Your 2 CMs

[Holmowl]

48 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

No matter how long I stare at our list of midfield options, I don't see a two who will dominate in this division. As others have said, plenty of combinations for a three though

 

But we played with a midfield 2 for the second half of the season and we dominated the league, because we were the form side over those 25 games.

 

And we had quite a variety of midfield two in that time.

 

Sometimes I think fans think we have to win 46 games. We only have to be one point or one goal better than the third best team to go up.

 

If we play 442 with two CMs over 46 games it gives us our very best chance of promotion. Who we put in those two shirts is important, but secondary.

[IstillhateSteveBould]

6 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

 

They would give us the most solidity, but would they get us up the field fast enough. Don't forget, our wingers are not as direct as those that Brighton employed. Even though, I've noticed in these friendlies, the wide players staying wide, which is encouraging, when the ball is played wide, it's generally been going back inside, and we work our way slowly up the pitch. At Brighton, the wingers get the ball and immediately motor forward

 

Haven't seen much of the friendlies, only the highlights. Is that what's happening?

 

I'd be stunned if Carlos goes for that. Especially with our selection of central midfielders. 

 

Outright wingers who stay wide, with Bannan/Lee central is a dangerous game to play imo. We'd concede a lot.

[S36 OWL]

4 hours ago, Holmowl said:

This was prompted by a brief exchange with studentowl on another thread.

 

Here are the "rules". No cheating!!!

 

• Assume we don't buy another CM before August 5th.
• You can't change Carlos's stated intention to play 442.
• Abdi, Bannan, Lee, Hutch, Jones all fighting-fit

 

Who do you want to see as our CM duo for our first few games?

 

I think this will be quite revealing and difficult. Perhaps there isn't a perfect partnership among them. So who do you pick?

 

He will shoehorn three of them into the 4-4-2 

[Holmowl]

1 hour ago, oldishowl said:

Fletcher played as a regular lone striker in the Premier League while at Sunderland.

I presumed his signing last season  along with Abdi meant we were going 433.

Shows what I know 

 

I agree Fletch is as close as we have to a lone-striker, but I'm far from convinced he is that good at it. Look at those games he plays with FF dropping deep. We are painfully unable to get the ball to stick up front.

 

 

[Holmowl]

Just now, S36 OWL said:

 

He will shoehorn three of them into the 4-4-2 

 

(Sound of buzzer buzzing) CHEAT!

[StudentOwl]

12 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

 

They would give us the most solidity, but would they get us up the field fast enough. Don't forget, our wingers are not as direct as those that Brighton employed. Even though, I've noticed in these friendlies, the wide players staying wide, which is encouraging, when the ball is played wide, it's generally been going back inside, and we work our way slowly up the pitch. At Brighton, the wingers get the ball and immediately motor forward

If you're seeing the friendlies live, then fair enough mate.

But I'd argue the highlights show the opposite... Reach's last goal for instance had right winger Boyd doing a dummy over the ball on the left hand side of the D outside the box. But if you're there, I'll 100% take your word for it. 

[gurujuan]

40 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

 

But we played with a midfield 2 for the second half of the season and we dominated the league, because we were the form side over those 25 games.

 

And we had quite a variety of midfield two in that time.

 

Sometimes I think fans think we have to win 46 games. We only have to be one point or one goal better than the third best team to go up.

 

If we play 442 with two CMs over 46 games it gives us our very best chance of promotion. Who we put in those two shirts is important, but secondary.

 

Yes, that's what Carlos hopes. I'm not totally convinced, but I do agree it was effective. In fact my only gripe with it last season, was the lack of entertainment For the most part, it was pretty dire

[gurujuan]

40 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

If you're seeing the friendlies live, then fair enough mate.

But I'd argue the highlights show the opposite... Reach's last goal for instance had right winger Boyd doing a dummy over the ball on the left hand side of the D outside the box. But if you're there, I'll 100% take your word for it. 

 

 

In that particular instance, yes. It wasn't always the wingers, which is why I referred to the wide players Often it was the full backs. My comments though were, that although we generally had players stationed wide, it didn't make us any more direct, as our first intention, was to play the ball back inside. As a tactic, it seemed as much about drawing the defenders out of the middle to create space, than any desire to use old fashioned wing play

[No 2 is r nilsson]

13 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

 

They would give us the most solidity, but would they get us up the field fast enough. Don't forget, our wingers are not as direct as those that Brighton employed. Even though, I've noticed in these friendlies, the wide players staying wide, which is encouraging, when the ball is played wide, it's generally been going back inside, and we work our way slowly up the pitch. At Brighton, the wingers get the ball and immediately motor forward

Totally agree, and Hutch stays very deep which doesn't help. I've picked these because I think he'll play 3 in front with JR or Fletch up front (4231). Like you say that 3 needs to be direct, and with pace. I think Hoops can play the central role (or Abdi, or even Winnal) with Boydy and Nando either side (or Wallace or Reach).  Brighton showed us how to do this last year and I agree a lot rests on the wide players to attack with purpose, and for the full backs to give us the width. 

[IstillhateSteveBould]

6 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

 

I agree Fletch is as close as we have to a lone-striker, but I'm far from convinced he is that good at it. Look at those games he plays with FF dropping deep. We are painfully unable to get the ball to stick up front.

