Striking set ups

[Lord Snooty]

 

Now I know, I know. This isn't going to flag up YOUR favourite partnerships per se.

But I'm interested to know as a collecting who we think are our best lone striker, partnerhip and triumvirate.

 

 

[Lord Snooty]

Fletcher obviously dominating the lone striker poll.

Surprised more people think Hooper a better lone target man than Joao. Always seen Hooper more of a link man myself.

All about opinions though.

 

Keep voting!

[shandypants]

I don’t think you can do the classic old school pairing. We don’t really have a Bannister, Varadi, Lineker, Cottee type player. 

[Pale Rider]

All these options here and elsewhere mean nothing when SB blows the sheet to the wind. 

[Lord Snooty]

50 minutes ago, shandypants said:

I don’t think you can do the classic old school pairing. We don’t really have a Bannister, Varadi, Lineker, Cottee type player. 

 

You see I'm not sure Bannister wasn't moved on too soon. 

Yes Chapman came in and became a great striker for us. 

But might they have worked as a pair? Classic big man little man.

I think that they might not that it matter now. 34 years later!

[Lord Snooty]

50 minutes ago, Pale Rider said:

All these options here and elsewhere mean nothing when SB blows the sheet to the wind. 

 

True.  I must admit I didn't realise when I started the polls that Bruce was about to swing the axe on the squad as early as tomorrow though!

 

Going to be some interesting decisions.

 

[TomtheOwl95]

Best three pronged attack is kind of open to interpretation. At the back end of last season Joao, Nuhiu and Forestieri put some decent form together playing in a three at times.

[Rev Owl]

I think we're going to have Rhodes next season because no one will buy him. I think with the likes of Aaron's and possibly Lazaar or that type of player they'll be more crosses for him. So I think it will be Fletcher plus one of Hooper or Rhodes if Hooper stays. Forestieri will have to play in midfield and lump it. If Hooper doesn't stay I think Winnall and Rhodes will fight it out to partner Fletcher. I don't think SB fancies João. Matias if he stays will be in midfield and Nuhiu if he stays will come on last 10 from time to time.

Not saying these are necessarily my preferred options but I think that's how it will go.

[Lord Snooty]

9 hours ago, Rev Owl said:

I think we're going to have Rhodes next season because no one will buy him. I think with the likes of Aaron's and possibly Lazaar or that type of player they'll be more crosses for him. So I think it will be Fletcher plus one of Hooper or Rhodes if Hooper stays. Forestieri will have to play in midfield and lump it. If Hooper doesn't stay I think Winnall and Rhodes will fight it out to partner Fletcher. I don't think SB fancies João. Matias if he stays will be in midfield and Nuhiu if he stays will come on last 10 from time to time.

Not saying these are necessarily my preferred options but I think that's how it will go.

 

He's got another year to run till summer 2020 so I think he might be around.

If he is made availble I don't see us picking up even a fraction of what we paid.

So it might be worth Bruce seeing if he can get something from him.

 

However; like so many of our strikers he does seem to work best in a traditional pairing and that raises the question as to be asked whether playing with a front two compromises our ability to compete in midfield , as we saw against Leeds this last weekend and so many times in Carvalhals reign...

[Rev Owl]

38 minutes ago, Lord Snooty said:

 

He's got another year to run till summer 2020 so I think he might be around.

If he is made availble I don't see us picking up even a fraction of what we paid.

So it might be worth Bruce seeing if he can get something from him.

 

However; like so many of our strikers he does seem to work best in a traditional pairing and that raises the question as to be asked whether playing with a front two compromises our ability to compete in midfield , as we saw against Leeds this last weekend and so many times in Carvalhals reign...

Well the current trend is for 433 so I'm not sure how that helps out with midfield? 352 helps midfield and allows a front two but requires exceptional wing backs.

Bruce seems to play 442.

I don't think the problem in midfield is the formation but rather the current personnel. 

We had no out ball against Leeds because there was no pace from Boyd and no effective overlapping from Fox.

Bannan huffs and puffs but can easily be out muscled.

Midfield is the place to sort out but it also relies on two good fullbacks.

I'd rather stay at home than go to Hillsborough and watch 451 regardless of who the one is.

