Case for the Defence: Can we plug the leaks?

By Albatross
October 20 2004

Another away game, another two goals conceded, another defeat. It was a depressingly similar result last night, although Pools may consider themselves more than a little unlucky - but we still need to improve results away from home.

While the defeat at Brentford was not unexpected, and Pools can consider themselves unfortunate not to have come away with a point if not all three, the problem remains that we have now lost all but one of our games away from Victoria Park and have now been beaten in our last six on the road. Our home form may be pretty good, but as things stand we are in mid-table and need to start getting some results on our travels if we are to climb the table.

Where does the problem lie then? Plenty of people would like to see us sign a new forward, and are quick to point out that we are not converting our chances - while others prefer to concentrate on our defensive record.

I'm one of those that believes that the "Goals Against" column is the important one. When you look at our record, you'll see that only one team in the division has conceded more goals than us - rock-bottom Stockport. When you look at the away games only, you discover that we are actually joint worst in terms of conceding. OK, so we have only scored eight times away from the Vic, but Tranmere have only scored six - and because of their sound defence, have still picked up two wins and three draws. If your defence is tight, you only need to score one goal to pick up the win - as Pools did to great effect in our promotion season, when the 1-0 away victories frequently weren't pretty but made a vital contribution to our tally.

Do we need to sign a defender then? Well, that's when things get a little more tricky for me. Yes it would be good to have a bit of extra competition across the back line, but the responsibility for stopping goals is shared by the team as a whole. We're looking vulnerable to crosses for example - so does the team need to work at forcing wide players inside, and providing extra protection for the full backs? Is the midfield doing it's defensive duties as well as they could be? Are the forwards making sure they close down the defenders, giving them less time to manuever the ball into position to launch an attack? In the early days of CT's reign, we improved our defence no end by signing Tinkler, as he sat in front of the defenders and helped break up attacks before they reached dangerous areas - at this level, where forwards are more likely to take their chances, it's even more vital to prevent the opposition creating goalscoring opportunities.

Part of Cooper's problem is that he is still missing a couple of key performers that would not only strengthen the defence but also allow us to be more flexible in terms of formation. Few would argue that Robertson is stronger defensively than Robson (who looks more like a midfielder); and Jack Ross was showing some promise on the right as well. Additionally, both would be comfortable as wing backs - possibly allowing Mickey Barron to move back into the position in the centre of the back three that he excelled in for so long, or giving Tinkler the opportunity to maximise his ability to read the game by dropping back into the sweeper role. Especially away from home this could give us the extra protection we need - particularly if we play Strachan as a holding midfielder. When we played this system effectively under Turner, we had Tinkler to hold, Stephenson to pull the strings, and Miller to get forward; could a combination of Strachan, Humphreys and Sweeney do the same?

For the moment though Cooper has to work with what he's got; and to add to his headaches, Nelson is now suspended for Saturday's game after picking up his fifth booking last night. Tinkler and Westwood at the back and Strachan into midfield looks the most likely bet - the question is, will we be able to stand firm at the back against Peterborough, a side that is averaging only just more than a goal a game? Here's hoping....