I just don't really see the point playing players out of position in a formation we never play and then saying "he can't step up", you don't learn anything useful. If he genuinely wanted to learn something about those players it would have made far more sense playing the same system the first team play as that's where they'd actually play if they ever are called upon to play in the firsts rather than that ridiculous 3 at the back that we don't actually play. When is Romeo going to play as a right sided centre back? He's not. When are Evans or Tanner likely to play as wing backs? They're not.
Evans is a good example of why last night was a little ridiculous for me. He's a winger who did ok in pre-season, why stick him in as a left wing back if you want to see if he can step up to the first team (where he would play as a left winger)? Surely it makes far more sense to stick him in as a left winger. If you want to see him take ownership of that role and test him defensively, stick a kid in at left back and have Evans help him through the game
Panzo as well, we've brought him in as one of our 3 main centre halves, why give him one of his few opportunities in a back 3 when we don't use one?
This would have made more sense to me and made Bulut's complains about who can step up more reasonable at least then they're in positions that actually correspond to how they'd play if they had to step up
Runnarson
Romeo Adams (if we must rest Gouts/McGuinness) Panzo Giles/Beecher
J.Colwill Rinomhota
Robinson R.Colwill Evans
Etete
There you have the system we actually play and players in positions they actually play with some of the younger players given responsibility. Go out and play well, no excuses. Instead we went with a bizarre formation we don't use, with square pegs in round holes.