ccmfans.net is the Central Coast Mariners fan community, and was formed in 2004, so basically the beginning of time for the Mariners. Things have changed a lot over the years, but one thing has remained constant and that is our love of the Mariners. People come and go, some like to post a lot and others just like to read. It's up to you how you participate in the community!
If you want to get rid of this message, simply click on Join Now or head over to https://www.ccmfans.net/community/register/ to join the community! It only takes a few minutes, and joining will let you post your thoughts and opinions on all things Mariners, Football, and whatever else pops into your mind. If posting is not your thing, you can interact in other ways, including voting on polls, and unlock options only available to community members.
ccmfans.net is not only for Mariners fans either. Most of us are bonded by our support for the Mariners, but if you are a fan of another club (except the Scum, come on, we need some standards), feel free to join and get into some banter.
I think it is a poor coaching option to move your best centre back out to left fullback just to plug a hole and just because he is left footed.
You are now putting one of your best players in a position where he is not his best as well as weakening the position he has just left.
Clisby doesn’t look comfortable at all imo. But more comfortable than Rowles... *chuckle* yeah that’s a given.
What is expected of the wide defenders has shifted as the game evolves. It’s almost universally required that in a back 4 your wide backs provide attacking width/overload now. Rowles has demonstrated that its not his strength as he’s more of a traditional CB. IMO the answer for us might be a back 3 if we don’t have an alternative LB to call upon. Give Clisby a rest and chance to refocus on hitting those crosses while still tracking back if we need to play him.but they were two of our best fullbacks,
At this stage Mick I think its not only a good option but possibly our only option at the moment.
Rowles has played left back for us numerous times,he knows the left side plays well and is a very strong defender.
The fact that he`s left footed adds to the merit of his `temporary` move,I certainly wouldn`t put him there `just because` he`s left footed
he has so many other attributes that suggests he could do a job for us there.
Would you rather Tonyik or Fox play there then to plug the hole, because it`s a hole that keeps getting bigger as other teams exploit the weakness.
Who would you play there?...
I previously gave the option of Stensness there. Though I am warning to his contributions in the midfield. If Hatch is not up to standard (don’t know much about him) then we will continue to play Clisby there. That’s the downside of trying to maintain the minimum of a salary cap.
We really can’t afford, in a thin squad, to play one of our best players out of position. I have seen enough football over the years to know this rarely works.
Has anyone seen formations at training to suggest that Nisbet is gonna start or Rowles is going to LB... Or is this all just speculation and we're just gonna see the exact same line up were all actually expecting
Staj has bemoaned our slow starts before the Sydney game (Roar away for one). Somehow our players dont seem "at it" and have no whiteline fever.
Needs to rev them up
I doubt Staj will change much from last last week. Maybe Oar for Silvera and back to to 4-2-2-2.
Nothing in his history suggests a major change after a solid performance
There are plenty of other teams who have/are playing a righty at LB and whilst it’s not ideal, it can be made to work imo.At this stage Mick I think its not only a good option but possibly our only option at the moment.
Rowles has played left back for us numerous times,he knows the left side plays well and is a very strong defender.
The fact that he`s left footed adds to the merit of his `temporary` move,I certainly wouldn`t put him there `just because` he`s left footed
he has so many other attributes that suggests he could do a job for us there.
Would you rather Tonyik or Fox play there then to plug the hole, because it`s a hole that keeps getting bigger as other teams exploit the weakness.
Who would you play there?...
There are plenty of other teams who have/are playing a righty at LB and whilst it’s not ideal, it can be made to work imo.
The solution is obvious to me play 3 at the back with two wing backs (Oar and SS or DDS) in a 3-5-2 or if going 4 at the back put Fox or Ziggy there (it was said pre-season that Zygmunt can play anywhere across the back line iirc) 3-2-4-1 (or 3-2-3-1-1) might work or 4-2-3-1 as long as that doesn’t include Clisby.
That seems to be likely with what we’ve heard on here this week. Possibly pushing DDS over to the right wingback spot. The other alternative would be Oar for Clisby and Miller for SS. Wonder if SS will have any minutes in him.I would love to see Oar in for a Clisby but I just think it's such a long shot. Hope I'm wrong, but fully expecting Clisby to start and Oar to come in for SS