Darlo v York

Open now for discussion of all things Darlo!

Moderators: botrash, mikkyx, charlie, uncovered

User avatar
don'tbuythesun
Posts: 1629
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:24 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by don'tbuythesun » Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:27 am

Think it's our age! Remember the exciting sixties 2-3-5?! Back passes too.

Ghost_Of_1883
Posts: 526
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Ghost_Of_1883 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:35 am

I wasn't even born in the 60s which is just as well, because 2-3-5 would send me into a complete break down.

There are 4 allowable formations -

4-4-2 (can be 4-2-4 if particularly attacking)
4-3-3
4-5-1 (can be called 4-2-3-1 if you're trendy)
5-3-2 (sometimes called 3-5-2)

No other formation should be allowed - but of greater importance is not actually the formation which the team is playing ,but the ability of the watching fans to correctly identify it.
Last edited by Ghost_Of_1883 on Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
We are Darlo! We know our shitt! If we say it's 1-2-0-1-1-3-0-1-1 then you better believe it! La la la oo, la la la oo (clap, clap, clap, clap)

H1987
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by H1987 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:35 am

Looks like a sulk to me.

Observing the above formation is how the team sets up isn't being trendy, or snobbish. It's reflecting the reality in front of your eyes. It's obvious to everyone else. Campbell is the most advanced man, O'Neill is further back. The wingers are more advanced. Just because they sometimes track back doesn't mean thats not the position they are set up in.

I'm entirely sure it's set up so that sometimes, if necessary, we can go to 4-4-2. Sometimes, it frankly looks like 4-2-4. That simply doesn't change the reality of how the team sets up. Which is the above, and it's obvious if you pay attention.

Ghost_Of_1883
Posts: 526
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Ghost_Of_1883 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:48 am

H1987 wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:35 am
It's obvious to everyone else.
No it isn't. Plenty can see it's 4-4-2
Campbell is the most advanced man, O'Neill is further back.
Irrelevant. You wouldn't expect the two forwards to be always in line. If anything, Campbell drops out of the box looking for the ball, far too often for me.
The wingers are more advanced. Just because they sometimes track back doesn't mean thats not the position they are set up in.
You keep saying this but more advanced than what? A wingers' job is to attack is it not, but in any case the position of the wingers makes no difference to whether the formation is called 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 (4-2-3-1) - wingers constantly high up the field would make us more of a 4-2-4 than the other two formations, if anything.
I'm entirely sure it's set up so that sometimes, if necessary, we can go to 4-4-2. Sometimes, it frankly looks like 4-2-4.
Clear 4-4-2 currently but would agree that sometimes it looks more 4-2-4
That simply doesn't change the reality of how the team sets up. Which is the above, and it's obvious if you pay attention.
I'll just throw the comment back at you - it's obvious we're 4-4-2 if you're paying attention.

You need to stop hanging on to the image of a formation which we binned when Holmes got injured, and had to move the CAM Thompson to the wing, and replaced him with forward O'Neill.

If O'Neill doesn't play and Thompson moves in to the centre with Donowa on the wing then it becomes a 4-2-3-1, as Thompson isn't a striker like O'Neill and will do a different role - trying to come in behind Campbell as Syers would do with Styche.
We are Darlo! We know our shitt! If we say it's 1-2-0-1-1-3-0-1-1 then you better believe it! La la la oo, la la la oo (clap, clap, clap, clap)

JE93
Posts: 1241
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 2:48 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by JE93 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:14 am

Ghost_Of_1883 wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:48 am
H1987 wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 10:35 am
It's obvious to everyone else.
No it isn't. Plenty can see it's 4-4-2
Campbell is the most advanced man, O'Neill is further back.
Irrelevant. You wouldn't expect the two forwards to be always in line. If anything, Campbell drops out of the box looking for the ball, far too often for me.
The wingers are more advanced. Just because they sometimes track back doesn't mean thats not the position they are set up in.
You keep saying this but more advanced than what? A wingers' job is to attack is it not, but in any case the position of the wingers makes no difference to whether the formation is called 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 (4-2-3-1) - wingers constantly high up the field would make us more of a 4-2-4 than the other two formations, if anything.
I'm entirely sure it's set up so that sometimes, if necessary, we can go to 4-4-2. Sometimes, it frankly looks like 4-2-4.
Clear 4-4-2 currently but would agree that sometimes it looks more 4-2-4
That simply doesn't change the reality of how the team sets up. Which is the above, and it's obvious if you pay attention.
I'll just throw the comment back at you - it's obvious we're 4-4-2 if you're paying attention.

