Is this defence first style what we need to expect long term with Monk?

[gurujuan]

7 minutes ago, swfc-dan said:

You don't as Pigs and other teams have showed. It is much more common though agreed as teams prefer to play more shorter build up. I just really question whether our midfield has enough goals in them to make it work.

 

Happy with the results lately but I'm more looking at the performances and lack of chances created.

I think Brighton were the last side to have any sort of success, with a midfield two, and they soon ditched. United don’t do it now, and to be honest, they didn’t really when they were in the championship. Duffy was used more as a midfielder, until he was replaced by the Everton lad, who performed the same role It’s really difficult to play with a central two these days, so to play two up front, means no wingers

[full fathom five]

I'm still reserving judgement on Monk, so far about 50/50 with the good and bad. Given time i want to see a lot of these mistakes coached out of them and us have a plan b and c and definitely want to see us start to put two halves of football together instead of just 45 minutes then nothing. 

[Salmonbones]

3 minutes ago, asteener1867 said:

I'll take it as long as the results are up there.

Yep, it was pretty dull, but tbh..Ive never seen so many players on the deck in one game...half the time I couldn't see the reason, you just looked over and another one was down.

 

 

They went down very easy I thought, but on the other hand didn't they have three go off injured?   Maybe they are made of less stern stuff - they did like to give a challenge but not receive one all game.

[Avon barksdale]

At the start of the season I thought we’d be sh!t and mid table ,so to be sh!t and 3rd I’m more than happy with. Big test Saturday though 

[swfc-dan]

6 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

I think Brighton were the last side to have any sort of success, with a midfield two, and they soon ditched. United don’t do it now, and to be honest, they didn’t really when they were in the championship. Duffy was used more as a midfielder, until he was replaced by the Everton lad, who performed the same role It’s really difficult to play with a central two these days, so to play two up front, means no wingers

True, Pigs played 3-5-2 with wing backs rather than wingers. I think if we are to keep with wingers we need to be getting a lot more out of Reach going forward, or else we could try that system ourselves with Reach as a wing back.

Not to say the current system isn't working, but I'm just not entirely convinced by a few narrow wins against weak opposition.

 

Leeds will be the true test on sat. No doubt the formation will stay the same for that, but I'd like it if we could change for weaker opposition when we should be going on the offensive.

Edited October 22, 2019 by swfc-dan

[Salmonbones]

Just now, Avon barksdale said:

At the start of the season I thought we’d be sh!t and mid table ,so to be sh!t and 3rd I’m more than happy with. Big test Saturday though 

 

Hey listen I think we played naff most of season, but for some reason I am more optimistic against the better sides.   Today was horrendous to watch but I think we play better against teams that aren't scrappy and like to play.

 

I think we may well beat Leeds.

[darra]

7 minutes ago, asteener1867 said:

I'll take it as long as the results are up there.

Yep, it was pretty dull, but tbh..Ive never seen so many players on the deck in one game...half the time I couldn't see the reason, you just looked over and another one was down.

 

It was that that spoilt it never seen so many stoppages for a clash of heads. Game never got going

 

[jonnyowl]

People wont care how we play when we are 3rd in league.

 

However if we become a defensive first team and we are 13th people will get fed up of it and the manager pretty quickly.

[gurujuan]

3 minutes ago, swfc-dan said:

True, Pigs played 3-5-2 with wing backs rather than wingers. I think if we are to keep with wingers we need to be getting a lot more out of Reach going forward, or else we could try that system ourselves with Reach as a wing back.

Not to say the current system isn't working, but I'm just not entirely convinced by a few narrow wins against weak opposition.

 

Leeds will be the true test on sat. No doubt the formation will stay the same for that, but I'd like it if we could change for weaker opposition when we should be going on the offensive.

I still think it has more to do with the quality of our front three, or more importantly the blend. It’s true, there also aren’t many goals in that midfield, although both Lee and Luongo are capable of running beyond the centre forward

[pazowl55]

Put Sterling on one wing and Salah on the other and 4-3-3 works a dream. We just need Wingers that are prepared to get within 5 yards of Fletcher.

[S36 OWL]

41 minutes ago, swfc-dan said:

Monk's definately done a great job shoring up the defence, imagine we may have the best defensive record after tonight. Naturally it's come at the expense of goals at the other end and general excitement, if we keep winning it's fine but sitting on 1-0 leads all the time seems risky (as shown vs Warnocks cheaters).

 

Are people in favour of the one up front system even at home? For me it worked much better away vs Cardiff where you can break on teams, the last 2 home games we have made hard work of narrow wins against poorish teams.

 

I thought it might change with Fernando's return but that doesn't seem likely now, and finally he got a chance tonight but it was playing on the wing in the same shape. Is this Monk's preffered system or is it maybe just the one he thinks is most effective with our squad? 

 

We certainly will have a number of unhappy strikers (Winall, Rhodes) if it continues, but overall it seems to be working as we are getting the results and look very solid. Maybe not the best value for money in terms of entertainment though?

 

All the best teams are built on a solid defence. 

