Jump to content

Recommended Posts

As a former manager of our's once said, "players win games, not formations".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Footy is a simple game made difficult by the the so called experts on the telly,problems is too many believe in the testicles they speak.We look pretty strong at the back,three or four decent centre backs ,reasonable full backs.Everyone in front of them will be the judge as to where we finish this season.The manager showed at Boro he has a way of playing having worked out the opposition,doesn't always work but I think he will sort it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, DJMortimer said:

As a former manager of our's once said, "players win games, not formations".

 

Would probably have agreed with you if it wasn't for the fact the team across the city are playing Premier League football with Leon Clarke in there squad.

lol

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/10/2019 at 08:20, pazowl55 said:

4-5-1 for me. We haven't got two strikers good enough at the moment to play with two up front.

 

"Too many forwards" they said...

 

:duntmatter:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bobness said:

 

"Too many forwards" they said...

 

:duntmatter:

Had about 9 forwards. How did we end up Winnall and Rhodes fighting it out to be the second striker.

 

Forestieri can't come back quick enough and he ain't even a proper striker.

WTF:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The simple change Salzburg made of going into a diamond vs Liverpool completely turned the game so can made a difference at any level.

 

Conte picks his players based on his formation so Lukaku will thrive in a 3-4-3 and he knew it. We seem to just buy players then try to fit them in somehow or buy players with no natural position.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, pazowl55 said:

Couldn't agree more. Unless we get a proper partner up front for Fletcher then what is the point in it.

 

But we have played 2 strikers in our last two games anyway.

 

But because we have played 442 we have had nothing in midfield .

352 would at least give you 3 in central midfield with a chance to play a bit of football.

 

We have not played 433 in a league game under Monk so why is everybody dismissing 352 in favour of 433.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Harris will only thrive when we have a central midfield 3 ... Be that in a 433 or 352

 

His quietest games have been when we play just the 2 central midfielders with Harris and Reach being beside them ... Harris needs to be further forward with an earlier chance to isolate the full back and then give him the old shimmy which usually results in a dangerous cross into the box! :biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, erowl said:

Harris will only thrive when we have a central midfield 3 ... Be that in a 433 or 352

 

His quietest games have been when we play just the 2 central midfielders with Harris and Reach being beside them ... Harris needs to be further forward with an earlier chance to isolate the full back and then give him the old shimmy which usually results in a dangerous cross into the box! :biggrin:

Would Harris even play in a 3-5-2 system, he isn’t a wing back

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe not .. He can play in a 433 or even a 343 where the midfield 4 are Reach - Bannan - Luongo - Odubajo ... Reach has previously stated that he likes a sort of wing back role and Odubajo has played it before.

 

Then Harris and Forestieri could operate buzzing around Fletcher ... None of the strikers at the club (Fletcher apart) are cutting it

 

Borner - Lees - Iorfa as the back 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, oldishowl said:

 

But we have played 2 strikers in our last two games anyway.

 

But because we have played 442 we have had nothing in midfield .

352 would at least give you 3 in central midfield with a chance to play a bit of football.

 

We have not played 433 in a league game under Monk so why is everybody dismissing 352 in favour of 433.

 

We played 4-5-1. 

We do need an extra player in the middle of the park i would agree with that, but I wouldnt be getting rid of four at the back to do so. And especially not just to accommodate another striker who is no good. 

We had Gayle or someone like that then yep. do whatever we can to get two up front. But not with Winnall and Rhodes.

 

Be interesting to see what Monk does with Forestieri. Because he is 100% coming in as Fletcher's strike partner if Monk wants to continue with two strikers.

Edited by pazowl55

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pazowl55 said:

We played 4-5-1. 

We do need an extra player in the middle of the park i would agree with that, but I wouldnt be getting rid of four at the back to do so. And especially not just to accommodate another striker who is no good. 

We had Gayle or someone like that then yep. do whatever we can to get two up front. But not with Winnall and Rhodes.

 

Be interesting to see what Monk does with Foresteri. Because he is 100% coming in as Fletcher's strike partner if Monk wants to continue with two strikers.

 

We only played 451 against Fulham when Lee started .

The other 3 games we have played 442.

 

I don’t believe Monk will touch 352 so I am only really saying what I would do.

 

Guess this is because I am fed up with us being so hit and miss because for 3 years we haven’t had the balance in the squad to play 442 or 3 in the centre with a lone striker.

