Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Or not, because McSheffrey is poor, in fairness does have few good moments and Baker, I'd try him 'in the hole', in the absence of Fleck.
The system is not broke, why fix it?
At a higher level they were ineffective. Worth a try at this level.
We got relegated using it and we were shocking yesterday. I wouldn't say it's in great condition, would you?
I like formations like 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 on paper but I am just not convinced it would work in our division. You need to have very accurate passing and be very good in possession as you only have one striker now as a target so any wayward or long passes are likely to be gobbled by the opponents defence.4-4-3
Murphy
Clarke-Brown-Wood-Hussey
Barton-Jennings-Fleck
Baker-------Cody------Elliott
Or try Kilbane and left back and shake it up.
Murphy
Clarke
Wood
Malaga (although AT wont drop Brown)
Hussey (only due to there being no LB competition)
Fleck (if fit)
Barton
Jennings
Baker
Cody
Ball (he will come good and we need his height)
At a higher level they were ineffective. Worth a try at this level.
I thought Elliott looked sharp when he came on against Yeovil, so I'd be tempted to go with him and Cody up front and just try threading through balls to them.
Would rather see that, than the long ball.
---------------------Murphy---------------------
Clarke-------Brown------Wood---------Hussey
-------------------Jennings---------------------
-----------Barton-----------Kilbane------------
---------------------Fleck------------------------
-----------McSheffrey----Elliott-----------------
McDonald on for Sheffers if it doesn't work out. I for one would like to see him back up front though. The few games he got there last season during the striker shortage, he looked a decent player again. At this level I'm confident he'd deliver. Well, sort of confident.
Based on Saturdays performances, Murphy, wood, Clarke, Barton and McDonald need to be in the team. build the rest around them with whoever is fit and looking sharp in training.
So basically the diamond.
Are you always this sharp?
You think 4-3-1-2 is a diamond?
Are you sponsored by diamond formations or something?
When you write 4-1-2-1-2 down on a piece of paper what does it look like to you? I'll tell you as your clearly not paying attention. Its very narrow and match after match teams keep getting loads of space out wide and putting pressure on our full backs and getting balls into the box. You need to keep the ball and work very hard in midfield and have very solid full backs for the diamond to work defensively which is why we have struggled and with Hussey as left back we will continue to struggle. He's a good potential but he makes basic errors every game and leaving him and Clarke exposed all the time isn't very fair. Seeing as you keep banging on about our midfielders and what system suits them why don't you stretch your tiny mind to think about the back four and the pressure they keep coming under due to this narrow formation that you're so in love with.
We need one up top, someone on the tip of the starfish, someone in the hole.
Or we could just go with the kick some fecking arse approach with each player playing as well as they would for another team
We need one up top, someone on the tip of the starfish, someone in the hole.
Or we could just go with the kick some fecking arse approach with each player playing as well as they would for another team
It is the pretty much the diamond, but with the DM pushing up CM, there isn't that much a noteable difference to ditch the diamond and replacing it with 4-3-1-2, as 4-3-1-2, still has the narrow midifield just, the DM is moved up slightly.
Clarke and Hussey would still be susceptible to being exposed.
This is what the Dimond looks like:
RB---CB---CB---LB
---------DMC--------
----RCM-----LCM
---------AMC-------
------ST-----ST----
Now 4-3-1-2:
RB----CB----CB----LB
---RCM--CM--LCM
----------AMC-----
------ST-------ST
There we go, all we've done is move the DM up a little bit, so to suggest we should ditch the diamond and replace it with 4-3-1-2 is laugable. So don't call me small minded! As there is a small difference between the 2 systems...
For the record, I think the diamond is the best formation for us as the AMC suits Fleck, and we need 2 strikers imo, and because we have sh!t wingers, play with out them. Oh and I forgot, we have 2 very taltented young talents in Barton + Thomas, but because niether are particularly great defensively, we need a DM, Jennings... Oh and a flat 4 defence is the best imo, So what formation does that give you?
Yes but to follow your logic, on another thread you stated that 4-3-3 wouldn't work with the players we've got. So how close is 4-3-1-2 to 4-3-3? Using your thinking they are so close its laughable. Like I've said already I don't have an issue with the diamond if you've got the players to play it (and I dont mean against a couple of pub teams during preseason) but 2 competitive games in and it looks like we have the same problems but with different players. Now I'm sure as you've been at both games so far you can at least agree it hasn't looked very good so far.
Well I guess they both play with a goalkeeper and 11 players :thinking about:On what planet is 4-3-1-2 similar to 4-3-3?
Well I guess they both play with a goalkeeper and 11 players :thinking about:
I meant including the goalkeeper, not 11 players + the goalkeeperA goalkeeper and 11 players? I hope the ref can't count!
Yes but to follow your logic, on another thread you stated that 4-3-3 wouldn't work with the players we've got. So how close is 4-3-1-2 to 4-3-3? Using your thinking they are so close its laughable. Like I've said already I don't have an issue with the diamond if you've got the players to play it (and I dont mean against a couple of pub teams during preseason) but 2 competitive games in and it looks like we have the same problems but with different players. Now I'm sure as you've been at both games so far you can at least agree it hasn't looked very good so far.
I stated 4-3-3 wouldn't suit us, and 4-3-1-2 is basically the diamond, as, assuming we play with* Jennings would naturally drop back so Thomas/Kilbane and Barton can advance with the ball, therefore, if you looked at the shape during the match, you will find that it looks like the diamond, with that in mind, 4-3-1-2 is basically the diamond, also, playing 4-3-1-2 would NOT provide more width as in the diamond, the 2 CMs would obviously leave space between them for the DM. :claping hands:
* Barton Jennings Kilbane/Thomas
-------------Fleck----------
4-3-1-2 and 4-3-3 are not similar, 4-3-3 plays with wingers whereas 4-3-1-2 does not. :facepalm:
Before I start, saying Accrington, Bristol Rovers, Port Vale are pub teams is ignorant and shows you are detatched from reality as they are a division below us, with that in mind... Are we a semi-pro team?
On that point we beat Accrington, Bristol Rovers, Port Vale with the diamond whereas we lost to; Ross County, ICT, Nuneaton & Wrexham when playing 4-2-3-1, therefore, judging on results, the diamond suits us.
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?