Formation too rigid

[runningaround]

4 hours ago, vulva said:

Do the same thing over and over again, and expect different results, madness etc etc. 

 

Anyway, why not use the international break to try and perfect a different formation?

 

Presuming everyone is fit, 3 at the back. We've got natural wing backs in Reach and Hunt, and a 3rd centre half who naturally can push forward into midfield. 

 

Westwood

 

Reach

 

Lees

Hutchinson

Loovens

 

Hunt

 

Bannan

Jones

Wallace

 

FF

Rhodes

 

 

Finally, someone speaking sense. It is like we play with the shackles of pressure upon us. He needs to let the opposition worry about our strengths. Attack is the best form of defence 

[torres]

If anything I think we over complicate matters. The full backs are usually our most forward players and in a 442 this is a nightmare when we need to win it back. 

 

Plus the full backs are not really world beaters so when they are our outlet we are in trouble 

 

The midfield are all over the place leaving us looking open and lack fluidity going forward 

 

Plus whoever thinks Winnall is a link man between midfield and attack wants locking up 

[Walt]

3 hours ago, vulva said:

3 at the back is different to a back 5. At home, Hutchinson has been dropping in, but the issue is that the fullbacks havnt been pushing on. As a result, we have been playing a back 5 against teams with 10 men behind the ball. That equals both stalemate and awful football. 

I thought the full backs last season were to the key to how well we played as they were high up the pitch. I'm convinced the opposition have turned the tables on us and made them our weakness this time around. People say the opposition sit deep against us, save for two or three teams I don't believe that to be the case. IMO they either press our fullbacks or set little traps where they nick the ball off our full back (usually on the half way line) as he doesn't have any options in front to pick out, especially down the line as our "wingers" are playing narrow. It's also noticeable just how much joy the opposition get from dropping long diagonal balls in behind our fullbacks.

[shezzas left peg]

7 hours ago, vulva said:

Do the same thing over and over again, and expect different results, madness etc etc. 

 

Anyway, why not use the international break to try and perfect a different formation?

 

Presuming everyone is fit, 3 at the back. We've got natural wing backs in Reach and Hunt, and a 3rd centre half who naturally can push forward into midfield. 

 

Westwood

 

Reach

 

Lees

Hutchinson

Loovens

 

Hunt

 

Bannan

Jones

Wallace

 

FF

Rhodes

 

 

I've been saying and wanting us to try  this all season a more modern up to date formation that is flexible. 

[onlyonedavidhirst]

I wonder what side we should play if we were in the Premiership now and had all current players fit and available (including loans out coming back and current loanees stopping.  I'd play

 

Westwood

Hunt

Lees

Loovens

Fox

 

Hutch

Lee

Abdi

 

Fessi

Joao

McManaman

 

I actually think this is a modern formation that allows us to press far more, which I think is key to us playing well.  It's similar to the side we played against Arsenal at home and I think it suits our players and most of the squad easily slot in (e.g.: Wallace could swap for Abdi or McManamam, Reach for Fox or Abdi, Jones for Hutch, Fletch or Hooper for Joao). I'm not sure how well Rhodes fits into it but other than that I'd be more confident with that than any other formation. That said I don't think it would work right now which is the more pressing need. So for me we need to find a way to close the gap between the strikers and midfield or change our style. Firstly, I'd take Fletch to one side and talk to him about the player we saw in the first few games and the one that has been successful in the Premiership. I'd then tell him he's got 4 games in the team with Rhodes and play the pair of em up top with Fessi and McManaman wide. I'd play Hutch and Reach central (Abdi if fit) and our standard back 4. If Hooper is fit then that changes things  as I'd try him with Rhodes but we need to get a supply to Rhodes and he needs a partner who will chip in as well.  Winnall has looked at his best as an impact sub and we also have Wallace and Buckley who could slot in.  To me, high pressing (which also gets the crowd going), starting the game on the front foot and less worrying about the opposition is crucial. 

[Orlando_Trustful]

One thing that has become strangely evident this season is how much of the ball our centre backs and full backs see. Nearly every attack Lees and Loovens have umpteen touches each, and quite often begin our attacks, despite neither being great with the ball. Loovens misplaced about 5 passes in the first half on Friday. 

 

Then when we get into the opponents half our wingers come inside making it very narrow in the middle, and our full backs become wingers. That puts so much emphasis on the full backs in an attacking sense, none of whom are good at doing so. Therefore we end up going backwards and continuing the sequence from Lees and Loovens again. 

