Nathan Craig

[Scott Brehaut]

Given that our new signing, Harding, and club legend Manse don't appear to have gelled very well (I know the season is young....), why do people think that Craig is, and was last season, overlooked constantly?

Juan, and Ling before him, seemed to not rate him and he hasn't made the bench yet this season. Does he have a bad attitude in training? Is he not as good as people seem to think?

It's an odd one. Does anybody "in the know" have any info?

[DTUFC]

Some of my mates claim he had a big fall-out with Ling in training, but I don't believe that - he doesn't seem the type.

I suppose managers might feel he's not solid enough defensively to be play CM in League Two; perhaps that's why Ling shoved him onto the wing.

[Colorado Gull]

No idea why he isn't playing, he's the best midfielder we have in the side and has been for a long time now. I have no clue why he isn't even on the bench, it's about time he had a chance!

[supergulls]

He never had a fall out with ling.

[AustrianAndyGull]

No idea why he isn't playing, he's the best midfielder we have in the side and has been for a long time now. I have no clue why he isn't even on the bench, it's about time he had a chance!

It is bizarre how he wasn't even on the bench Danny and he is one of our most creative midfielders and best distributors of the ball so it is weird. I think Harding should be given a chance before he is identified as the weak link though, I've seen him twice and i'm not totally convinced at the moment that he is what we need in the middle with Manse too but it's early days and all I can do is get behind Ben and offer him my support. Given time he may turn out to be the business but is there a non footballing reason why Craig is overlooked by Knill? I can't answer that i'm afraid.

[exiledgull]

I think this post has been answered in the 4 replies that we have seen.

If he did have a fall out with ling - possible bad attitude
If he didn't have a fall our with ling - not seen as good enough!

Change Ling to Knill, and he still isn't playing. He cannot be in a 2 man midfield as he is so lightweight. He would have to be in a 3 man midfield which would mean dropping one of the striker to accommodate him! We wasn't happy with 3 in midfield.

Harding was much better Saturday! And I think they will get better and better! Harding looks a big strong lad and good in the air if we had him and Mansel we would get overrun!

[Sunnysideup]

I think this post has been answered in the 4 replies that we have seen.

If he did have a fall out with ling - possible bad attitude
If he didn't have a fall our with ling - not seen as good enough!

Change Ling to Knill, and he still isn't playing. He cannot be in a 2 man midfield as he is so lightweight. He would have to be in a 3 man midfield which would mean dropping one of the striker to accommodate him! We wasn't happy with 3 in midfield.

Harding was much better Saturday! And I think they will get better and better! Harding looks a big strong lad and good in the air if we had him and Mansel we would get overrun!

There lies the problem with a 2 man centre midfield (as there are obviously pros and cons with all formations). Both CMs need to be able to win possession and break up opposition play, in addition to distributing the ball to the wingers (hopefully) and appearing in the opposition box and then tracking back.

The occasions I have seen Craig play (regardless of which position) he hasnt looked like he is going to win much possession nor does he appear to have the engine for 90 minutes box to box running.

The manager clearly sees the way ahead as having 2 CMs and 2 wingers so realistically there is nowhere to accomodate someone who can pick the odd pass but cant do the down and dirty work needed in the middle of the park. Im sure someone with the ability of a Russell would be lovely as he could put the ball onto a 9 inch square from 25 yards (well, perhaps a slight exageration) but he could also get the tackles in and win possession back off the opposition.

I have to say I like the look of the way the team is set up compared to the previous regime. We appear to have some useful pace now and will improve as the lads get more comfortable playing together.

[SteveDeckchair]

I've seen enough of him in glimpses to think that he'd be great with a prolonged run in the team and can't quite fathom why he's not at least on the bench.

Harding should come good, much as Saah started slowly in his first season.

I think the answer lies in Knill's preference for solidity down the middle and flair out wide. Craig doesn't fit that mould unfortunately.

[ferrarilover]

We'll lose him soon enough to a team who will use him sensibly then pick up three or four hundred grand for him.
I know NC isn't at Eunan's level yet, but all this old bollocks about not being able to do the ugly work didn't seem to affect us during our run to the playoff final with Manse and Eunan in a two man midfield. With the ability and pace of our wide men, we need someone who can pick a pass to find their clever runs. Add in Hawley and his ability to find space (already the best I've ever seen at L2 level. Opposition defenders simply haven't a clue where he is for the vast majority of the match) and we are wasting 80% of our attacking potential by playing two central midfielders who couldn't pick a pass to save their lives.
We aren't a big, physical team. We aren't going to bully and muscle others for 90 minutes a la Southend and Northampton. We need to do something different from that. Swindon and Gillingham have proven that it is possible to football your way out of L2. Equally, Stevenage and Shrewsbury have shown that being very good at one thing is also enough to see you promoted. Neither of the latter are especially good footballing sides, but Stevenage kill you with work rate and Shrewsbury kill you with sheer size and brute force. This isn't the Premier League, you don't have to be good at everything, you simply have to pick one thing and get good at that. We were hopeless going forward three years ago, but we were exceptional at the back, which is why we made the playoff final.
We need to sack this daft idea of trying to be both swift in attack and menacing in the middle and start focusing on one or the other. Either sign five 6'6" goliaths and sack off pretty football altogether, or give Craig a chance to show what he's got and start footballing teams to death.

