S6ToBerlin 73 Posted October 17 Author Share Posted October 17 (edited) 6 minutes ago, StudentOwl said: Dawson Flint van Aken Luongo Odubajo Harris Reach Bannan Kachunga Paterson Windass Doesn't look like 4-4-2 to me If you look at the average positions on whoscored you might actually be right! Except then it's more like Dawson Flint JVA Odubajo Luongo Harris Bannan Reach Kachunga Paterson Windass What's that count as then?!? 2-3-1-2-2?! I guess if you count Odubajo and Harris as full/wingbacks then it's kinda like a 4-2-2-2 Edited October 17 by S6ToBerlin 2 Link to post Share on other sites
StudentOwl 16,249 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 4 minutes ago, S6ToBerlin said: I mean, both of them ended up drifting in a lot and popping up in the center of the pitch but that was to give space for the overlapping fullbacks. Reach quite regularly made runs into the middle to drag a defender in and give Harris or Windass space on the left. Still 4-4-2, even if it's not the typical wingers bombing it to the byline and getting in crosses kind of 4-4-2 that used to be popular. Fair enough pal, if you want to call that 4-4-2 or a modern-telling of 4-4-2 with narrow wingers, I won't stop you. I just can't conceptualise calling a formation that has your 'left winger' (Kachunga) sitting on average narrower than your left-sided striker (Windass)... and your right winger (Reach) sitting narrower than your right centre back (Flint), a 4-4-2. It just seems to fit the mould of a 5-2-1-2 or a 5-3-2 with an ultra-aggressive central defender (Luongo) to me... or even a 4-1-2-2-1? I just don't see the midfield "4" when they're essentially sitting in a vertical column (21, 10, 11 and 45). Link to post Share on other sites
StudentOwl 16,249 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 4 minutes ago, S6ToBerlin said: Dawson Flint JVA Odubajo Luongo Harris Bannan Reach Kachunga Paterson Windass What's that count as then?!? 2-3-1-2-2?! I guess if you count Odubajo and Harris as full/wingbacks then it's kinda like a 4-2-2-2 Sorry, just seen this! 4-2-2-2 might be the easiest interpretation? Whatever it is, it's definitely "atypical" Link to post Share on other sites
hugeowl 8,036 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 19 minutes ago, StudentOwl said: Not claiming I can... other than a back 4 I'm not sure what that really had in common with a 4-4-2 though... can you? You said 442 was the least accurate It was the basis of where we started as others have correctly pointed out Luongo dropped into the back 3 at times similar to how Hutchinson used to Odobajo and Harris were in the main full backs Paterson and Windass up front but working back and reach and Kachunga occupying the wide areas 44 fecking 2 but a fluid one Link to post Share on other sites
bladeshater 5,472 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 No good having rigid formations be adaptable to how the games going 1 Link to post Share on other sites
StudentOwl 16,249 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 Just now, hugeowl said: Paterson and Windass up front but working back and reach and Kachunga occupying the wide areas 44 fecking 2 but a fluid one Kachunga sat narrower than both Windass and Bannan, and Reach sat narrower than Flint. They absolutely didn't occupy the wide areas... as the bloke that's started this thread has conceded himself! As I say, if you want to call this 4-4-2, fill yer boots... but I just can't see it. Link to post Share on other sites
MallorcaOwl 584 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 17 minutes ago, StudentOwl said: Dawson Flint van Aken Luongo Odubajo Harris Reach Bannan Kachunga Paterson Windass Doesn't look like 4-4-2 to me That's a 2-1-2-2-1-2 Link to post Share on other sites
hugeowl 8,036 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 1 minute ago, StudentOwl said: Kachunga sat narrower than both Windass and Bannan, and Reach sat narrower than Flint. They absolutely didn't occupy the wide areas... as the bloke that's started this thread has conceded himself! As I say, if you want to call this 4-4-2, fill yer boots... but I just can't see it. I am not bothered where they “sat “ we had 4 defenders 4 midfield and 2up top as I said fluid and players do run around 1 Link to post Share on other sites
S6ToBerlin 73 Posted October 17 Author Share Posted October 17 I guess in the sense that it was 4 defenders, 4 midfielders and 2 up front, you could call it a 4-4-2. It's just 4-4-2 implies you have 2 wingers and it turns out Reach and Kachunga spent more time in the middle than out wide. So 4-2-2-2 probably more accurate. Anyway it doesn't really matter what it's called, it looked good and I hope we see more of it moving forward! Link to post Share on other sites
hirstyboywonder 11,117 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 Still not sure exactly what formation we were playing but the consensus is at least that it was a move away from 3 rigid central defenders and I think the first 60 minutes was the best we have played in terms of fluid attacking football. Difficult to determine where Kachunga played as he didn't get involved a great deal. It certainly wasn't a natural wide role, possibly scope to tweak it in terms of having Brown instead of Kachunga when fit and getting Marriott in the side up top. Link to post Share on other sites
oldishowl 5,191 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 Well somebody needs to ask Monk in one of the post match interviews. See if he knows....... Link to post Share on other sites
domSWFC 3,887 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 I still think we should play 3 at the back. Flint in the centre being no nonsense, with Iorfa and Van Aken being more mobile and ball playing defenders either side of him. 1 Link to post Share on other sites
Jeffjohnsonmyhero 1,311 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 A winning formation Link to post Share on other sites
trev 3,677 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 Christmas pudding formation. Link to post Share on other sites
Shetland Owl 1,160 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 what ever it was it worked. Now lets so it out for our next game Link to post Share on other sites
Dutch McLovin 2,611 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 1 hour ago, StudentOwl said: Dawson Flint van Aken Luongo Odubajo Harris Reach Bannan Kachunga Paterson Windass Doesn't look like 4-4-2 to me We played 442 under Carlos when we got to the play off final. Hutchinson spent a lot of time in between the center halves. Bannan spent a lot of time away from the left of the midfield. Wallace came inside loads. it was very fluid. However it was 442 Link to post Share on other sites
WalthamOwl 16,786 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 Whatever formation it was Harris and Kachunga imo where the only weak links. 2 Link to post Share on other sites
Dutch McLovin 2,611 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 How did Harris do as a left back ? Link to post Share on other sites
Dutch McLovin 2,611 Posted October 17 Share Posted October 17 2 minutes ago, WalthamOwl said: Whatever formation it was Harris and Kachunga imo where the only weak links. I would like to see more of Penney Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now