4-4-2 (1 Viewer)

Evo1883 · Nov 1, 2015

We cannot play it , fleck and vincelot are used to sitting slightly deeper this season and the gap between front 2 and midfield 2 is far too big , so teams are ruining us in midfield when its played because we don't have high workrate wingers to help out .
We have played it so far 4 times this season not full matches but part of matches where we switched to it .
Southend 2-2
Scunthorpe 0-2 (beaten easily )
Swindon 2-2 caved in eventually after switching to it .
Posh 3-2 ..were 2-0 down whilst using it and could have conceded more .

I wonder why mowbray keeps trying it , is he looking for a plan B formation ?
It is a formation we should simply avoid , and in my opinion not play ever again with the players we currently have .

I_Saw_Shaw_Score · Nov 1, 2015

I would start on Tuesday-

AA

Murphy. Cole. JOB

Fleck RV

Evo1883 · Nov 1, 2015

I think JOB is best behind the striker , stick cole out wide , see how he gets on .
Mighy produce the quality end product we lack in kent

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Philosoraptor · Nov 1, 2015

Interesting stuff, you must excuse me I am not the greatest one at football but am intrigued by all this. Shouldn't one position (E.g 4-4-2) naturally transpose into another on how a game is flowing?

covcity4life · Nov 1, 2015

I wud give lameires another chsnce. This time with job and cole. Murphy and kent in bench to terrorise second half

Specs WT-R75 · Nov 1, 2015

Evo1883 said:
I think JOB is best behind the striker , stick cole out wide , see how he gets on .
Mighy produce the quality end product we lack in kent

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Worked for Becks and he didn't have pace either

Armstrong
Cole JOB Murphy

Then second half you have Lameiras & Kent as attacking options or MAF/Tudgay if you need to switch it up.

percy · Nov 1, 2015

Philosorapter said:
Interesting stuff, you must excuse me I am not the greatest one at football but am intrigued by all this. Shouldn't one position (E.g 4-4-2) naturally transpose into another on how a game is flowing?

yes and no really. 442 is quite a rigid formation so stays pretty much as is whether in possession or not, whereas a 451 can change into a multitude of different formations so is a lot more flexible.

Philosoraptor · Nov 1, 2015

Flexibility is a good thing?

Philosoraptor · Nov 1, 2015

I would imagine playing a 4-4-2 would only be possible if the subjective properties of the individual players are better then the opponents. That's if there is no flexibility.
I would believe every formation must have some sort of natural development/flexibility to it for a system to work.

shmmeee · Nov 1, 2015

Philosorapter said:
I would imagine playing a 4-4-2 would only be possible if the subjective properties of the individual players are better then the opponents. That's if there is no flexibility.
I would believe every formation must have some sort of natural development/flexibility to it for a system to work.

Well 442 can't really move beyond 424 244 without pushing people well out of position.

4231 can be 442 4411 2431 451 433 quite easily.

For me it's horses for courses and our midfield is too deep and our wingers not disciplined enough for 442.

shmmeee · Nov 1, 2015

Our plan B should be based around personnel not formation I think. A front 4 of JOB Cole Lameiras Fortune/Tudgay will give you a very different shape and feel to say Kent Maddison Murphy Armstrong for example. Maybe look at 343 with Vincelot dropping back and the fullbacks pushing up.

Sky Blue Pete · Nov 1, 2015

Tm did say they were playing too deep first half

percy · Nov 1, 2015

formation is mostly about transition, and how you set yourself up when not in possession. when you've got the ball it doesnt matter where the players run with it really. i like 442 but most managers these days dont as it leaves you too light in the middle of the pitch which is where most games are won and lost, hence yesterdays performance

skyblue94 · Nov 1, 2015

JOB must surely get a starting role Tues, completley changed the game when he came on. Very impressed with Kent as well, apart from the lack of end product, but you could tell yesterday the Boro defenders were terrified of him. Possibly start Cole and replace with Kent after 60 or so when their defenders become leggy

Hobo · Nov 1, 2015

4-4-2 over rated only by Cov fans....or so it seems.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Nov 1, 2015

I don't think he's purposely setting out to play a 442, at least not a traditional 442. When he's partnered Fortune or Tudgay up top with Armstrong he's wanted Armstrong to play deeper in a number 10 position but this isn't his game, Armstrong just naturally drifts high up the pitch making it a 442 and Vincleot and Fleck struggle as the wide men don't really come inside to help.

Armstrong is better as a striker who starts high up the pitch but with licence to roam, drop deep and exploit the flanks if the space is there to do so, not as someone who starts deep with license to drive forward.

Philosoraptor · Nov 1, 2015

Aron Nimzowitsch wrote something called 'My System' nearly one hundred years ago, and I can see the parallels in what people are suggesting.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_System
http://dfiles.eu/files/9n8ael4qy

ccfc92 · Nov 1, 2015

I do understand formations are important etc, but surely players can respond to how the games going?

Like yesterday, for example, Fortune could have dropped deeper, allowing AA to be further up top.

Or for example, if you're a wing back, and their winger has pace, you drop a bit deeper to compensate.

Surely players don't need to be told specifically what to do on every little detail?

Philosoraptor · Nov 1, 2015

ccfc92 said:
I do understand formations are important etc, but surely players can respond to how the games going?

Like yesterday, for example, Fortune could have dropped deeper, allowing AA to be further up top.

Or for example, if you're a wing back, and their winger has pace, you drop a bit deeper to compensate.

Surely players don't need to be told specifically what to do on every little detail?

First restrain, next blockade, lastly destroy. - Aron Nimzowitsch

Philosoraptor · Nov 1, 2015

I think one of the problems here could be to get a team to think with a collective consciousness.

4-4-2 (1 Viewer)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency