakyi hitting a dropping ball on the turn just over the bar). And while Forest Green may have been happy with their point, they came by far the closer to grabbing a winner. One low cross looked for all the world as though it would be converted at the far post, only for a small deflection on it seemingly putting their guy off.

So it proved to be another game – like so many already - we might easily have won comfortably, could easily have lost it despite the first half. Garner talked of it being a frustrating night, but in truth it was worse than that. We had failed to make our advantages count and when those advantages were neutered couldn’t muster enough to overcome fresh challenges. And we can’t write it off as one of those nights as last time at The Valley we failed to see off Cambridge.

It's hard to avoid the conclusion that last season we had good players for this level underperforming as a team, giving the feeling that if we just got things in order – as JJ did when taking over – we were better than most. This time around we haven’t collectively adapted properly to the style Garner wants to play, perhaps don’t have the players best suited to that style, are being outgunned by the stronger teams and are failing to put away what on paper are weaker ones. Garner may have just been being honest when he agreed that a top-six finish this season would represent over-achievement but, while that may tally with what we have seen on the pitch, the thought of a fourth consecutive season in this awful division is not going to get the crowds back.

Is there anything BG can do about it? I think there is. If we want to play with a single central striker both the wider players and midfielders have to adjust, including adjusting to the strengths of that striker. It isn’t rocket science that if the wide men hug the touchline (and Kirk especially was guilty of that) the striker is going to be isolated, requiring that if play develops down one flank the guy on the other has to tuck in. If the wider players are going to stay out wide (in general), they need to focus on supplying good crosses for the forward to get onto – and one or two of the central midfielders have to get into the box in support – as Fraser has done a couple of times to good effect.

We seem to be falling between two stools on that front. It doesn’t help that Stockley is out of form and looks low on confidence, that Aneke is simply unavailable. We are asking an awful lot of the central striker whoever it is. And while we all hope that Leaburn will continue to develop and enjoy a great career with us, it is unfair to expect him to play the central role as things stand; up against a couple of seasoned pros effectively on his own he is going to struggle (as Stockley has done when it comes to balls hit in his direction with back to goal). And on that front, I think Garner missed a trick when it came to making changes. I would have brought on Stockley and – assuming his legs were still good – moved Leaburn out right, switching Rak-Sakyi to the left. In that position Leaburn can often find himself up against a full-back and odds-on to beat him in an arial context (vis our second against Accrington).

If the central striker is Stockley, play to his strengths, which means crosses he can get on the end of inside the box. Sure, if CBT and Rak-Sakyi are scoring goals, midfielders chipping in, we have no problem. But take away Plymouth and we’ve scored seven goals in seven games, simply not enough. Change doesn’t have to involve ditching the system, just tweaking it – and making sure that those involved know what’s required. After all, there’s no single way of playing 4-5-1/4-3-3. I remember Spurs with Hoddle, Ardilles, Galvin etc. They played with Clive Allen up top and if memory serves his only job was to get on the end of balls into the box; in build-up play they just ignored him.

With CBT and Rak-Sakyi fresh at the start, we have a considerable attacking threat. But if one is a little off, or runs out of steam, the replacements are not the same type of player. Kirk is more likely to deliver a telling cross but less likely to offer a real goal threat; Jaiyesimi is also less of a goalscorer (and understandably looked rusty on Tuesday night when he came on). Leaburn is the other option, again a different type of player and requiring as and when he comes on others to adapt their game accordingly.

There were positives from Tuesday night. Chin made an impressive debut and Payne was lively and effective in the first half, ably supporting the forward players. And again, it could have been worse. I just hope that following the reported comments from Leo Rifkind and the reaction of the Trust we’re not going to embark on an extended discussion of what is (reasonably) expected of owners and supporters. The fact is that in this division The Valley is not going to be full and rocking on a consistent basis (unless tickets are given away), we need to be in the Championship. Getting into the Championship requires investment. Comments like “financial stability in football means money going out = money going in” are at best inane; and this one just isn’t true. If an owner is prepared to accept a level of loss and cover that loss as an investment, that is also stability, as it is in any business. If losses need to be reduced, even eliminated, fair enough. But Duchatelet's stated goals were to break even and get us into the Premiership and they were always incompatible - and he ended up failing on both counts.