 

It all seems a bit of a mess. There were some attacks on Friday when we had Winnall, Reach, Buckley and Rhodes all vying some the same sort of space in the final third. 

[Philster]

9 hours ago, Justbeanz said:

Said it in various threads but to me Bannan has to fill up the hole behind Rhodes and Winnall to link them up to play off each other.Sits too deep or wide too often.

 

Fnarr ooyahh kyuk arf.

[Swiss Toni]

12 hours ago, vulva said:

Agree with that. Our fullbacks aren't good enough to play fullback, but they are good enough to play wingback. 

 

The whole ole tempo of our play is dictated by Loovens. Good player, but plays every game like a testimonial. 

If true that's where we are going wrong. No play should be dictated by a CB especially as we have players like Jones, Bannan and Abdi to pull the strings.

[SiJ]

Thing is...formations are important and all, but ultimately they mean very little when we are playing such a passive brand of football (for large parts of the season). 

 

Lack of tempo, lack of pressing has been the major change from last season. It has become far, far too easy for away sides to play at S6 this season. 

 

Funnily enough our one great home display (Norwich obviously) marked the return of a higher tempo and pressing. 

[SallyCinnamon]

2 hours ago, SiJ said:

Thing is...formations are important and all, but ultimately they mean very little when we are playing such a passive brand of football (for large parts of the season). 

 

Lack of tempo, lack of pressing has been the major change from last season. It has become far, far too easy for away sides to play at S6 this season. 

 

Funnily enough our one great home display (Norwich obviously) marked the return of a higher tempo and pressing. 

 

Norwich sat off us. We play better against teams who sit off us and allow us to play. Fortunately for us Norwich are still in the Premier League mentality of football and that's why we looked better. 

 

Other teams have simply sussed us out- we have no plan b.

[SiJ]

1 minute ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

Norwich sat off us. We play better against teams who sit off us and allow us to play. Fortunately for us Norwich are still in the Premier League mentality of football and that's why we looked better. 

 

Other teams have simply sussed us out- we have no plan b.

True....plus Norwich played a 4-4-1-1 formation so pretty much went like for like. 

 

The one team we've faced recently who did not have an extra central midfielder. 

[Owls2k]

11 hours ago, SiJ said:

Only Wednesday could have a continental coach who sticks rigidly to a 4-4-2 formation (albeit with a bit of 3-5-2 thrown in there for sh*ts and giggles) 

 

If you want to get the better of us then just play with 3 in central midfield. You'll overpower us and we will get hopelessly overrun, particularly with the current combination of Jones and Bannan. 

We did start playing as a 4-3-3 under Carlos but he very quickly changed that, I wonder why. It was one of the main reason we brought in Matias.

 

Edited March 19, 2017 by Owls2k

[Southie_Owl]

I've said before that I feel if a different manager came into the club I don't believe he would review the squad and think 442 is the obvious formation. A team of players in a 4231 or 433 looks better to me, as I feel we have players who are better operating in the centre of the pitch than out wide. But Carlos believes 442 is the only formation that works, which i find frustrating 

 

Westwood

 

Hunt

Lees

Loovens 

Fox

 

Hutchinson

Bannan

 

McManaman 

Abdi

Forestieri 

 

Rhodes

 

Or...

 

Westwood

 

Hunt 

Lees

Loovens

Fox

 

Abdi

Hutchinson

Bannan

 

Mcmanaman 

Rhodes

Forestieri 

 

(i realise players like Abdi and FF are injured but the above players had been available at the same time during this season) 

Edited March 20, 2017 by Southie_Owl

[pazowl55]

Think our play will change when Hooper comes back in.

Very good at bridging the gap between midfield and attack, often goes unnoticed.

[Walt]

1 hour ago, Southie_Owl said:

I've said before that I feel if a different manager came into the club I don't believe he would review the squad and think 442 is the obvious formation. A team of players in a 4231 or 433 looks better to me, as I feel we have players who are better operating in the centre of the pitch than out wide. But Carlos believes 442 is the only formation that works, which i find frustrating 

 

Westwood

 

Hunt

Lees

Loovens 

Fox

 

Hutchinson

Bannan

 

McManaman 

Abdi

Forestieri 

 

Rhodes

 

Or...

 

Westwood

 

Hunt 

Lees

Loovens

Fox

 

Abdi

Hutchinson

Bannan

 

Mcmanaman 

Rhodes

Forestieri 

 

(i realise players like Abdi and FF are injured but the above players had been available at the same time during this season) 

Couldn't agree more. The players we have suit those formations down to the ground. I can't believe CC hasn't given it a go when we had most of them fit, it just seems so obvious to me (I think he tried something like a 433 against Barnsley but not with those players). Everyone in their natural position, round pegs and all that...The only issue I would have is the one up front. Could Rhodes play that role? That's why I'd have been busting a gonad to sign an athletic striker with genuine blistering pace instead of maybe Rhodes.

