Do we play McCabe ahead of Barlaser?

Bruce said:
Right now, our midfield consists of Hackney, Barlaser and Azaz which is paper-thin. While Howson and Morris are unavailable I have no idea how to fix it.

Possibly we have to go to three at the back with the third centre back being able to step in front of the other two. We don't really have wing-backs but we can still do something like

GK
Rav - Fry - Edmundson/Clarke
Dijksteel - Hackney - Barlaser - Azaz/McGree - Engel/Borges
Doak - ELL

Have Barlaser as a deep-lying playmaker while Hackney and Azaz play as #8s. Basically, we're swapping out the left-forward (currently Zoidberg) for an extra centre-back who is there to close down threats on the end edge of the box.
Click to expand...
Yep, it's another option. I don't know if it needs to be that big a change even though (maybe it does).

At the minute Azaz has very little defensive responsibility. You could just instruct him to play deeper alongside Hackney and Barlaser. Which would take something away from him obviously but would make us harder to play through.

Plenty of sides, some very successful, play 433 and it's still expansive attacking football.

A big question for me is if we don't have a proper "6" available can we afford the luxury of playing with a "10"?
 
festa5 said:
I feel like the obvious move, and we know it won't happen, is to move to a 3 man midfield until Morris returns.

I'd say there's a very strong argument to say we don't have the players to play a 2 at the minute.

That could be McCabe but he could also play Gilbert or McGree there.

Of course downside is then what do you do with the forward positions, but you could (for example) play Azaz on the left and have him drift central when in possession. Leaving Lath and Doak as they were.

The point is there are other options than trying to persist with a 2 who are weak off the ball (which they all are other than Morris).
Click to expand...
I think if we went to a 3 man midfield, it would be Azaz that would suffer. We'd essentially be moving the no10 back into midfield.
Azaz would probably have to go back out on the left.

------McCabe--Barlaser--Hackney-----

Doak---------------------------------------Azaz

------------------------Lath------------------------

Unless you went 3 at the back and played wing backs. Then you could still play Azaz as a roaming no10. But do we have thr players for wingback?
 
B_G said:
I think if we went to a 3 man midfield, it would be Azaz that would suffer. We'd essentially be moving the no10 back into midfield.
Azaz would probably have to go back out on the left.

------McCabe--Barlaser--Hackney-----

Doak---------------------------------------Azaz

------------------------Lath------------------------

Unless you went 3 at the back and played wing backs. Then you could still play Azaz as a roaming no10. But do we have thr players for wingback?
Click to expand...
I don't think we do, particularly not now Jones has gone.

Yeah that's the balance isn't it? But it's not like Azaz is creating loads in a lot of these home games anyway is it? It might even help him playing a bit deeper and having more time on the ball. If teams sit deep you're better off attacking the flanks anyway than trying to thread it through a packed centre.
 
festa5 said:
A big question for me is if we don't have a proper "6" available can we afford the luxury of playing with a "10"?
Click to expand...
I think that's exactly the way to put it.

Your 6's are the ones who make a platform for the rest of the team to play on but we only have Morris who can do that reliably. In theory Hackney acts as a hybrid 6/8 because he does some defensive work while focusing on getting the ball deep and "breaking the lines" (tm) then turning up at the edge of the opponent's box for a shot. Morris is a traditional 6 who keeps it simple and helps defend the edge of the box. When it works, it looks great but we don't have anyone to replace Morris.

Barlaser is a deep-lying playmaker: sort of a #10 who sits in front of the defence and needs two minders in front of him to buy him space to play. Could kind of play that role if Hackney and Morris played alongside him and we dropped Azaz but dropping Azaz for Barlaser would be foolish.
 
McCabe was the positive to come out of yesterday's match for me. I'd have him as second half sub for the next 5 games. Giving him 30 mins a game to see how he does.
 
What we need in midfield is players who are technically good, fast and strong on the ball.

We have players with one or two of those attributes; but too few with all three.

When we get them, we will go up.

