BWFC Goals for 39 Goals against 74

For a team supposedly built on defence, we were pretty crap at defending this season having shipped a whopping 74 goals with only 2 teams doing worse.

All the chat seemed to have focused on why we didn't score enough at the other end with the sale of Madine and the manager's defensive approach being the main scapegoats. There is a particular irony about the latter as on the few occasions we did play with more attacking intent, we did better for the most part - and conversely there were very few occasions when we conceded from attacking positions, so obviously the manager's approach seems illogical to many Wanderers fans and that's been behind the calls for change.

Sure we need more goals (as there were only 2 teams scored less than us) but isn't there an even bigger, or at least as important question over the defence?

So whilst we might all agree that we need to improve for next season, and working on the assumption that we won't be getting a significant change to our finances (for now at least) what change would in your opinion have the most impact? New attacker, new defender or new manager (same players but different approach)?

I had high hopes that the defence would be solid this season but Beevers was a big disappointment for me. Parky never played Wheater and Burke together as far as i can remember. None of them were particularly great but the constant switching of full backs and bringing Dervite back from the dead on a couple of occasions was strange to say the least.
I would say we definitely need better centre backs for a start and that then goes through the spine of the team. We need more dynamic centre midfielders and strikers. Not much to ask is it? 

wanderlust wrote:For a team supposedly built on defence, we were pretty crap at defending this season having shipped a whopping 74 goals with only 2 teams doing worse.

All the chat seemed to have focused on why we didn't score enough at the other end with the sale of Madine and the manager's defensive approach being the main scapegoats. There is a particular irony about the latter as on the few occasions we did play with more attacking intent, we did better for the most part - and conversely there were very few occasions when we conceded from attacking positions, so obviously the manager's approach seems illogical to many Wanderers fans and that's been behind the calls for change.

Sure we need more goals (as there were only 2 teams scored less than us) but isn't there an even bigger, or at least as important question over the defence?

So whilst we might all agree that we need to improve for next season, and working on the assumption that we won't be getting a significant change to our finances (for now at least) what change would in your opinion have the most impact? New attacker, new defender or new manager (same players but different approach)?

We scored just 4 goals and conceded 22 in our first eleven matches whilst we hadn't got a defensive midfielder in place or was getting up to speed.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

We also only scored 5 and let in 15 in our last six matches when I strongly suspect contract clauses limited player availability for games.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

For the remaining twenty-nine games of what might be considered our 'normal' season we scored 30 goals and conceded 37 which would have placed us in midtable in the league (13th position).

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


So what point are you trying to make as both the defence and attack were clearly good enough for the majority of the season and certainly factors outside our control (the stricter embargo coming in at the start of the season through to game 9, and the probable contract clauses effecting team selections for at least the last six or more games of the season) leading to the disastrous start and end to our fixtures for the season?