Well done Sheridan

[justanotherfan]

For me our most important "player" doesn`t even take to the park, John Sheridan has persisted with his own way of doing things and patiently waited until he got the players he wanted. No knee jerk reactions to criticism for he is most definitely his own man and has fashioned the team capable of the all out attacking football we were promised, the bonus is that he also built the meanest defence around. For me the fact that what he knew Dominick Blizzard was capable of is now readily apparent. No Bobby Reid but I felt the midfield was more assured than ever with the pace coming from out wide. A credit to John Sheridan and also to James Brent for facilitating this team and manager. The crowd wasn`t bad yesterday either, credit to the Demport.

 

[pearces greens]

....same goes for vica versa of course.

One of those chicken and egg type things,always makes for good debate.The point i was really making is that there would appear to be no good reason why players such as Hartley,Nelson,Nelson,McHugh etc shouldn't be successful in a 4-4-2 as well-agreed,the difficulty would be fitting them all in but they would seem to be of sufficient quality to make a go of it.Also agreed that it would be hard to balance out the midfield with the two ball winners in there for 4-4-2 but would there be any reason why an O'Connor/Blizzard [for arguments sake] combo wouldn't work? Not advocating that Argyle should change a winning formula but put it this way-would you have fancied Argyle's chances of conceding 9 goals in 18 games with the players that Sheridan inherited or indeed the ones that finished last season,no matter what formation was played? Darned sure that i wouldn't have,they weren't good enough.

Two Nelson's ! ? now that would be good.

 

[Womble]

I always knew he would be a good appointment, and have said so repeatedly. Hes doing a cracking job.

Also nice to see people who previously critisised him being happy to give him credit now too.

 

[IJN]

Yes Mr Womble, you did indeed stick up for him on many occasions.

It's also good to see people saying they were wrong.

 

[N I Green]

I'm the guy who started the "Are you watching, Sheridan?" chant after Nathan Thomas was brought on in a match and promptly scored a goal.

I maintain it was a chant aimed in jest and banter, but boy has he made me look a right mam! Great stuff!

 

[IJN]

John Sheridan's Green and White Army was sung at the Ricoh on Wednesday night.

 

[Mannamead Green]

Am I the only one who doesn't think this 3-5-2 will be 'found out'?

Whenever teams like us go on poor runs of form playing 4-4-2, do people say 4-4-2 has been found out? We might go on mediocre runs in the future playing 3-5-2 but that won't be because of it: it's simply the formation that suits our players and playing style the best.

 

[GreenSam]

Am I the only one who doesn't think this 3-5-2 will be 'found out'?

Whenever teams like us go on poor runs of form playing 4-4-2, do people say 4-4-2 has been found out? We might go on mediocre runs in the future playing 3-5-2 but that won't be because of it: it's simply the formation that suits our players and playing style the best.

Yeah I've always found it to be a deeply flawed statment.

3-5-2 has strengths (fluidity) and weaknesses (sometimes easy to play counter attack against).

4-4-2 has its strengths (its inherent simplicity) and it's weaknesses (lack of ability to flood the midfield or play between the lines).

Yet when we lose under 4-4-2 it's put down to the players, or the wrong subs, or lack of passion but when we struggle under 3-5-2 it is always the tactical flaws that seem to be pointed out above any other factor. Just because 4-4-2 was the most common formation in the lower leagues (perhaps still is, I don't really know) doesn't mean that it's flawless or that it should be the ultimate end game when all of the other inferior formations are 'found out'.

Under 4-4-2 we were mid-table fodder. Under 3-5-2 we've produced form that's automatic promotion comfortably. How that can be looked at and seen as not comfortably the best for us is beyond me. Mellor and (on the basis of yesterday though I was critical in previous games) Kellett are far more suited to that role of getting up&down the line than Berry, Purrington or an unfit Parsons. We've got at least one, maybe two, natural wing-backs in our squad. Last season we only had one and he was very rarely fit.

 

[Penmaster]

The positive's of 3-5-2 can be negated tactically if 1-11 aren't totally on the ball with what they need to do offensively and defensively. That's why, over time, teams ultimately end up reverting to a 4-4-2. Sheridan has done this himself during games we are struggling in.

 

[Mark Pedlar]

A lot of people seem to be forgetting that Sheridan was one of the last to recognise that 3-5-2 would suit our players best. Last year he stumbled across a team that produced a series of results which propelled us upwards then when Lavery left he struggled again. This year he has stumbled across 3-5-2 after persisting with 4-4-2 well past the point that many on here were saying it wasn't working. Hopefully we don't pick up any serious injuries or lose any key players because I'm not convinced that we have the depth to play the same system with losses to say O'Connor, Reid and one of the centre-backs at the same time.

 

[Gary Wills]

So the bookies are paying out on being wrong about Sheridan.
That's wonderful.

 

[KBGreen]

I think that we have all seen real progress in this team and I for one continue to believe that we will be promoted this season.

Obviously the manager plays a critical role in that, so I am supportive of the overall set-up. However my experience of sitting behind him last week at Coventry, will always mean that I will retain concerns about his man-management / motivation skills, when the chips are down.

Luckily, we are such a great side, that I will have a long wait for that test to take place......

 

[Gary Wills]

If Argyle can remain this high in the table, there's still only a 25% chance via the play-offs ain't there? And how many of this team have been through a successful play-off campaign?

 

[pedro91]

The way the team is set up,I can't see us conceding many goals.If we can keep scoring,then we will win a lot more than we lose.

 

[Quinny]

If Argyle can remain this high in the table, there's still only a 25% chance via the play-offs ain't there? And how many of this team have been through a successful play-off campaign?

The playoffs are a horrible, horrible lottery: you can be 15-20 points clear of the teams behind you in the playoffs, but one iffy day and that's it. Great for SKY and "the chance to play at Wembley" (yay?) but that's of little solace if you lose.

Three teams go up automatically from League Two: right now our ambitions must to be to be in one of those three slots. Given our run in towards Xmas, that must be considered a realistic goal, and then we can look at how to consolidate that.

Look at me: a couple of weeks ago I'd been happy finishing in the play-off zone...