You need to stop hanging on to the image of a formation which we binned when Holmes got injured, and had to move the CAM Thompson to the wing, and replaced him with forward O'Neill.


So is it the role the player is being asked to fulfil which makes a formation or position which you have ascribed to them?

You keep saying that because O'Neill is a 'forward' we must be playing 4-4-2. Could it not be that the role the player is being asked to undertake takes them out of a stock formation which the position you're giving him would fit him into? When we used Alan White as an auxiliary target man in the Evo-Stik Div1 season it didn't mean we started 5-4-1, as i think we all agree White was a defender. Similarly Wright played Thompson as a Striker and a Wingback but you're saying he's a midfielder either CAM or Winger?

I agree with you, one out of Campbell and O'Neill drops deep (i also agree with you we do this a little too much for my liking and don't always test teams in behind enough). But to me, because one of them is always deeper then essentially you are not playing with two 'forwards' I tend to call them strikers. As H1987 says, it's a game of opinions we have one school of thought and have provided our reasons why, you have another. Wouldn't it be a boring world if we all agreed all the time.

Also on your stock formations list, I think you've missed 3-4-3 which most people agreed helped Chelsea to the premier league title under Conte.

Ghost_Of_1883
Posts: 526
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Ghost_Of_1883 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:23 am

O'Neill isn't being asked to fill in the attacking midfielders' role, it would be nonsense to do that. He's a proper forward who holds the ball up well and gets in the box as he should (needs to work on finishing though). So as he is playing as a front man, and Campbell is playing as a front man, that makes 2 front men, right? Well it can't be 4-2-3-1 when you have two players both on the pitch playing as forwards.

I honestly don't care if we play 4-2-3-1 if it suits the players (as it did with Styche as lone forward/spearhead), but here's the thing, you don't shoehorn players into a formation if they don't fit - you arrange the formation to suit the players at your disposal. This is why we are currently playing 4-4-2.
We are Darlo! We know our shitt! If we say it's 1-2-0-1-1-3-0-1-1 then you better believe it! La la la oo, la la la oo (clap, clap, clap, clap)

H1987
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by H1987 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:40 am

For what it's worth, i agree with you that this formation doesn't really fit the current crop of players, and Campbell isn't Styche. Nor is playing that role particularly suited to O'Neills abilities. However, O'Neill in the line leading role would work (imo), with Campbell at the AMC / deep forwards role. Note that this is the team that *I* would play, as i honestly don't see him starting with Donowa either, and based on the last game it could still be Omar at RB.

That said, i'd say we are in agree to disagree territory here, because based on what i'm watching, this is the formation we are playing. I have no problem with us playing 4-4-2, or any supposedly less trendy formation. That's simply not what i, or others see right now.

Ghost_Of_1883
Posts: 526
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Ghost_Of_1883 » Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:56 am

"I, and others" - argument from popularity. Though two points regarding that 1) how many "others" are there who think we're 4-2-3-1 and 2) even if the 4-2-3-1 camp are in the majority, that would mean it's a popular opinion but not necessarily the truth.

Anyway, enough for now - I look forward to us giving York 2 easy goals tomorrow and manfully struggling to get back into it with no real cutting edge.
We are Darlo! We know our shitt! If we say it's 1-2-0-1-1-3-0-1-1 then you better believe it! La la la oo, la la la oo (clap, clap, clap, clap)

User avatar
don'tbuythesun
Posts: 1629
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:24 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by don'tbuythesun » Fri Sep 13, 2019 1:30 pm

When I met you with Hicker many years ago I thought you were older! The years play tricks but the 60's footie was exciting.

quakerste
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by quakerste » Fri Sep 13, 2019 5:47 pm

York have sold the allocation for the seating with 217 left from the standing allocation of 770.

Around 650 sold so far.

