Central Midfield

[Finney on the Wing]

14 minutes ago, prowl said:

We need wingers who can also tackle. I know they are a rare breed but that would allow them to tuck in when we don't have the ball and that would give us a more compact shape. At present they stay too wide and there are gaping holes in the middle.

 

Think we need a whole midfield that can tackle, to be honest.

[SwellOwl]

Options are awful, is it and to give Hunt a go?

 

Least would so show some effort and can’t be any worse? 

[prowl]

Just now, Finney on the Wing said:

 

Think we need a whole midfield that can tackle, to be honest.

I'm trying to be positive.

 

If we go down that road where do we stop. I'd keep Iorfa, Borner and maybe Fox, Luongo if he can keep fit, Reach maybe and after that I'm struggling. Fletcher would be on the list but I'm not sure how much he's got left in his tank.

[Holmowl]

6 minutes ago, Finney on the Wing said:

 

Not too sure about that, Holmowl - Luongo, to me, is more of an attacking midfielder and Bannan the play-maker.

 

There's not much protection for the defence if it was just those two - Hutch behind them, definitely yes.

The results say otherwise.

 

Our results with and without Luongo are quite revealing about how much we miss him. By contrast, we did slightly better without Hutch than with him Upto Christmas.

 

(No point comparing anything after Christmas because in Fletcher’s absence we have fallen apart.)

[Guest LondonOwl313]

24 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Monk can’t win though can he?

 

Play 3 CMs and 75% of OT slam him for being negative only playing one striker.

 

Play 2 strikers and 75% slam him for a weak central midfield.

 

(I know 75% + 75% = 150% but many of us change with the wind)

 

And btw it’s not true that we do better in 433. 

we played 4-4-2 when we got to two play offs and we also played it under Bruce when we lost only 4 games in the second half of the season and were on top in the majority of games

 

problem is the tactics.. the manager shouldn’t allow the midfield to sit so deep. We had Bannan and Hutchinson in centre mid last season and Bruce was constantly on at them to get the ball forward more quickly and to not sit deep.

 

Our strikers bar Fletcher aren’t good enough and that’s a bigger issue for me. We also don’t really have much quality at fullback and out wide. Haven’t replaced Pudil or Wallace or Hooper so as a team we aren’t as dynamic 

[WalthamOwl]

Just not Pessy again today. Monk isn’t going to bring Hutch back so I would rather one of the young lads fill in alongside Bannan. God knows when Luongo is going to be back, he’s a massive miss. What the hell do we do to these players to get them injured so often!?!

Edited February 22, 2020 by WalthamOwl

[mcmigo]

Just now, LondonOwl313 said:

we played 4-4-2 when we got to two play offs and we also played it under Bruce when we lost only 4 games in the second half of the season and were on top in the majority of games

 

problem is the tactics.. the manager shouldn’t allow the midfield to sit so deep. We had Bannan and Hutchinson in centre mid last season and Bruce was constantly on at them to get the ball forward more quickly and to not sit deep.

 

Our strikers bar Fletcher aren’t good enough and that’s a bigger issue for me. We also don’t really have much quality at fullback and out wide. Haven’t replaced Pudil or Wallace or Hooper so as a team we aren’t as dynamic 

Doesn’t matter who you have up front, you aren’t going to get anything from a game when you are shipping 5 to Blackburn , 3 to reading etc, and creating zip for the forwards.

Our team issues are in order of problem.

 

1.  The central defenders

2.  The goalie 

3.  The central midfielders

4.  The full backs

5.  The strikers

6.  The wingers

 

When we were 3rd it was built on good goalkeeping and good defending . The defence , and to a lesser extent the goalie, have been a complete shambles since the end of the stoke game. 

[adelphi1867]

1 hour ago, jonnyowl said:

It's a simple fix but he wont do it.

 

Play 3 in the middle with Hutchinson holding.

 

Bannan to play further forward.

 

Plus another, either Lee, Hunt or Luongo when fit.

We haven't tried that before have we?.

The fact is none of our c/m/f's are physically strong enough, we have had this problem since Kick-a-ball's time, but recently when we have played either Luongo & Pellupessy, or Hutch, together in the c/m/f role we have done better.

Edited February 22, 2020 by adelphi1867

[Bouncing Owl]

We’ve had this problem for years - having the right combinations in midfield and whether we go with a 2 or a 3.

 

For what it’s worth, I think our best 3 is hutch, bannan and Luongo. I think bannan and Luongo can work in a 2 but I’d certainly go with reach on one of the wings for additional work rate. 
 

Given hutch and Luongo will not be selected today, I’d go 4-1-4-1 and play joey, Lee and bannan to give us that extra security. 
 

 

[Dutch McLovin]

1 hour ago, JackSWFC said:

Windass?

