Little Shrimp wrote:A few points to be made are that we stuck with the back three against FGR and it didn't work (it was a front three, with Crowley and Hunter flanking Stockton), Mellon has shown flashes but also struggled greatly at times, and the 4-3-3 vs Derby worked exceptionally until the McGoldrick free kick on half time (I think having a more technically gifted XI helped as we were able to play our way out of tough situations).
Overall though, I think Derek should maybe have stuck with variations on a back three, with the odd exception (such as Derby). Rotate forward options (two attacking mids flanking Stockton, pairing with Mellon, Hunter or Gnahoua etc) depending on who we're playing, and shift Gibson between LWB and midfield also dependent on opponent. I think there was enough of a formula there to go on and make little shifts/rotations when needed, such as switching personnel or between a front two or three. I also think at times maybe a bit of bravery to drop Shaw/Weir/Crowley just to get a better balance in midfield.
I broadly agree with what you say, but I also sometimes think the tinkering around and making changes weakens us. Perhaps we should identify a system that works best for the players we have, then stick to it, drilling in to the players, what their job is. We know then that against some teams, we'd struggle, but, hopefully, in the necessary games, we'd pick up enough points. Tinkering & changing depending upon the opposition simply isn't working.
Six points from the next two games is imperative. Even four points probably will not be enough. Play like last night, and we'll be out of it this time next week.