User avatar
don'tbuythesun
Posts: 1629
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:24 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by don'tbuythesun » Fri Sep 13, 2019 7:11 pm

That will help towards that giant, towering, solid, colossus, bullet heading 6 ft 5 inch seasoned, ex football league striker, guaranteed 20 goals (with the cup run money of course).

jjljks
Posts: 1530
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:25 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by jjljks » Sat Sep 14, 2019 6:16 am

One thing for sure, the 50/50 draw would be well worth winning!

quakerste
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sat Jul 11, 2009 7:07 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by quakerste » Sat Sep 14, 2019 6:47 am

Not sure if it is correct but on the buy your ticket site for home supporters it says there is only 100 standing tickets left 58 seating. 207 standing for away supporters.

Is it already close to a full house?

Alfie
Posts: 262
Joined: Tue May 22, 2012 8:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington
Location: Eye, Suffolk

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Alfie » Sat Sep 14, 2019 6:53 am

Ghost_Of_1883 wrote:
Fri Sep 13, 2019 11:23 am
O'Neill isn't being asked to fill in the attacking midfielders' role, it would be nonsense to do that. He's a proper forward who holds the ball up well and gets in the box as he should (needs to work on finishing though). So as he is playing as a front man, and Campbell is playing as a front man, that makes 2 front men, right? Well it can't be 4-2-3-1 when you have two players both on the pitch playing as forwards.

I honestly don't care if we play 4-2-3-1 if it suits the players (as it did with Styche as lone forward/spearhead), but here's the thing, you don't shoehorn players into a formation if they don't fit - you arrange the formation to suit the players at your disposal. This is why we are currently playing 4-4-2.
No O'Neill today - so wonder what formation we will play, and if we can agree what it is.

Ghost_Of_1883
Posts: 526
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Ghost_Of_1883 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:30 am

No O'Neill, great, just great.

An afternoon of tippy tappy, outside the box, no penetration, no cutting edge, frustation ahead.

Coupled with the customary goal or two on a plate for the opposition makes this a guaranteed home defeat.

Formation will obviously be 4-2-3-1 with Campbell lone striker, Thompson CAM and Donowa on the wings with Rivers, there's literally no one else we can play is there?

Suppose Liddle and Atkinson are still out as well, just to completely fuck us up?

If we get anything out of this it'll be a miracle - this is where AA can prove his genius.
We are Darlo! We know our shitt! If we say it's 1-2-0-1-1-3-0-1-1 then you better believe it! La la la oo, la la la oo (clap, clap, clap, clap)

darlobaz791
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Mar 29, 2019 7:32 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by darlobaz791 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:40 am

Heard Hedley picked up a knock on Thursday too.
4-3-3

Elliot
Holness
Watson
Laing
Galbraith
Wheatley
Bascome
Hatfield
Thompson
Rivers
Campbell

Subs: Holliday, Morrison, Donawa Anyone else?!?

jjljks
Posts: 1530
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2015 10:25 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by jjljks » Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:55 am

darlobaz791 wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 7:40 am
Heard Hedley picked up a knock on Thursday too.
4-3-3

Elliot
Holness
Watson
Laing
Galbraith
Wheatley
Bascome
Hatfield
Thompson
Rivers
Campbell

Subs: Holliday, Morrison, Donawa Anyone else?!?
Well there is always Burn....🤣🤨

User avatar
Quaker85
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:38 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Quaker85 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 8:31 am

They've just signed a new striker - Kyle McFarlane who was at Birmingham :?

User avatar
don'tbuythesun
Posts: 1629
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 12:24 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by don'tbuythesun » Sat Sep 14, 2019 9:12 am

Perhaps try Burn up front?!

Emdubya
Posts: 702
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2015 9:31 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Emdubya » Sat Sep 14, 2019 9:27 am

Could be time to see what young Bell is made of.Plenty of pace and knows where the goal is.Desperate times.

JE93
Posts: 1241
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2009 2:48 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by JE93 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 10:08 am

We really cant catch a break. Liddle having a fitness test pre game but cant help but think by rushing him in we might do him more harm than good. Assuming he isn't fit.

Cant decide what is best do we pack the CM position as suggested above. Or do we stick with something we have probably had more training and put Thompson back in behind Campbell and bring Donawa straight into the team. I'd go for one of the following.

