percy
Member
true. was it spain who played with no strikers recently
Couldn't have put it better myself.
Three-layered formations are a thing of the past.
true. was it spain who played with no strikers recently
Yes, but changes to 4-2-3-1 when defending as Rooney drops back.
i think sometimes we try to over complicate things a little. the top sides mess around with formations because they have to, there playing against the worlds best players. we are in league one. keep it simple and tight and be organised. all players understand 442 because its simple, they know there jobs. top players are top players because they can adapt and change there game and play in different formations well.
I wouldn't necessarily agree with that but either way it starts off as a 442. Rooney and or welbeck naturally drop deep.
If we want to play a flat 4 it would have to be something like
Baker--Thomas--Barton--Mcsheff
Then having Fleck play just behind Mcdonald up front
Ferguson does like a 4-4-2 (I don't see how he can play it this year with Kagawa, van Persie and Rooney to fit in but that's another question entirely).
He has said himself though that he likes one striker to drop deep, forming a 4-4-1-1 to give them two points of attack as opposed to one.
I bloody love Kagawa. I've been following Japanese football for a while, he's ace.
Don't know about anyone else, but I'd bloody love the idea of us playing with a back 3:
-----------GK------------
-----------SW-----------
---|---CB------CB----|--
---RWB--CM---CM----LWB-
---|-------AM--------|---
--------CF----CF---------
Would allow us to fit Cody into a front two, give us a natural spot for Cody/Sheffers/Baker, and utilise our attacking full-backs.
Don't know a huge amount about the new centre backs, but would Brown/Malaga be able to play in the libero role? Don't think it will happen but I like the idea.
I like the first one, I like to think of it as an adjustment to the diamond making it more fluid to the formation. ( in reference to post #45)
However I think the regular diamond could work with Fleck playing, imo the the attacking midfield role is the pivotal point to the diamond role. If you have someone poor there 9/10 attacks will break down here and we will be left saying just couldn't find the killer ball or something similar more often than not. When Thorn first came in Mcsheff was revitalised and played the best football I had ever seen him play in this 7/8 games and the formation worked. Next season he was a shadow but because of circumstances he was pretty much un droppable in this position. How many times last season did we say it was good till we crossed the halfway line, well this is because we didn't have the same quality in attacking positions as before and every attack broke down as we didn't have enough quality.
If Fleck can play well in this role I think it will help the whole team play well knowing they have someone high up the pitch who won't cock it up every time we pass it to them
true. was it spain who played with no strikers recently
Murphy
Clarke Malaga Wood Hussey
Baker Barton Jennings McSheffrey
McDonald Elliot
Would you even be discussing formations had we taken our chances and won 4-1?
Its more about the players than the formation.
Interesting how the Liverpool CB's are struggling adjusting to the Rogers passing game. Honestly, maybe the hoofing today is simply because Wood and Brown can't play the passing game that Keogh and Cranie could? And I completely agree about your Fleck point: the formation that gets the best out of him and Cody is what we really need. If Fleck is out though, with Sheff in this form, I'd be worried about sticking with the diamond. I feel similarly about the DMC role with Daniels-but then I hate the "Makelele" role, we play with that man far far far too deep, always have. At this level it really needs to be 3 CM's and one in the hole, otherwise we won't get the ball and dominate the middle enough. Like today...
Struggling with it after one game? Talk about knew jerking.
Back on point, wouldn't be against the 3-5-2.
Struggling with it after one game? Talk about knew jerking.
Back on point, wouldn't be against the 3-5-2.
Are you asking me?
If so, I was asking posters on here, who criticise the diamond formation - which worked in his caretaker role - and suggest we play 4-4-2 (Note to those posters: We're in the 21st century), and as I don't believe it'll suit us nor how to play flat 4 in midfield (personel wise), I therefore asks those to 'put up or shut up' instead of moaning saying we play this but actually have a useful contribution and suggest who they would have. So far, those haven't helped the case to play 4-4-2 because all they've done is come up with SH!T. :laugh:
To answer you question, it is more to do with the players BUT, a formation is just as important as it can get the best of those players e.g. Fleck 'in the hole' as opposed to a LCM which would restrict his options when he gets the ball as he'd have to worry about back tracking (and he's prob sh!t at defending).
do you ever read your own posts. i would like to think that any player losing the ball would have to worry about back tracking to regain posession. some top managers still use 442 when they need to even tho we are in the 21st century
thats why i would play him down the left. any central mid position is gonna require some defensive duty. let him get at the full back and get some quality balls into the box. we already have barton probing from centre mid. attacking mids need to weigh in with goals as well and he dont score to many
im sure you aint forgot but how many of them goals were pens.
i think cody has scored five from open play
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?