Jump to content
gurujuan

Playing two wingers, what’s the point?

Recommended Posts

I really don’t think playing two out and out wingers does us any favours. There’s no evidence that it makes us any more prolific. 

If we get a performance, it generally comes from one side alone, and neither contribute much on the goal front 

Personally, I’d play three across the middle, bringing in Luongo, and playing Bannan on the left

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Bannan on the left”

 

 

Aaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhhh

  • Agree 3
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Gary.

 

Two wingers too much?

 

The two wingers who both had the beating of their fullbacks until you took one off and moved the other?

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

“Bannan on the left”

 

 

Aaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrgggggggghhhhhhhhh

Bannan did his best work on the left of a three

  • Agree 1

Share this post


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

Bannan did his best work on the left of a three


Aaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrggggggghhhhhh

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need to use the wingers as wingers. At the moment we only use Harris. Reach drifts too much. If we go back to basics, play two out and out wingers and get the ball wide and cross it Fletcher WILL score more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears the problem could be Murphy. 

 

At least when Reach has an off day he’s usually blocking an opposition threat. 

 

Lee/Luongo/Reach should all be in front of Murphy. 

Edited by Kopparberg
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

I really don’t think playing two out and out wingers does us any favours. There’s no evidence that it makes us any more prolific. 

If we get a performance, it generally comes from one side alone, and neither contribute much on the goal front 

Personally, I’d play three across the middle, bringing in Luongo, and playing Bannan on the left

 

Two wingers leaves us too lightweight in central midfield.

  • Agree 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Reach could get back to form it would help...but he is still the better option than Murphy.

Could play Lee on the right of a three in midfield, leaving Harris as the sole winger.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I’ve been saying for weeks, the formation that would probably get the most out of our best players is 3-5-2.

 

Absolutely ridiculous situation that we’re resorting to leaving the likes of Borner and Luongo on the bench.  These two need to both be in the starting XI.

 

Sadly Monk has kept us playing a back 4 at all times (even though we haven’t got one good full-back in the squad).

  • Agree 1
  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, mogbad said:

 

Two wingers leaves us too lightweight in central midfield.

It does, and that’s infuriating when they rarely both deliver in the same game. Switch Harris to the right, which might improve his crossing, and bring in Luongo. Over a season, Luongo would have more of an impact than Reach, and with Bannan then able to play in his best position, we’d have more control in games

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

I really don’t think playing two out and out wingers does us any favours. There’s no evidence that it makes us any more prolific. 

If we get a performance, it generally comes from one side alone, and neither contribute much on the goal front 

Personally, I’d play three across the middle, bringing in Luongo, and playing Bannan on the left

 

Two wingers leaves us too lightweight in central midfield.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we play 442 then the two strikers have got to cause significant problems for the centre halves. They have got to win the long balls, play as pair and turn their defence .

 

First half they did this which meant we got it to the wingers feet in their half and our central midfield were going forward.

 

Second half they won very little which meant our wingers were only defending and our central pair never got out of our half.

 

At Birmingham Monk had Jutikewic and Adams. One wins every header the other with pace to get behind. Different ball game.

 

Add in they two mobile midfielders  who could tackle all day and I think you see the issues 

  • Like 2
  • Agree 2

Share this post


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

If we play 442 then the two strikers have got to cause significant problems for the centre halves. They have got to win the long balls, play as pair and turn their defence .

 

First half they did this which meant we got it to the wingers feet in their half and our central midfield were going forward.

 

Second half they won very little which meant our wingers were only defending and our central pair never got out of our half.

 

At Birmingham Monk had Jutikewic and Adams. One wins every header the other with pace to get behind. Different ball game.

 

Add in they two mobile midfielders  who could tackle all day and I think you see the issues 

Which begs the question, why persist with the system? We have nobody with the pace to run in behind, and we certainly don’t have two midfield players with the energy to play as a two

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Which begs the question, why persist with the system? We have nobody with the pace to run in behind, and we certainly don’t have two midfield players with the energy to play as a two


I honestly think he knows, like we do, that he hasn’t got a balanced squad for any system .

 

433 we struggle to score.

442 also issues.

 

As it did in the second half Saturday and first half tonight 442 worked well, with us creating plenty of chances. 
Don’t think Monk sees us creating the same chances playing 433

 

Next two games will be interesting, don’t think he will go 442 without Hutch who was our best player again tonight.

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s ok saying or threat normally comes down one wing or the other,  not both, but you never know which one until the game is in progress

 

Also 1 winger is much easier to defend against than 2 because you can just overload defensively against that 1

 

not sure how anyone can say 2 wingers isn’t working after that first 25 minutes tonight

  • Agree 4

Share this post


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

It’s ok saying or threat normally comes down one wing or the other,  not both, but you never know which one until the game is in progress

 

Also 1 winger is much easier to defend against than 2 because you can just overload defensively against that 1

 

not sure how anyone can say 2 wingers isn’t working after that first 25 minutes tonight

I think they both probably did OK tonight, but I feel we are generally carrying one. In most of the games I’ve seen, we rarely seem to have a threat down both flanks, and I feel the extra body in midfield (Luongo) would actually serve us better

Share this post


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

As I’ve been saying for weeks, the formation that would probably get the most out of our best players is 3-5-2.

 

Absolutely ridiculous situation that we’re resorting to leaving the likes of Borner and Luongo on the bench.  These two need to both be in the starting XI.

 

Sadly Monk has kept us playing a back 4 at all times (even though we haven’t got one good full-back in the squad).

I would agree with you. The back 3 is a no brainer.

Midfield has so many options then there has to be a decent 5 to pick.

Problem is the front 2.

Fletcher and who?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, A12owl said:

I would agree with you. The back 3 is a no brainer.

Midfield has so many options then there has to be a decent 5 to pick.

Problem is the front 2.

Fletcher and who?

 

 

Would have to be one of the 4 other forwards we have, or we could play a Harris/Murphy off Fletcher; use their pace to stretch defences.

 

Yes none of those potential partners for Fletcher are perfect, but there’s 6 different viable options there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Westfield Owl said:

 

Would have to be one of the 4 other forwards we have, or we could play a Harris/Murphy off Fletcher; use their pace to stretch defences.

 

Yes none of those potential partners for Fletcher are perfect, but there’s 6 different viable options there.

If only we still had Joao, he would have been ideal

  • Agree 3
  • Disagree 1

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...