Fan's View - Gillingham

I agree with Paul.
I don't think that Bradbury was particularly mobile or quick. He was aggressive and positive however.
And I agree with you.
Bradbury was aggressive, but in terms of winning headers or getting the ball under control and bringing others into play - no different to Smith. But of course he needs time and encouragement to help with his development.
I admit to being a bit nerdy about tactics and formations, but it is completely bizarre to me that the Oxford Mail say we played 433.
It was definitely 4141. Holmes and Browne were alongside Branagan and Henry, not Smith. So Smith (and Mackie and Bradbury) are very isolated with usually no one within 30 yards of them when they receive (or more accurately battle for) the ball. Mackie definitely makes the best of this difficult situation.
I know a lot of people don't like 4231, but at least it enables the central player in the 3 to play closer to the 1 up top. And possibly the the two wide players can as well.
But 4141 is certainly making us stronger defensively.
I also get the feeling that Browne and Holmes have no confidence in Smith to receive and then do something with the ball and so try to do it all themselves. Or maybe that's under instruction from KR.
 
Re. Harvey Bradbury

It’s amazing what fans want to see from a promoted youth teamer. I recall Callum O’Dowda’s full debut against Charlton (I can’t remember if was in the FA Cup or League Cup … ?). He was reasonable and steady on the ball but clearly didn’t have the confidence or nous to beat his marker and played with a fear of losing the ball so he kept things very safe. Not a bad debut by any means but nothing more than a 6/10.

When I saw comments about him on the boards, you would have thought Ronaldo Mrk II had played. His debut was mythicised into one that was ‘fantastic’ by one poster. I had to remind them it really wasn’t. Generally, the OTT comments tend to come from players we’ve developed ourselves.

This is not to write Bradbury off – his size, scope and playing style make him sound like a real asset for the future – but it may go some way to explaining that some fans see what they want to see from a YTS player.
 
And I agree with you.
Bradbury was aggressive, but in terms of winning headers or getting the ball under control and bringing others into play - no different to Smith. But of course he needs time and encouragement to help with his development.
I admit to being a bit nerdy about tactics and formations, but it is completely bizarre to me that the Oxford Mail say we played 433.
It was definitely 4141. Holmes and Browne were alongside Branagan and Henry, not Smith. So Smith (and Mackie and Bradbury) are very isolated with usually no one within 30 yards of them when they receive (or more accurately battle for) the ball. Mackie definitely makes the best of this difficult situation.
I know a lot of people don't like 4231, but at least it enables the central player in the 3 to play closer to the 1 up top. And possibly the the two wide players can as well.
But 4141 is certainly making us stronger defensively.
o receive and then do something with the ball and so try to do it all themselves. Or maybe that's u

I also get the feeling that Browne and Holmes have no confidence in Smith t
nder instruction from KR.

This. Is definitely a 4141. I *think* the idea is that the midfielders close the gap to frontman by carrying the ball more than usual at this level. We have talent in that midfield so makes sense. Unfortunately, totally agree that they seem to have little confidence in Smith and end up on a road to nowhere more often than not. There were a couple of times in the first half v Gills where Holmes couldn't hide his frustration with Smith and gave him an earful - nothing changed. Contrast with Sam Long who also got a bit of 'guidance' on where and when to run and reacted immediately. Credit to Smith for so obviously trying to adapt his game and working hard but he just doesn't look like a good fit for that lone role.
 
Re. Harvey Bradbury

It’s amazing what fans want to see from a promoted youth teamer. I recall Callum O’Dowda’s full debut against Charlton (I can’t remember if was in the FA Cup or League Cup … ?). He was reasonable and steady on the ball but clearly didn’t have the confidence or nous to beat his marker and played with a fear of losing the ball so he kept things very safe. Not a bad debut by any means but nothing more than a 6/10.

When I saw comments about him on the boards, you would have thought Ronaldo Mrk II had played. His debut was mythicised into one that was ‘fantastic’ by one poster. I had to remind them it really wasn’t. Generally, the OTT comments tend to come from players we’ve developed ourselves.

This is not to write Bradbury off – his size, scope and playing style make him sound like a real asset for the future – but it may go some way to explaining that some fans see what they want to see from a YTS player.

I'm fully with you on this. We've often heard how great our youth players are and here outrage from some fans when they don't get thrown straight into the first team. Aaron Woodley. Alex Fisher. Tyronne Marsh. There's probably a lot more if I take the time to think about it.

Re. COD - I remember writing in the FV at the time that I didn't see him as being the answer to our problems (we always have problems of one kind or another). I know I wasn’t the only one and about four years ago I wrote – “when my mate suggested that he would be playing in the Jersey League in five years time, that was probably quite a bit OTT, but I wouldn’t put money on him having a lengthy Football League career.”

I know one poster on here kept having a go at me for these views. A relation with a vested interest perhaps and if I’d been in those shoes I would probably have done exactly the same.

But some youngster develop where as others don’t. More than once having spotted a young ‘un after the summer break there’s been comments such as “bloody ‘ell he’s bulked out” or “he’s turned into a man”.

I’ve also written this a few times before but COD turned into a very good player for us. I think the quantum leap was when he began playing with his head up and became much more aware of what was around him. But I’m not a coach who spots what’s what in training day in day out and knows which players have genuine ability that can be developed and those that have not.

Fair play to the lad, he’s making a very good living at Bristol City and is a full international.

I also remember Michael Duberry writing in the Oxford Mail when he wrote a small weekly column that he thought COD would end up in the Premiership. Not quite there yet but a lot closer to the Etihad than King’s Sutton. :)

And in no way have I written Bradbury off. Of course I haven't but as someone sat just in front of me on Saturday said, this is a steep learning curve for him.
 
This. Is definitely a 4141. I *think* the idea is that the midfielders close the gap to frontman by carrying the ball more than usual at this level. We have talent in that midfield so makes sense. Unfortunately, totally agree that they seem to have little confidence in Smith and end up on a road to nowhere more often than not. There were a couple of times in the first half v Gills where Holmes couldn't hide his frustration with Smith and gave him an earful - nothing changed. Contrast with Sam Long who also got a bit of 'guidance' on where and when to run and reacted immediately. Credit to Smith for so obviously trying to adapt his game and working hard but he just doesn't look like a good fit for that lone role.

Screenshot 2018-11-19 at 12.00.40.png
 

A good read.

I like that we have gone back to steady basics at the back, protected by Mousinho. Mousinho is comfortable on the ball, but his defensive positioning is so good a lot of attacks are stopped before getting on to the back 4.

Brannagan is the guy we should be building around. He has a lot more forward impetus of late with the addition of Mousinho. Brannagan started to run the game once Hanson was on. Away from home I would be pretty happy to see Hanson/Mousinho in front of the back four with Brannagan pushed up to behind the striker.

I made a point of watching Smith on Saturday as I was thinking it was his time to step up. He closed down and made blocks, but im not sure we should be applauding that from our striker. I have to say, in the second half especially he was making some intelligent runs across the defenders, constantly on the move looking for the ball. Until Brannagan pushed up noone was finding him. He was just starting to strike up some understanding before being subbed.

Bradbury - pretty raw and clearly knew he couldn't compete against the Gillingham CBs so went down the early jump route. He didn't have the ball at his feet (from what I recall) and his role appeared to be more one of unsettling the defence making space for others. Not a bad option to have on the bench and would assume he is picking up plenty from Mackie.
 
Back
Top Bottom