Jump to content
Holmowl

Is 442 the answer?

Recommended Posts

Why the clamour for 442?
 

Based on the season so far, does it appear that 442 offers more likely success than 433?
 

Our 442 games:-

 

QPR 1-2 (Fletcher FF)

Boro 4-1 (Fletcher Nuhiu)

Hull 0-1 (Nuhiu Winnall)

Leeds 0-0 (Fletcher Nuhiu)

Swansea 2-2 (Fletcher Nuhiu)

 

442 - P5. W1. D2. L2. (1 point per game) 

 

433 - P12. W6. D2. L4. (1.67 points per game)

 

What is it about 442 that drives so many to think it’s the answer with our current squad?

  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeing as we now seem to play the two big lads upfront regularly, let’s try a left footed winger on the left and a right footed winger on the right, and get some crosses in. I know it might seem a bit controversial but it may just work. 

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Different formations require completely different thinking. 

 

442 requires solidity and lines between which you force the opposition to work, it’s a defensive shape but when you have a holding midfielder it reverts to 4132 and can be over run a little.

 

352 with a holding midfielder dropping in to back 4 when needed can work when teams play 1 up front.

 

teams that take the game to the opposition tent to play 433 or 343 but this requires high energy and players dropping in to defend quickly.

 

We have an old squad and the work rate suits a 4141 and this is what Monk plays more often than not. Hard to beat but why we have just 1.47 pts per game. Promotion requires 2pts per game.

 

Having said that, 3 silly defensive errors have cost us 4 pts and you could argue that one or two referee errors, a couple more. 6 more pts and we’d be 3rd.

 

we’re doing ok with the squad we’ve got and have some real talent in a few places.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deck chairs/titanic. We aren’t good enough. We need this points deduction now, somehow escape relegation this season, and clear the decks properly in the summer. 

 

And then appoint a director of football, and give him total control over football matters. 

 

That said, so fear there is more chance of seeing the queens babies feeders. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

42 is the answer. Your book must have had a typo. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever wins games for me. However, the problem with 442 is you don't get chance to switch mid game so easily. For example 433 can become 451 very easily and the same can be said for 352 becoming 532. Easy to do without making substitutions. With 442 you generally have to make changes or play players out of position in order to change it a little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Certainly isn’t We don’t have the right pairing in midfield, with only perhaps, Luongo looking like a good fit, but the manager doesn’t seem to trust his fitness, even in a three. Then who could we play alongside Fletcher? Forestieri isn’t ideal, and is more effective coming from a wide position. He certainly doesn’t thrive on knock downs. Nuhiu maybe offers some presence, and takes a bit of the physical pressure off of Fletcher, but doesn’t make us anymore prolific. Rhodes and Winnall are shot at this level. None of the options suggest that a switch to 4-4-2 would be beneficial, even in the short term. 

I suspect any “clamour” for a switch to 4-4-2, is merely the belief of some of those who “clamoured” for us to sign Rhodes in the first place, that somehow, he will still come good. Ain’t gonna happen

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We could probably start the game with 12 men Holmers, but if we keep dropping last 5 minute ricks then we'll still be dropping points!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We are stuck with the players we have and Mr Monk is doing the best he can within that squad.

He must think that we are not potent enough in the Fwd department and playing to our strongest ability's organisation and discipline (sic).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, toooldforthis said:

Different formations require completely different thinking. 

 

442 requires solidity and lines between which you force the opposition to work, it’s a defensive shape but when you have a holding midfielder it reverts to 4132 and can be over run a little.

 

352 with a holding midfielder dropping in to back 4 when needed can work when teams play 1 up front.

 

teams that take the game to the opposition tent to play 433 or 343 but this requires high energy and players dropping in to defend quickly.

 

We have an old squad and the work rate suits a 4141 and this is what Monk plays more often than not. Hard to beat but why we have just 1.47 pts per game. Promotion requires 2pts per game.

 

Having said that, 3 silly defensive errors have cost us 4 pts and you could argue that one or two referee errors, a couple more. 6 more pts and we’d be 3rd.

 

we’re doing ok with the squad we’ve got and have some real talent in a few places.

Real talent in a few places yes, but not in other's, that's the problem and the reason for the silly errors, can't blame ref errors, all teams get them over the course of the season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We dont move quickly enough to put teams under constant pressure so no matter what system we play , with this set of players , opposing teams have the time to close us down . The only game thus far when we did get on the front foot was M'boro .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The constant changing doesn't help.

 

Find one that works for us and then stick to it - get good at it, let the players now it inside and out, we will benefit in the long term.

 

I still believe the 433 formation is the way forward for the players we have in the squad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We missed a chance not getting Cowley. I said at the time that he would have brought a completely new outlook to the club. Fresh ideas and a winning mentality. It’s clear why he initially turned down Huddersfield and before that, us. He would have given us an identity. 

 

No slight on Monk at all, who has done a very decent job, and comes across really well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vulva said:

Deck chairs/titanic. We aren’t good enough. We need this points deduction now, somehow escape relegation this season, and clear the decks properly in the summer. 

This. 

 

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thickest group of footballers I’ve ever witnessed. Must drive Monk mad. They keep repeating the same mistakes and never seem to learn from them.

 

Monk can’t design and fit a wardrobe with assorted screws from the back of a kitchen draw, an old knife for a screwdriver, and an old shoe for a hammer.

 

Patience run out after the last few games. I’m with the get rid of the lot of them brigade.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, theowlsman said:

Thickest group of footballers I’ve ever witnessed. Must drive Monk mad. They keep repeating the same mistakes and never seem to learn from them.

 

Monk can’t design and fit a wardrobe with assorted screws from the back of a kitchen draw, an old knife for a screwdriver, and an old shoe for a hammer.

 

Patience run out after the last few games. I’m with the get rid of the lot of them brigade.

Yep. 

 

If they were a young group of players or a relatively new side, then I would excuse some of the errors that we were seeing. 

 

They aren't though. In fact, on paper, they are probably the most experienced side in the entire division, or certainly one of them. 

 

And yet, they continually make the same errors time and time again. 

 

Can just see on it on Wednesday night. 

 

We will play reasonably well, create some good chances, miss most of them and then concede a stupid goal or two. 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think the current squad of players would be best suited to 3-5-2.

 

Something like

 

Westwood

Iorfa   Lees   Borner

Odubajo  Hutchinson  Bannan   Luongo   Reach 

Fletcher   Forestieri

 

I appreciate some would alter the personnel, but I still think that would be our best shape, giving us a 3 in central midfield, attacking wing backs, and allowing a Forestieri / Harris type some freedom and to give us a bit of zip up front.

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In answer to the title of the thread. 

 

Yes lets play 442. We will win some games. We will draw some games. We will lose some games. 

 

I really don't think the formation matters with these players. We will play 1 of only a few basic formations (442,433,451) and considering we know these players inside out after years of watching them we also know they are capable of playing well and poorly in any formation. It depends on so many variables auch as the opposition and us not making stupid mistakes. 

 

My overall point is its not the formations that are the issue but the quality, energy and desire of the players that determines a good season. Formations are just the basic template for them. 

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sheriwozgod said:

I still think the current squad of players would be best suited to 3-5-2.

 

Something like

 

Westwood

Iorfa   Lees   Borner

Odubajo  Hutchinson  Bannan   Luongo   Reach 

Fletcher   Forestieri

 

I appreciate some would alter the personnel, but I still think that would be our best shape, giving us a 3 in central midfield, attacking wing backs, and allowing a Forestieri / Harris type some freedom and to give us a bit of zip up front.

 

Was going to post the exact same, I think that formation would suit us.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2

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...