Why Tom Cleverley should start his internal reflections closer to home
While the ludicrous transfer mess steals the headlines, there's a tactical theme to early failings
Welcome to another One Team In Devon, where things have started, predictably and tiringly, in atrocious fashion.
I need to point you to my pre-season newsletter, where I warned that this season could be a write-off. The premise was that it could feasibly take three windows (or more) to build a promotion-capable squad – and I still think that is the case.
And while it’s still early, I also didn’t think we’d look this far off.
Recruitment woes are well documented, and I think it’s only worth reflecting on that when the window closes. There’s time for the club to pull things around.
But all I’d say, at this stage, is that Plymouth hasn’t moved location. While location has always been a challenge, we’ve never struggled to attract quality players before, and we should be offering a realistic push towards Championship football. Something seems very wrong.
Tom Cleverley broke his diplomatic trend of saying whatever people want to hear to claim that internal reflections were needed, after coming away from the Toughshit Arena with barely a shot on target.
But in this newsletter, I argue that while Cleverley faces the significant challenges of a long injury list and slow recruitment to date, he is also tying one arm behind his own back tactically.
Square pegs, round holes
The assessment that we played well in the opening 20 minutes was undermined by the fact that we rarely looked threatening, and there appears to be no coherent plan to create quality chances and score.
While Cleverley bemoaned squad quality (despite talking it up through pre-season), structurally the team feels ludicrously unbalanced, and some answers seem to be available.
Makeshift full-backs, a diminutive front four, and players out of position just make for a squad that feels wrong. We seem to operate as a back six with two sitting midfielders that rarely venture forward, and a front four that in turn feels outnumbered.
While I appreciate the lack of a proven number nine (plus, in my opinion, at least two more positions) – I have to question how effective this unicorn signing would be in a system that has so many obvious flaws.
Palsson is provably unsuited in a four, and there’s clear evidence of it from last season. Szucs, playing on the left of the two CBs for whatever reason, also looks unnatural. Galloway, who has been a solid LB cover historically, is keeping Mumba out of the game, lacks pace against speedy wingers, and loses his headers.
Granted, we have McKenzie out and should have signed a replacement loan CB, but it seems obvious to play these in a back three – possibly with Wiredu stepping out with the ball, and free wing-backs to join our attack.
The next piece of the puzzle solved by a back three is Mumba. I can’t recall Mumba putting in a quality LW performance for 90 minutes. He should return to LWB and provide a front three with added support. The middle two in a 3-4-3 can also complement the setup, with Ibrahim staying deep and Boateng, or indeed Benarous, advancing to provide fluidity, in something that approaches a front five or six in possession.
While this team needs time to gel, the data shows that Argyle is a 3-4-3 team. Schumacher and Muslic used this to great effect, while it has struggled under Schumacher in the Championship, Rooney, and now seemingly Cleverley. Perhaps the two or three incoming players can complete this 4-2-3-1 system, but it doesn’t seem right to me.
So, while there are clear flaws in what, at the moment, is a disastrous transfer window and mysterious injury crisis (why does everyone have bandaged wrists?!), the assessments of what needs to change should start closer to home.