Ranger

[southendkid]

I think it's probably worth giving the 4-5-1 a go, it's not worked in the past but that's mainly because Mooney and Cox are rubbish at winning long balls forward, Fortune has had a bit more success with them so it might work as a short term solution until our strikers recover. If it isn't working I'd play McGlashan or another midfield as a makeshift striker rather than risk a serious injury by rushing Cox back.

 

[manor15]

Apparently Rangers injury is worse than Cox's & he is going for a scan later today.

Not sound promising :sad:

BBC Essex claimed he'd torn his thigh muscle on Saturday, no idea if true or not. They usually get things right but seems odd they came out with it and the club and Chris Phillips haven't mentioned it.

 

[THE SEVENTIES NORTH BANK]

I think it's probably worth giving the 4-5-1 a go, it's not worked in the past but that's mainly because Mooney and Cox are rubbish at winning long balls forward, Fortune has had a bit more success with them so it might work as a short term solution until our strikers recover. If it isn't working I'd play McGlashan or another midfield as a makeshift striker rather than risk a serious injury by rushing Cox back.

4-5-1 Doesn't work for this current crop of Southend players. We saw that at the start of the season, especially away from home where it allowed the other team to pile forward with only one to mark at the back. We certainly wouldn't want to play it against an attack minded team like Wimbledon.

 

[SeaSideDoughnut]

I think it's probably worth giving the 4-5-1 a go, it's not worked in the past but that's mainly because Mooney and Cox are rubbish at winning long balls forward, Fortune has had a bit more success with them so it might work as a short term solution until our strikers recover. If it isn't working I'd play McGlashan or another midfield as a makeshift striker rather than risk a serious injury by rushing Cox back.

Until I read that I forgot Mooney still played for us. Genuinely.

 

[mattitouk]

BBC Essex claimed he'd torn his thigh muscle on Saturday, no idea if true or not. They usually get things right but seems odd they came out with it and the club and Chris Phillips haven't mentioned it.

I recall listening to Phil's post match interview with the BBC after the game & all he said then was that they both had "soft tissue" injuries.
In an article on the back page of the Echo this evening, it says that Cox has "tweaked his groin" & Nile has done a similar thing with his "rectus femoris muscle".

 

[rigsby]

I recall listening to Phil's post match interview with the BBC after the game & all he said then was that they both had "soft tissue" injuries.
In an article on the back page of the Echo this evening, it says that Cox has "tweaked his groin" & Nile has done a similar thing with his "rectus femoris muscle".

That's bad news, best get that sorted before he starts any prison sentence.

 

[kentblues]

Rectus femoris muscle is one of the four main thigh muscles I think- I have done it myself and the problem is it hurts most when you kick something- and then believe me it hurts, a light ball feels like you have kicked something made of lead.
I think if he felt it then best hope is a strain- the outcome looking it up is normally 4 weeks for a strain, can be 6-8, in exceptional cases 1-2. If its a tear then its long term (but apparently unlikely as tears very rare).

I suspect Cox will be available given we have 9 days but may need an injection (I also note there is no mention of Cox needing a scan?)

 

[RobM]

This from Wiki'

"Rectus femoris strain, referred to as hip flexor strain, is an injury commonly at the tendon that attaches to the patella or in the muscle itself. The injury is usually a partial tear but could be a full tear. The injury is caused by a forceful movement related to sprinting, jumping, or kicking and is common in sports like football or soccer. The rectus femoris is prone to injury since it crosses both the knee and the hip. Symptoms include a sudden sharp pain at the front of the hip or in the groin, swelling and bruising, and an inability to contract the rectus femoris with a full tear."

 

[Rattus Norvegicus]

This from Wiki'

"Rectus femoris strain, referred to as hip flexor strain, is an injury commonly at the tendon that attaches to the patella or in the muscle itself. The injury is usually a partial tear but could be a full tear. The injury is caused by a forceful movement related to sprinting, jumping, or kicking and is common in sports like football or soccer. The rectus femoris is prone to injury since it crosses both the knee and the hip. Symptoms include a sudden sharp pain at the front of the hip or in the groin, swelling and bruising, and an inability to contract the rectus femoris with a full tear."

Right. Good. The injury is common in football and soccer. :facepalm:I wonder if that also covers footie, kick-abouts and Wembley (that's what we used to call it anyway).



Hash tag: Wikirubbishspoutedeverywhere

 

[southendkid]

4-5-1 Doesn't work for this current crop of Southend players. We saw that at the start of the season, especially away from home where it allowed the other team to pile forward with only one to mark at the back. We certainly wouldn't want to play it against an attack minded team like Wimbledon.