Edited April 16, 2019 by Rev Owl

[Lord Snooty]

32 minutes ago, Rev Owl said:

Well the current trend is for 433 so I'm not sure how that helps out with midfield? ....

 

I think it's about not getting picked off in that central area. You can close down as quick as you like but 3-v-2 there's always an option for them to work around you. You can be chasing shadows like Lee and Hutchinson were in the play-off final. Or like we were at Leeds the other night.

 

 

 

Quote

... I'd rather stay at home than go to Hillsborough and watch 451 regardless of who the one is.

 

All depends.

If the wide players are joing in and making a second striker and you have the exra body from midfield bombing on then it's as attacking as anything else, IMO.

 

I mean is this..

 

 

or this

 

 

really any less 'attacking' and entertaining than this?

 

 

I don't think it is.

 

Ok, if we break it down to base level  1-striker = more negative than 2 strikers.  Yes.

But it's not that simple is it. It's intent as much as anything.

I just think that you can have as much intent as you want with 4-4-4 but if you lose that central midfield area you are having to work twice as hard to get the ball to provide service for that front two.

You can play 7 strikers. But if you don't have the ball you'll still not score more goals than the oposition.

 

The other thing of course is getting your players in the right areas of the pitch that suit them best isn't it.

Our play of season, IMO was ruined because of our insistance on trying to shoe horn all our names into the side, irrespective of whether they were in positions on the park which actuall suited those individuals and what they bring to the team.

 

On the face of it one up top might sound negative but in reality, I don't think it is.

 

Don't get me wrong. I love 4-4-2. and there's part of me that wishes that all teams still played it so that games were more open, that we saw more of those open end to end ding dongs of days gone past, with two wingers on either flank and a twin strike force in the middle. but  I fear those days have gone

 

 

 

[Rev Owl]

Gosh that's an in depth reply .

I always learn something from these sorts of posts. 

I do have to say though that the two formations that include both Fletcher and Hooper are what I want to see because, it's as you also rightly say, it's also about personnel. If I were Fletcher or Hooper I would want someone to share the responsibility with for putting the ball in the net. Perhaps it's my age but I think in terms of strike partners. 

Whatever happens though let's play more on the front foot, less passing round our own half, more wing play beating a man, getting to the bye line and putting in a cross. Old school ! 

[HOOTIE AND THE SHIT TU]

I went with 

 

Fletcher

Fletcher - Hooper

Fletcher - Hooper - Joao

 

I can't find a place for Forestierri, he's a shadow of his former self

 

And I can't help thinking that at some point the penny will drop with Joao, and he'll start being the player we all know he can be

[Rev Owl]

In fact if you are at Hillsborough and hear someone shouting 'Bye line, get to the bye line y'chuff' that'll be yours truly.

[Lord Snooty]

1 hour ago, Rev Owl said:

Perhaps it's my age but I think in terms of strike partners. 

 

 

Me too , and I think there is still something magical about seeing a pair of insync strikers working as a pair.  Varadi & Bannister, Chapman Varadi/Shutt, Hirst and Williams.

There's something to love about seeing that almost telephathic understanding that some players just seem to get. Esepcially up there at the top end of the pitch.

 

Of course, I'm a simple chap and that, it seems,  is football from a simpler time. Time I sometimes wish we could get back to...

 

 

Edited April 16, 2019 by Lord Snooty

[Utah Owl]

Best striking set ups?

 

Surely it's main body at the front gates and flying pickets covering the rest?

[gurujuan]

None are really what’s needed, but even if Bruce brings in someone to lead the line, we probably still need to keep at least 4 

Which 4, I don’t know, I suppose it depends on which ones are easier to sell. We lack pace, so for me, get rid of all the slower ones

[Dick_Turpin]

1 hour ago, Utah Owl said:

Best striking set ups?

 

Surely it's main body at the front gates and flying pickets covering the rest?

But where do you put the brazier?

[Utah Owl]

44 minutes ago, rickygoo said:

But where do you put the brazier?

Nev would be the expert on that!

[slinger208b]

20 hours ago, shandypants said:

I don’t think you can do the classic old school pairing. We don’t really have a Bannister, Varadi, Lineker, Cottee type player. 

 

Hoopers pretty close...