4-5-1:

----------------------------- Elliott -----------------------------
Holness ----- Laing ------ Galbraith --- Watson
--------- Wheatley - Hatfield - Bascombe --------
Rivers ---------------------------------------- Thompson
------------------------- Campbell ---------------------------

Or

4-2-3-1:

----------------------------- Elliott -----------------------------
Holness ----- Laing ------ Galbraith --- Watson
----------------- Wheatley - Hatfield -------------------
Rivers ------------ Thompson ------------ Donawa
------------------------- Campbell ---------------------------

User avatar
theoriginalfatcat
Posts: 3953
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 7:40 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by theoriginalfatcat » Sat Sep 14, 2019 10:46 am

After watching York last week I was optimistic about this game, but on reflection, we haven’t got Southport’s big beast defenders and who’s going to score our goals?

A good all round team performance is a must today.
Mr Singh said this " I'm not expecting to get back any of the money I've already put in, I'm prepared to write it off for the future of the club. I'm not hanging in to make any kind of financial gain in the short or long term - if someone was prepared to come in and take the club off my hands, I'd be more than willing to discuss it"

Tamworth matchday programme 26 Nov 2011

Ghost_Of_1883
Posts: 526
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:33 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Ghost_Of_1883 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 11:02 am

theoriginalfatcat wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 10:46 am
A good all round team performance is a must today.
No, points are a must - minimum of 1 required.

A good performance and defeat does not bring fans back because stayaways look at the results only and league position only. Unfortunately there is no column in the table for "good performance"

I'd take the shittest, wankest, luckiest performance that I've ever seen today if it comes with 3 points.
We are Darlo! We know our shitt! If we say it's 1-2-0-1-1-3-0-1-1 then you better believe it! La la la oo, la la la oo (clap, clap, clap, clap)

User avatar
Quaker85
Posts: 303
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2018 7:38 am
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Quaker85 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 11:26 am

Ghost_Of_1883 wrote:
theoriginalfatcat wrote:
Sat Sep 14, 2019 10:46 am
A good all round team performance is a must today.
No, points are a must - minimum of 1 required.

A good performance and defeat does not bring fans back because stayaways look at the results only and league position only. Unfortunately there is no column in the table for "good performance"

I'd take the shittest, wankest, luckiest performance that I've ever seen today if it comes with 3 points.
So would I but I can’t see it happening. Everyone is going to work their bollocks off and we need 7 or 8 to be on the top of their game to get a result today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Darlo_Pete
Posts: 12002
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2009 10:13 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by Darlo_Pete » Sat Sep 14, 2019 12:07 pm

Obviously not many people have faith in us winning, as of 14 predictions, only 2 of us have gone for a home win!!

H1987
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by H1987 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 1:52 pm

I’d bite your hand off for a draw today.

Formation might be 4-3-3 I think.

H1987
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by H1987 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:32 pm

That decision to let Heaton go isn't looking great right now. Honestly, i expected us to lose this one, but losing a player we now have no cover for really compounds it.

tdk1
Posts: 1995
Joined: Wed Jul 22, 2009 6:21 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by tdk1 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:39 pm

We didn't decide to let him go, we just didn't have him on a contract.

This run of injuries has been absolutely ludicrous.

H1987
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by H1987 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:45 pm

No, but I doubt he was agitating to go, unless he was told he wasn't going to play. The amount of injuries is ridiculous though. We'd have had to play a bunch of 15 year olds last year if this happened.

0-2 now, game over.

H1987
Posts: 1211
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2016 4:14 pm
Team Supported: Darlington

Re: Darlo v York

Post by H1987 » Sat Sep 14, 2019 3:49 pm

No shame in losing this one, it sounds like we've competed, and I suspect they're going to coast the league this year.

However, the league situation doesn't look great from losing all those games away that we should not have been losing. Games like this matter less when you're picking up the points you should elsewhere. The injuries are killing us though. I really hope Liddle hasn't been rushed back.

Trotman, Liddle, Atkinson, Holmes, O'Neill and now Laing. FFS. They're all starters as well. Hopefully Liddle can be removed from that list, but it concerns me that he was only on the bench. Makes me think he wasn't ready at all, and had to be put on out of desperation. I hope i'm wrong.

Post Reply