But not before.
 
Tired Alan said:
We don’t know if McCabe is good enough, but he looked alright yesterday. We know Barlaser isn’t good enough and has proved it many times.

Time to try it?
Click to expand...

Neither are good enough. McCabe not yet although he may be. Send him out on loan when Morris and Howson are fit as he probably won't even make the bench then. Barlaser is not good enough even though he has had numerous chances to nail down a first team slot it only happens through injuries. What I will say though he has looked better than Hackney in a few games this year. His form has been nothing to shout about but I know its taboo to criticize him on here.
 
Left_peg said:
We need a proper number 6 as back up to Morris. Look at the last 2 goals we’ve conceded, ball is half cleared to the edge of the box and there’s no midfielder anywhere near to put pressure on the goalscorer.

In a 4-2-3-1 you need your midfield to have a 6, an 8 and a 10. Playing 2 8s and a 10 leaves you very open
Click to expand...
I hate this ‘number 6’
In England defensive midfielder was always traditionally - and in many cases still is - number 4

Just my preference haha
 
Last edited:
Definitely in the minority, maybe the only one, but I don’t think Barlaser was the problem yesterday….it was the three/four in front offering very little. Barlaser never hides in games. I would be more inclined to play McCabe with Barlasser/ Morris and Hackney and tweak to a 4-3-3 or 4-3-2-1.
 
The problem yesterday was probably 10 of that team were either not 1st team players or not playing in their preferred position. Put 2 or 3 into the “1st team” and in their preferred position and you can judge. Not yesterday. And that’s down to the manager.
 
Barlasar has done nothing to warrant his place in our team. He's only there because Morris isn't. He creates little, his set pieces are woeful, he doesn't score, and his passing leaves a lot to be desired - often giving the ball away in dodgy positions, putting us under pressure.

I don't like slagging individual players off but I find most of my frustration with Boro lately has come from our midfields lack of ability to help this team, especially defensively where its become more of a hinderance. HH has been off the boil for a while, and Barlasar isn't a ball winner. Couldn't tackle a Sunday dinner.

I think we need less 'creative' players in our midfield, and instead have someone in there that does the less glamours work of disrupting the opposition, getting a toe in, block a pass, get stuck in, keep it simple.

Give McCabe his chance.
 
Last edited:
It’s worth remembering that there are plenty who said Hackney wasn’t ready due to having only really played for Scunthorpe when he was thrown in.
 
Tired Alan said:
It’s worth remembering that there are plenty who said Hackney wasn’t ready due to having only really played for Scunthorpe when he was thrown in.
Click to expand...
I've read three different reports on the game and McCabe doesn't get a mention in any of them.

@Laughing summed it up when he said the following ' If he had a couple of bad games, which is likely, too many of our fans will describe him as dog **** and get on his back.'
 
Norman_Conquest said:
I've read three different reports on the game and McCabe doesn't get a mention in any of them.

@Laughing summed it up when he said the following ' If he had a couple of bad games, which is likely, too many of our fans will describe him as dog **** and get on his back.'
Click to expand...
I didn’t go but read a few reports and ratings and they didn’t universally say Barlaser was as bad as being put on here
 
Barlaser isn't a bad footballer and yesterday he looked more positive than in other games, had a couple of shots where he put his foot through it instead of trying to 'finesse' it from distance. The problem is that he's being asked to play a role that he can't do. What he's good at, Hackney is better.
 
Left_peg said:
We need a proper number 6 as back up to Morris. Look at the last 2 goals we’ve conceded, ball is half cleared to the edge of the box and there’s no midfielder anywhere near to put pressure on the goalscorer.

In a 4-2-3-1 you need your midfield to have a 6, an 8 and a 10. Playing 2 8s and a 10 leaves you very open
Click to expand...

The last two goals we have conceded have been down to the center backs not clearing the ball properly. Frys was absolutely shocking and Clarke yesterday has got to get something on the ball not just tee it up ffs.

We could have Kante in there and you can't fix stupid
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top