Successive managers have wrestled with the problem and not found a solution. Monk is just the latest.

 

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The side against Huddersfield was actually a bit of a hybrid formation Nominally, Reach was down as a strike partner for Fletcher, but didn’t really play there. He seemed to be playing behind Fletcher and providing a link with the midfield, sort of trying to play between the lines In my opinion, he isn’t clever enough to take on that role

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Folk on here will think I'm staunchly anti Barry Bannan, but that's really not the case at all.  However, the problem stems from BB not having the right options in front of him.  Put a quick Vardy, Gayle type forward up top, which forces the opposition defence to drop 5-10 yards, and BB gets more time, more space to advance into, or space for someone to occupy and receive a pass.  Put an athletic midfielder alongside him who will advance and move opposition midfielders around and same outcome.  He needs someone to play off, it used to be Hooper, who at times he linked superbly with.  That's the only time he gets into advanced positions. There was an example on Tuesday night where he played the ball in short and Winnall wanted it into the channel.  He wants the return pass, probably because it encourages a runner to give him a target. While ever he has this desire to go back and collect the ball off the back 4 we are struggling.

 

I'd agree with the 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1, 4-5-1 type formations, but without BB.  Have Hutch or JP as the holding midfielder, but the other two have to be capable of getting up and alongside the central striker.  It has to be that way otherwise the striker becomes isolated.  I've said this before, you need to engage with a 5th attacker, otherwise its too comfortable for the opposition.  Now we have wingers, I'd be loathed to see them trying to get to close to Fletcher as we lose our width.  We are pretty much set up to play 4-2-3-1/4-3-3/4-5-1.

 

                                          Westwood

 

                                    Iorfa           Borner     

               Odubajo                                           Palmer

 

                                        Hutchinson/JP

 

                               Lee                     Luongo

 

   Reach                                                                    Harris

                                           Fletcher

 

Just my opinion, but don't try and squeeze in a second striker if we are losing the midfield battle and don't squeeze in BB because the balance of the team isn't right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, spike1867 said:

Folk on here will think I'm staunchly anti Barry Bannan, but that's really not the case at all.  However, the problem stems from BB not having the right options in front of him.  Put a quick Vardy, Gayle type forward up top, which forces the opposition defence to drop 5-10 yards, and BB gets more time, more space to advance into, or space for someone to occupy and receive a pass.  Put an athletic midfielder alongside him who will advance and move opposition midfielders around and same outcome.  He needs someone to play off, it used to be Hooper, who at times he linked superbly with.  That's the only time he gets into advanced positions. There was an example on Tuesday night where he played the ball in short and Winnall wanted it into the channel.  He wants the return pass, probably because it encourages a runner to give him a target. While ever he has this desire to go back and collect the ball off the back 4 we are struggling.

 

I'd agree with the 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1, 4-5-1 type formations, but without BB.  Have Hutch or JP as the holding midfielder, but the other two have to be capable of getting up and alongside the central striker.  It has to be that way otherwise the striker becomes isolated.  I've said this before, you need to engage with a 5th attacker, otherwise its too comfortable for the opposition.  Now we have wingers, I'd be loathed to see them trying to get to close to Fletcher as we lose our width.  We are pretty much set up to play 4-2-3-1/4-3-3/4-5-1.

 

                                          Westwood

 

                                    Iorfa           Borner     

               Odubajo                                           Palmer

 

                                        Hutchinson/JP

 

                               Lee                     Luongo

 

   Reach                                                                    Harris

                                           Fletcher

 

Just my opinion, but don't try and squeeze in a second striker if we are losing the midfield battle and don't squeeze in BB because the balance of the team isn't right.

I’m with you regarding squeezing in a second striker, aside from the odd game, but I’m not sure that it’s Bannan who is the problem. The problem is Fletcher, or it is if he plays the lone striker role, flanked by out and out wingers. Most sides operating with one central striker, have a secondary striker operating in one of the wide positions. If not, then your lone striker needs to be prolific.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 02/10/2019 at 12:34, Holmowl said:

 

Not sure it works mate. Try putting the 11 names to it and problems start appearing  higher up the pitch.

 

I think in a 541 it looks ok-ish, but in a 532 the names just don’t work.

1 up, are we looking for enough points to stay up? 

get 'em attacked at home.

2 up with support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...