[saf]

On 19/03/2017 at 07:56, vulva said:

Agree with that. Our fullbacks aren't good enough to play fullback, but they are good enough to play wingback. 

 

The whole ole tempo of our play is dictated by Loovens. Good player, but plays every game like a testimonial. 

Completely agree with the comment about loovens. As dodgy a defender as Sasso is, he did carry the ball with purpose out of defence.

 

Never thought I'd say it, never mind type it, but think we missed Sasso vs Reading. I wonder whether he could play Hutchinson's role (whilst he's out) in front of the back two, where he could go forward and his dodgy defending wouldn't be costly. 

[brian joicey]

On 19/03/2017 at 07:50, vulva said:

Do the same thing over and over again, and expect different results, madness etc etc. 

 

Anyway, why not use the international break to try and perfect a different formation?

 

Presuming everyone is fit, 3 at the back. We've got natural wing backs in Reach and Hunt, and a 3rd centre half who naturally can push forward into midfield. 

 

Westwood

 

Reach

 

Lees

Hutchinson

Loovens

 

Hunt

 

Bannan

Jones

Wallace

 

FF

Rhodes

 

 

if he ain't spotted it after 38 matches what's the chances now ???? even though it's obvious to a blind man  

[Southie_Owl]

16 minutes ago, Walt said:

Couldn't agree more. The players we have suit those formations down to the ground. I can't believe CC hasn't given it a go when we had most of them fit, it just seems so obvious to me (I think he tried something like a 433 against Barnsley but not with those players). Everyone in their natural position, round pegs and all that...The only issue I would have is the one up front. Could Rhodes play that role? That's why I'd have been busting a gonad to sign an athletic striker with genuine blistering pace instead of maybe Rhodes.

 

Yep I love Carlos but it baffles me why we haven't tried a different formation than 442. The football world has evolved into playing 4231 as the formation of choice. And Liverpool & Southampton show that 433 can work well too. 

 

I do appreciate that Rhodes may not be best as a lone striker but he certainly has the finishing ability to be a lone striker, with 3 players just behind him creating the chances. When I watch teams that play 4231 when they are attacking it often ends up with 4 players up front anyway. With the two holding midfielders staying outside the box to break up opposition attacks 

Edited March 20, 2017 by Southie_Owl

[SiJ]

11 hours ago, Owls2k said:

We did start playing as a 4-3-3 under Carlos but he very quickly changed that, I wonder why. It was one of the main reason we brought in Matias.

 

Good point. 

 

If memory serves me correct in the game against Bristol City we went with a three of Hutch, Lopez and McGugan and a front three of Adthe, Wallace and Matias...

 

Arsenal game it was Hutch, Lee, Bannan and then a front three of Joao, Helan and Wallace. 

 

Honestly think it would make sense to switch back to such a set up (assuming everyone is fit and available).

[oldishowl]

I like Carlos but the big failing is that we don't have a style of play which we stick with and recruit players to fit the system

This is why we have ended up with a lack of balance in the squad.

 

We don't have midfielders that fit 442 and we don't have strikers that really suit 433. I have to say I thought we had brought Fletcher in to play a lone striker role in a 433 this season. He had played that role in the Premier League and I am sure it would have helped us. However we didn't and Fletcher , after a bright start with us, has fallen away .

 

All the other teams in the top 6 have a fixed way of playing . They don't change it whoever the opposition , whether home or away. Newcastle play a lone striker, Brighton play 442 , Leeds lone striker etc. 

 

It might look like we play 442 all the time but we tinker with the approach. We analyse the opposition to death, Carlos said he had watched Readings previous 10 games on video, and tinker with our approach accordingly. Some of this is needed but not to the extent we do it.

 

Each game is an experiment for us, an exercise in coaching which the players are asked to implement on the pitch. The problem is players are being asked to do slightly different things all the time .

Sometimes this works like Huddersfield and Newcastle where we beat them with tactics but generally it looks like we are starting afresh each game. This is why we are so inconsistent. A new plan every game.

 

We analyse the opposition and try and set up to beat them, Carlos says this in most interviews,   when what we should be doing is setting up our way, improving continually the way we play , getting rid of our weaknesses and playing to our strengths , improving as the season goes on.