I don't really see what the alternative is other than Jason Williams coming in, there are no fit strikers to play anything other than one up top unless you use a makeshift striker. It will only be for a few games and as I said I think the reason it didn't work before is our fit strikers at the start of the season were losing everything played forward so our midfield never got bought into the game. Fortune is capable of running onto balls played over the top and holds the ball up well so if Wimbledon only leave one or two back to mark him when they attack he'd get plenty of chances, so they'd be taking a big risk to do it. I don't think 4-5-1 is a great formation but we don't really have any great options right now.

 

[rigsby]

I don't really see what the alternative is other than Jason Williams coming in, there are no fit strikers to play anything other than one up top unless you use a makeshift striker. It will only be for a few games and as I said I think the reason it didn't work before is our fit strikers at the start of the season were losing everything played forward so our midfield never got bought into the game. Fortune is capable of running onto balls played over the top and holds the ball up well so if Wimbledon only leave one or two back to mark him when they attack he'd get plenty of chances, so they'd be taking a big risk to do it. I don't think 4-5-1 is a great formation but we don't really have any great options right now.

No point in changing our mid-field 4, they have been able to do what they do best as individuals to make a good team. McG did more than ok on Saturday and rounded it off with a well earned goal.

They may not be first choice but Fortune gives us strength and hold up play and McG raw pace. There's a few side in our division would love to have both of them right now.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

I think it's probably worth giving the 4-5-1 a go, it's not worked in the past but that's mainly because Mooney and Cox are rubbish at winning long balls forward, Fortune has had a bit more success with them so it might work as a short term solution until our strikers recover. If it isn't working I'd play McGlashan or another midfield as a makeshift striker rather than risk a serious injury by rushing Cox back.

There is the problem, in your opening sentence! We can not return to playing a lone striker. The poor run of form was when we tried with that and didn't work.
I believe that if we only have Fortune then we need to play some one "up" with him AND that person needs to know his role is that and not as a midfielder/winger whatever. And if that player doesn't stick to the task then use a sub and try someone else BUT if we have a formation which lends itself to defending then that is what will happen.
If JW is fit then this could be his chance to show in training, around the squad and knocking on PB's door and announcing that he wants to "bust a gut" for a start.


I am quietly confident that Cox will be available.

 

[Lord Football]

Ranger and McGlashan up front is non too shabby, as they proved on Saturday. Ok, so the midfield have to do things differently and Ranger's absence is a massive blow but it is not the end of the world. As I've said before, if we didn't have Ranger I'd expect us to be raving over Fortune.

The real key to this team is the spine, and the base of that (Anton, Tommo, Lenny, Woody) is not affected.

 

[Massimo Giovanni]

Ranger and McGlashan up front is non too shabby, as they proved on Saturday. Ok, so the midfield have to do things differently and Ranger's absence is a massive blow but it is not the end of the world. As I've said before, if we didn't have Ranger I'd expect us to be raving over Fortune.

The real key to this team is the spine, and the base of that (Anton, Tommo, Lenny, Woody) is not affected.

I have not doubt you intend Fortune and McG.
And I would go along with that as long as McG knows he is up top and not a winger/mid player which leaves to much of a gap.

 

[Rattus Norvegicus]

I have not doubt you intend Fortune and McG.
And I would go along with that as long as McG knows he is up top and not a winger/mid player which leaves to much of a gap.

I quite liked the 4-5-1 last season when it was first used against Peterborough away (I think) and it stopped the leaky defence situation that we had.

Come forward to December 2016 and we are in a different situation. We have a tight defence, we have a good and stable midfield.

On balance I would prefer that we try with a patched up 4-4-2 than go back to a 4-5-1.

 

[rigsby]

I quite liked the 4-5-1 last season when it was first used against Peterborough away (I think) and it stopped the leaky defence situation that we had.

Come forward to December 2016 and we are in a different situation. We have a tight defence, we have a good and stable midfield.

On balance I would prefer that we try with a patched up 4-4-2 than go back to a 4-5-1.

Don't you mean 5-4-1. As in 3 CB's and 2 Full backs. Which is what we played last season at Posh. Plus Payne was never really playing midfield so it was more 5-3-1-1

 

[Polish_Blues]

Stick with 4-4-2 and play McG & Fortune up front together! McLaughlin can play up front too.

 

[onceknownasrab]

If Fortune and McG play as the two upfront, who is going to be on the bench as a striker? I suggest with that pair in the first eleven you will need two striker options on the bench and I don't see who that can be. Difficult times but interesting times.

 

[Tinky]

Please NO 451, Mr Brown, I'm not prepared to watch that dross on Boxing Day!

 

[Ironshrimper]

Stick with 4-4-2 and play McG & Fortune up front together! McLaughlin can play up front too.

McLaughlin I would put him up front, our best player, consistency..he could play anywhere.