 

 

 

But that's not the system. That's the "easy way out ball" up to Fletcher that we look to play because our build up is so slow and our players are static. 

 

We allow teams to get back into their shape, pass it about at the back, run out of options then chip it up to Fletcher. 

 

Happens everytime he (or Nuhiu) plays. 

 

If anyones to blame for that, it's Reach, Wallace, Bannan, Lee. They're the ones who are supposed to make angles for passes, get on the ball and make things happen.

[Holmowl]

Just now, IstillhateSteveBould said:

 

But that's not the system. That's the "easy way out ball" up to Fletcher that we look to play because our build up is so slow and our players are static. 

 

We allow teams to get back into their shape, pass it about at the back, run out of options then chip it up to Fletcher. 

 

Happens everytime he (or Nuhiu) plays. 

 

If anyones to blame for that, it's Reach, Wallace, Bannan, Lee. They're the ones who are supposed to make angles for passes, get on the ball and make things happen.

 

I hate the "chip it up" ball too. 

 

But, why is our record with two out and out strikers so good, and why do we score so few goals when we only play one out and out strikers?

 

Surely not having a Cameron Jerome type lone-striker has to be playing a part of that?

 

And we haven't got one, so how can we play that way successfully? Carlos has said 442, and given the squad we have, lone-striker would be even more awful to watch and produce even fewer goals.

[Mr. Chow]

Would like to see abdi get back to his best but bannan and hutch as long as they don't start all swapping positions whilst attacking. Keep hutch at def mid and bannan attacking 

[pazowl55]

Bannan and Lee will be the ones that get the most game time in centre midfield if all are fit. so I suppose that would make them the best two. 

 

[StudentOwl]

9 minutes ago, Animal said:

Would like to see abdi get back to his best but bannan and hutch as long as they don't start all swapping positions whilst attacking. Keep hutch at def mid and bannan attacking 

Bannan isn't that style of midfielder, he likes to come deep, always has done

 

[Holmowl]

5 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

Bannan isn't that style of midfielder, he likes to come deep, always has done

 

 

In his recent Star interview he did say he wanted to play higher up this season.

[StudentOwl]

2 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

 

In his recent Star interview he did say he wanted to play higher up this season.

Good for him

Still not his style of play

He's like Rooney, he likes to come deep and get the ball a lot. Nowt wrong with it, but if you play that way it's difficult to untrain yourself from it. If he can break the habit of a recent lifetime, fair play to him

[oldishowl]

27 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

 

I agree Fletch is as close as we have to a lone-striker, but I'm far from convinced he is that good at it. Look at those games he plays with FF dropping deep. We are painfully unable to get the ball to stick up front.

 

 

 

But that is different.

In a proper 433 the wide players are capable of getting up to support the striker and an attacking midfielder also makes runs. In scenario above nobody supports the striker.

We only tried to play 433 to start a game once last season . It was against Wigan at home, bizarrely.

I think Fletcher started, FF definitely played wide left and Abdi started.

It was a disaster because both wide players, FF and Wallace kept coming into the middle like our wide players normally do.

It got too crowded. Fletcher got no support and we made Abdi look rubbish.

I have to admit I was surprised by Carlos that day.

 

[IstillhateSteveBould]

14 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

 

I hate the "chip it up" ball too. 

 

But, why is our record with two out and out strikers so good, and why do we score so few goals when we only play one out and out strikers?

 

Surely not having a Cameron Jerome type lone-striker has to be playing a part of that?

 

And we haven't got one, so how can we play that way successfully? Carlos has said 442, and given the squad we have, lone-striker would be even more awful to watch and produce even fewer goals.

 

I don't get what you mean.

 

We always play with 2 strikers. Your personal definition of certain individuals may differ from Carlos', but they're all played as out and out strikers.

 

The system is the same regardless of personel. 

[Holmowl]

Just now, oldishowl said:

 

But that is different.

In a proper 433 the wide players are capable of getting up to support the striker and an attacking midfielder also makes runs. In scenario above nobody supports the striker.

We only tried to play 433 to start a game once last season . It was against Wigan at home, bizarrely.

I think Fletcher started, FF definitely played wide left and Abdi started.

It was a disaster because both wide players, FF and Wallace kept coming into the middle like our wide players normally do.

It got too crowded. Fletcher got no support and we made Abdi look rubbish.

I have to admit I was surprised by Carlos that day.

 

 

I saw that Wigan set-up as an out and out 451. Couldnt for the life of me understand why we went 451 for Wigan at home.

 

Whatever it was it was horrible.

 

I thought our only proper 433 start was away to Rotherham.

[oldishowl]

1 minute ago, Holmowl said:

 

I saw that Wigan set-up as an out and out 451. Couldnt for the life of me understand why we went 451 for Wigan at home.

 

Whatever it was it was horrible.

 

I thought our only proper 433 start was away to Rotherham.

 

That to me was not 433

We played 3 strikers but no wide players.

Rhodes and Fletcher played as a pair up front while Hooper played behind them . We didn't play any players wide , the 3 midfielders all played centrally. In modern speak we played a diamond