[Emerson Thome]

I think the 4-3-3 at the start of the season has morphed into a 4-5-1. Really the system relies on the wingers to carry the ball and create chances, and as we've seen recently in games where Reach and Harris are quiet we don't have much of an attacking threat.

 

The emergence of Luongo as someone who can burst forward from the centre has been much needed though. He took the goal expertly today - never looked like missing.

[Patrick Bateman]

50 minutes ago, lincolnowl said:

He’s not for me. 
 

I’ve given up on the hope of seeing SWFC back on the Premier League. There’s too many broken pieces to the overall club. 
 

I just want to see players in a blue an ms white shirt having a go, on the front foot and looking to attack and looking to cause the opponents problems. 
 

instead we have a defensive, patchy coach muddling his way through. 

That's the spirit 

[swfc-dan]

17 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

I still think it has more to do with the quality of our front three, or more importantly the blend. It’s true, there also aren’t many goals in that midfield, although both Lee and Luongo are capable of running beyond the centre forward

Add Lees to the 3 man defense, Reach and Palmer/Moses/Harris as WB, Luongo/Lee, Bannan, Hutch CMs and FF and Fletch up front. 3-5-2. Could work better? 

Would reduce the strain on goals from the wingers and keep us very solid at the back. Just a thought. Only player who wouldn't have a natural position would be Harris. Maybe for games where we need to go at teams more at least.

Edited October 22, 2019 by swfc-dan

[Holmowl]

Several of you don’t like the 433.

 

Why?

 

This season in a 433......P9. W6. D2. L2  = 2.22 pts per game

 

This season in a 442......P3. W1. D0. L2  = 1 pt per game

 

Why aren’t you happy with our 433?

 

 

[gurujuan]

I’m not complaining, I’ve always said that is the best system to give us control We will lack something going forward, but that is more to do with the personnel, than the system If we carry on achieving results in this fashion, and then upgrade the front three in January, what’s not to like

[TANGLED UP IN BLUE]

I think the 4-3-3 doesn't always look as attacking as it sounds with us...we often end up a man spare in midfield, a big gap up to fletch or limited options to pass further forward at times. It works better when the full backs get up the pitch.

 

A change of personal in the wide positions might change that and bring a more attacking style and goals but as Holmys stat shows why would Monk risk it with the current points return he's getting.

At some point we will have the "must win, go for the throat" games and we'll see what Monk is about then I reckon.

[swfc-dan]

1 hour ago, Holmowl said:

Several of you don’t like the 433.

 

Why?

 

This season in a 433......P9. W6. D2. L2  = 2.22 pts per game

 

This season in a 442......P3. W1. D0. L2  = 1 pt per game

 

Why aren’t you happy with our 433?

 

 

Very happy with the points return so far. But watching the games tells a different story, we aren't convincing and only just scraping past poor sides.

Just don't feel the current 4-3-3 has enough firepower to win games consistently right now. Though I guess if we concede zero goals each game we should win! Maybe that is the plan

It feels much more like a 4-5-1 with us, as Fletch is often isolated.

Edited October 23, 2019 by swfc-dan

[shezzas left peg]

8 hours ago, swfc-dan said:

Monk's definately done a great job shoring up the defence, imagine we may have the best defensive record after tonight. Naturally it's come at the expense of goals at the other end and general excitement, if we keep winning it's fine but sitting on 1-0 leads all the time seems risky (as shown vs Warnocks cheaters).

 

Are people in favour of the one up front system even at home? For me it worked much better away vs Cardiff where you can break on teams, the last 2 home games we have made hard work of narrow wins against poorish teams.

 

I thought it might change with Fernando's return but that doesn't seem likely now, and finally he got a chance tonight but it was playing on the wing in the same shape. Is this Monk's preffered system or is it maybe just the one he thinks is most effective with our squad? 

 

We certainly will have a number of unhappy strikers (Winall, Rhodes) if it continues, but overall it seems to be working as we are getting the results and look very solid. Maybe not the best value for money in terms of entertainment though?

Spurs played one up top last night too and scored 5. 

Every system has its merits and disadvantages, but the biggest thing is the personell employed to play it. 

If monk can get Nando and lee fit, firing and anywhere near their old selves, well be a different kettle of fish. 

It would look so much more like an attacking 4-3-3 when in possession, but also a solid 4-5-1 without the ball, so for me the system does work, but you need the wingers to be good finishers and players breaking forward to support the attack from midfield to work really well. 

[Southie_Owl]

8 hours ago, Owls-Fan said:

Burnley, Cardiff & Brighton fans have been happy with solid and organised sides getting promoted from this league. I’d hope Wednesday would be the same. I’d rather win 1-0 games like tonight than draw or lose playing open football 

this ^ I bet people would have been delighted if Dyche or Hughton were appointed, never mind that they’d have made us hard to beat and pragmatic too.

 

At Burnley Dyche had to spend £8m on Andre Gray and Brighton needed to spend £4m on Knockaert to add the attacking spark to their organised sides to get promoted. 
I’m sure Monk realises we need to bring in similar players in January to improve the team. Hopefully loans or wheeling and dealing will be possible.  Otherwise he’s doing as best as we could hope for so far