Every time former Lincoln City man Jack Moylan scores for Cardiff, it is natural to wonder what we have lost.
His latest brace highlights how he was ready for the step up to the Championship. Still, I think the regularly asked question of whether we have replaced him overlooks something fundamental about how we now play.
We have moved from (predominantly) a 4-2-3-1 to a 3-4-3. Broadly speaking, the two wide(r) attacking positions remain, along with the centre-forward and two central midfielders, but the number ten disappears. The extra player goes into the back line, giving us three centre-backs and wing-backs on either side. It’s the formation we played against Peterborough last season, when we won 5-2, and Jack was missing. If I recall, we also played it against Huddersfield the game prior, with Jack coming off the bench.
That changes the discussion around replacements considerably. We have removed the position that would most obviously accommodate an attacking midfielder, so looking for someone to inherit a specific ‘Moylan role’ might be looking for a vacancy that no longer exists. The attacking contribution still needs to be replaced during a change, but it has to come through different positions and combinations.
We certainly seem to struggle to replicate some of the qualities Moylan possessed. He could take possession, run at defenders and turn an ordinary moment into something dangerous, particularly when we won the ball with opponents out of position. Removing the ten from the formation does not remove our need for that directness and invention.
For me, that is where the scrutiny should fall, and in interviews of late, Chris and Tom have intimated as much. We can organise ourselves effectively, limit dangerous spaces and win possession, but there has to be a threat attached to those recoveries, be it on the break, or by penning teams in. I think a lot of Jack’s good moments came when we wanted to move forward quickly, something we haven’t done as effectively this season. Otherwise, the platform we have worked to establish does not produce enough at the other end. Caveat: we’re up against significantly better footballers.
There also seems to be an assumption that we are barely creating an attacking threat, or that we’re much less effective than last season, which the numbers do not support. Last season, we averaged 1.72 xG and 12 shots per game in League One. Across this season’s admittedly small sample, those figures stand at 1.55 xG and 11 shots. That is a modest reduction against significantly stronger opposition, yet some of the discussion makes it sound as though our attacking output has disappeared. Moylan was important, but we should be careful about retrospectively presenting him as the catalyst for an unstoppable attacking force.
There is no Port Vale, Exeter or Northampton on the fixture list this season, and some drop in attacking output was always likely given the step up, so to see such a small drop in the moments leading up to the final action is encouraging. We can want quicker transitions and more goals while recognising that we are still creating chances. The figures suggest we have retained much of our attacking intent in considerably more demanding circumstances.
It is tempting to see an additional centre-back and conclude we have simply become more defensive. I think that misses the purpose of the adjustment: containing much livelier attacks, with players worth significantly more than our entire starting XI, while retaining the ability to spring forward ourselves. Whether we are executing that well enough is a separate, legitimate question.
A 3-4-3 gives us three attacking players, with wing-backs capable of joining them. For me, making it work better means moving the ball forward quickly enough for those players to receive it before the opposition settles. The speed and connection between defence, midfield and attack become crucial. That does not mean launching every recovery towards the forwards. It means recognising opportunities earlier, finding the first forward pass and having runners available to support it. Those are collective responsibilities, rather than something we can leave to one gifted player.
The summer arrivals should be assessed within that framework. Mason Melia’s injury has restricted our opportunity to judge what he can contribute, and it would be unfair to write him off already. Equally, expecting him to become Moylan risks measuring him against a job the current formation does not explicitly contain.
Chiedozie Ogbene’s pace and directness offer another possible route towards improving those transitions. His contribution need not mirror Moylan’s to be useful, provided it helps us turn possession regained into opportunities. The same applies to the wing-backs, with Tendayi Darikwa’s absence another consideration when assessing our attacking options. It’s no secret that Sacey West Patreon-sponsored Dom Jefferies isn’t as dynamic in that wide role as Darikwa, but maybe the solution will come in the form of Daniel Oyegoke as he settles.
We also need to accept the scale of the change in opposition. We cannot expect to play exactly as we did during a 103-point League One season against much better teams and players. Adjusting to that reality is sensible; the challenge is ensuring the adjustment gives us enough attacking threat. Think back to Chelsea at home in the cup. That offered the closest comparison to the sort of league fixtures we are facing now, and we went with a 5-3-2. Moylan was injured, but my feeling is that he probably would not have started in that setup anyway.
That illustrates why this goes beyond one departure. Even with Moylan still at the club, we were prepared to alter the shape to meet a particular challenge. Now that challenge arrives regularly, and the balance between containing opponents and hurting them has become a weekly concern.
I think we have changed accordingly, and asking who replaces Moylan in a formation without a ten takes us towards the wrong answer. Would we have still been 4-2-3-1 had he stayed? That’s not the point either. He didn’t: remember, he wanted to leave; we didn’t go out to try to sell Jack. Things have changed, and while we can miss his talent, it is important to recognise that we do not need a direct replacement for his old role.
The question now is how we make the 3-4-3 work better, particularly in getting from back to front quickly enough to threaten Championship defences.
Comments Welcome!