Jump to content

A Period Of Reflection For Monk?


Recommended Posts

There was a moment in  the first half when a cross came in and we had 4 men in the box. We ended up with a corner.

But...I said to my pal, I can't remember in a long while us having so many piling in to try and get on the end of things.

 

Even when we were doing well earlier in the season often  Fletcher was a lone body in there.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The one thing that stands out for me is Monk has given some serious thought to the problem of getting two strikers up front and the perinial problem of getting the best out of Bannan, who is clearly our most influential player.

 

3-5-2 Solves both problems, as Bannan has license to drop into the back 3, making it a 4 and not a 5 (5 being two negative) and also move into a 3 in midfield when we need to be more offensive.

 

Playing 2 up front will also hopefully unlock the enigma, which is Rhodes, allowining him to play off Wickam.

 

Im also impressed by the amount of weight Wickam has lost, because before Lockdown, his signing looked deluded. Not anymore.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like that we seem to have a more positive approach.

 

A note of caution is that a lot of Monk's tactics seem to revolve around getting crosses into the box. This formation seems to be creating more space for the wing-backs... but, they've got to know what to do with the ball. West Brom are one of the best organised and tallest teams in the division, so they handled most of the crosses with ease. But hopefully against most of the teams in the league we'll get a bit more joy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, cowl said:

What was Monk actually doing before the lockdown then? Was that him making us hard to win?

Lockdown is the first chance he's had to take a breath since he arrived, and I thought we played pretty well against Brom for an hour, with plenty of corners and getting men in the box.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Ozymandias Owl said:

The one thing that stands out for me is Monk has given some serious thought to the problem of getting two strikers up front and the perinial problem of getting the best out of Bannan, who is clearly our most influential player.

 

3-5-2 Solves both problems, as Bannan has license to drop into the back 3, making it a 4 and not a 5 (5 being two negative) and also move into a 3 in midfield when we need to be more offensive.

 

Playing 2 up front will also hopefully unlock the enigma, which is Rhodes, allowining him to play off Wickam.

 

Im also impressed by the amount of weight Wickam has lost, because before Lockdown, his signing looked deluded. Not anymore.

 

 

 

Being rather short of central defenders might have the starting point for deciding to play 3-5-2 don’t you think?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Blatter said:

Being rather short of central defenders might have the starting point for deciding to play 3-5-2 don’t you think?

 

We're short on central defenders - so we play 3 instead of 2. Safety in numbers? Cool. . 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Blatter said:

Being rather short of central defenders might have the starting point for deciding to play 3-5-2 don’t you think?

 

If we are short of central defenders why would you choose to play three instead of two?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, pazowl55 said:

If we are short of central defenders why would you choose to play three instead of two?

Last night our three central defenders consisted of a full back, a dodgy wing back and Iorfa who’s  played most of his previous career at full back.

 
We’re short of centre backs and overloaded with midfielders now and improvising.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Blatter said:

Last night our three central defenders consisted of a full back, a dodgy wing back and Iorfa who’s  played most of his previous career at full back.

 
We’re short of centre backs and overloaded with midfielders now and improvising.

Because all our centre backs are injured at the moment. We easily have 4 players who could play as the two centre backs. 

 

I just dont believe when coming up with this formation Monk thought it was because of a lack of centre backs.

 

5 minutes ago, Owls-Fan said:


Out of interest who would you have played in a back 4 yesterday? 

Because of injures we would have struggled.

Maybe Odubajo Palmer Iorfa Reach.

 

But he wanted to play three at the back, he didnt do it because of a lack of options. 

Even in the previous two games with the options of a decent back four he choose not to.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
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...