Matt.

[cambgull]

Could not agree more, Matt. It's not as if it hasn't been done before. There are probably hundreds of teams who have had a playmaker and a midfield battler in the middle of the park. As you say, we've done it before not so long ago, even as close as Easton and Craig seemed to work. If we're going to play football the right way, we need someone who can create things in the middle. I saw it during the match against Oxford, the wingers would often have to beat their opposite number AND the full back as the pass from the middle is played to feet. With a creative man in the middle, one pass will bypass the opposition winger and it means they only have one to beat, not two. We also don't seem to play enough one-twos, when they are a fantastic way of getting past players without any need for dribbling.

[chunkygull]

totally agree with the last 2 posts. midfields traditionally have a grafter and a creative. having 2 workhorses is killing any chance of playing football. but then saying that a pro footballer whether just a workhorse or not should have enough in their locker to make a decent forward pass or a couple of one, two's.

i appreciate that many fear being over run in midfield but it would help if there was more emphasise on the basics, accurate passing, keeping the ball and not giving it away too cheaply.

if you do give it away then something like the barcelona 7 second rule is simple, yet very,very effective. the whole team just press the position where the ball is , make the areas of the pitch small and retrieve the ball. teams just dont have time to settle or pass. if the ball isnt back in 7 seconds the team retreat back into position and reassemble their shape. it works more often than not. there is no need to have 2 defensive minded midfielders.

this is another thing that reminds me of the basics you are told. if your team loses the ball you all have to get back and work hard to get the ball back.

it is typical of modern football however to be defensive minded, it is a results business and many coaches/managers are more worried about losing than trying to win, they dont trust their players enough or allow them to express themselves and truly use the creative talents they have. hence the various systems and tactics that shackle creativity.

defending starts by not giving the ball away, especially from the front men, but it would help if the forwards had decent playable balls passed up to them from the midfield. give them something to work with for christs sake. i cant see why we cant try something a bit different in midfield and at least give nathan craig a place on the bench to use if things arent working. do we really have to wait 10 games without changing anything.

i know we have won our last game but we wont always be able to have 1 bad half or give the other team a head start and get away with it. we still havent found our style yet i suspect and it wouldnt hurt to try something different, there seems to be many that are unconvinced mansell/harding works.

[Sunnysideup]

We'll lose him soon enough to a team who will use him sensibly then pick up three or four hundred grand for him.
I know NC isn't at Eunan's level yet, but all this old bollocks about not being able to do the ugly work didn't seem to affect us during our run to the playoff final with Manse and Eunan in a two man midfield.

Which run to the playoff final was that then?
If you mean the loss to Stevenage, you'll find it was usually Stanley (once signed) and Eunan in the middle for the run to the playoffs (although there were some "innovative" formations tried in that run).

You're also ignoring the fact that Eunan was more than capable of snatching the ball off opponents effectively, something that Craig (as far as i've seen so far) doesnt seem able to do.

[Sunnysideup]

Could not agree more, Matt. It's not as if it hasn't been done before. There are probably hundreds of teams who have had a playmaker and a midfield battler in the middle of the park.

The difference being, as a rule, that the "playmaker" (from OUR point of view recently Eunan, or Russell a bit earlier) is also capable of getting the ball back from the opposition. No one would class them as just workhorses or playmakers though.

As chunky says

but then saying that, a pro footballer, whether just a workhorse or not, should have enough in their locker to make a decent forward pass or a couple of one, two's

.

The opposite is also holds true, a "playmaker" should also be able to tackle and win the ball back.

[Jeff]

In the p/o final, wasn't it Lathrope and Stanley in the holding roles with Eunan in front of them? Generally when we played Eunan in a bona-fide Central Midfield position we struggled.

I recall on one occasion last season (Southend away) we went with Manse and Labadie as the holding midfielders, with Craig in front. Craig barely got a kick all game. Only one game I know, but if some are talking him up that much I'd expect to have seen more.

[SBP]

I think you will find that Stanley didnt play in the final.