Windass is more a wide attacking midfield or a number ten. Can’t really play Cm. If that’s the case you’d be including Forestieri as a Cm 

[Dutch McLovin]

1 hour ago, Justbeanz said:

It really isn't the best environment to be introducing young professionals into. Agree our options are limited but starting a young un at the moment with things as they are could really knock their confidence and set them back years. Disgusting that we've got ourselves into this position. 

Your spot on to be fair

[i used to be sc_owl]

Based on a couple of assumptions, that we play players in their natural positions and that the frozen out players will not be featuring, then I don’t see how we have the personnel to play three central midfielders at the moment. 
 

I’d be tempted to go mental and play a 4–2-4, with the full backs ordered to stay defensive and tuck in. Hit the long ball to Fletcher and Nuhiu with a couple of attacking players, such as Windass, Wickham, Harris or Forestieri looking for the second ball. 
 

Wouldn’t be pretty but it would be different. 

[Steelman]

1 hour ago, Fuzzy logics said:

I agree with the OP that central midfield has been our biggest issue this season.

 

Personally I think its worth trying Iorfa as a proper CDM in a 4132 formation, cant get any worse...can it?

I’d play Iorfa and Windass as a midfield two. 

[Dutch McLovin]

1 hour ago, Adam Reachs left peg said:

Has to be bannan and windass today for me best of a poor group 

Windass isn’t a Cm player he’s a number 10. 

[Holmowl]

17 minutes ago, LondonOwl313 said:

we played 4-4-2 when we got to two play offs and we also played it under Bruce when we lost only 4 games in the second half of the season and were on top in the majority of games

 

problem is the tactics.. the manager shouldn’t allow the midfield to sit so deep. We had Bannan and Hutchinson in centre mid last season and Bruce was constantly on at them to get the ball forward more quickly and to not sit deep.

 

Our strikers bar Fletcher aren’t good enough and that’s a bigger issue for me. We also don’t really have much quality at fullback and out wide. Haven’t replaced Pudil or Wallace or Hooper so as a team we aren’t as dynamic 

I agree mostly.

 

442 has never been the problem. The only slight difference I would add is that it worked equally well with or without Hutchinson. Not that I don’t rate him. It’s just that many people think he is key. He’s not.

[Dutch McLovin]

19 minutes ago, LondonOwl313 said:

we played 4-4-2 when we got to two play offs and we also played it under Bruce when we lost only 4 games in the second half of the season and were on top in the majority of games

 

problem is the tactics.. the manager shouldn’t allow the midfield to sit so deep. We had Bannan and Hutchinson in centre mid last season and Bruce was constantly on at them to get the ball forward more quickly and to not sit deep.

 

Our strikers bar Fletcher aren’t good enough and that’s a bigger issue for me. We also don’t really have much quality at fullback and out wide. Haven’t replaced Pudil or Wallace or Hooper so as a team we aren’t as dynamic 

This is spot on. We’re weak everywhere but if we play Hutchinson and Bannan and make them play further up (which monk won’t do) were more competitive. In an ideal world we’d have a beast and hutch in Cm and Bannan out wide. 
 

Tactics are bad. But the options aren’t good.

[Guest wilyfox]

3 minutes ago, Holmowl said:

Monk can’t win though can he?

 

Play 3 CMs and 75% of OT slam him for being negative only playing one striker.

 

Play 2 strikers and 75% slam him for a weak central midfield.

 

(I know 75% + 75% = 150% but many of us change with the wind)

 

And btw it’s not true that we do better in 433. 

 

It doesn't really matter what formation he chooses, the blend isn't right. We don't have goal-scoring wing-forwards for 433, nor do we have a strong available midfield pair for 442. I'd go for a midfield 3 simply to compensate for a weak midfield, but it's still not an answer. 

[dorian gray]

1 hour ago, Justbeanz said:

It really isn't the best environment to be introducing young professionals into. Agree our options are limited but starting a young un at the moment with things as they are could really knock their confidence and set them back years. Disgusting that we've got ourselves into this position. 

I've not seen anything that's stepped through our ranks, that had or has me excited, thought we had the keeper slot sorted, but we haven't.

[Yellowbelly]

Carlos’ system was quite clever really. The centre halves had the protection of Hutch which allowed the full backs to play further forward which then gave Bannan & Wallace the opportunity to come inside, outnumbering the oppos midfield. 442 but more fluid and attacking.

[dorian gray]

when this 'shitorbust' philosophy took over I thought, and hoped we'd sift through the lower divisions and cherry pick the better/young players in clubs. 

the attackers, and attacking m/f's are the ones that carry the most potential to buy in at hundreds of thousands, and move on in millions, after 3/4/5 years of good use.

but sadly that ship has long since sailed.