HighPeakFox Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 Looks to have more fluidity in any case...
Marshall Cockney Fox Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 Just now, Webbo said: I hope all these people calling for change won't complain if it doesn't work. I don't see that as a huge tactical change - just different personnel.
Bob Weasel Fox Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 Just now, Webbo said: I hope all these people calling for change won't complain if it doesn't work. I think what you will find Webbo is people will say it was still a 4-4-2 if we lose (with Gray up front) and if we win it was a tactical masterstroke (obviously with NP behind it all)
hornyhollthefox123 Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 2 minutes ago, Marshall Cockney Fox said: Don't think that's a new formation, just different players. Utterly reliant on the Algerians being interested today. Bloody hope they are!! Exactly this. Itll be the same shape completely just Mahrez or Gray as the no.10
CloudFox Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 5 minutes ago, Finnegan said: It could and probably still will be the same formation just with Gray up front? Tanner seems to think it's with Mahrez in the hole behind Slimani, but we'll see I guess. I'd imagine Gray and Mahrez will switch a lot.
Number 6 Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 Looks like a 4411 to me. Mahrez behind Slim but could interchange with Gray.
one F in Fox Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 Could be any line up combination, 4-4-2, 4-5-1, 4-4-1-1, 4-2-3-1, not sure it really matters, we just need a committed performance! COYB.
volpeazzurro Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 As long as Marhez pulls his finger out starts putting a bit of effort in it could work. He also needs to remember it's a team game and not the Marhez show, if he has 2 to 3 players on him even he should have worked out by now that he has team mates in space who themselves may be able to create something.
Dr The Singh Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 1 minute ago, Marshall Cockney Fox said: I don't see that as a huge tactical change - just different personnel. I agree, that's the key, otherwise all were doing is putting different heads on a table football
weller54 Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 1 minute ago, Livid said: Feeling slightly more optimistic. You need that attitude knocking out of you!
kingfox Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 Same formation we played last season, but Gray or Mahrez will slot into the Okazaki role.
Bob Weasel Fox Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 Who gives a Fock what the formation is formations don't win games players do lets hope ours turn up for a change
Dr The Singh Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 3 minutes ago, Webbo said: I hope all these people calling for change won't complain if it doesn't work. I will be complaining, I thought I would say that upfront
Blue Ed Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 Hard to fathom out the system but not to worry. I would like to see Chilwell pressing in to midfield so that should give Albrighton room to move up. so basically looks like 4-2-3-1 with Marhez or Gray in the middle to me but could easily be 4-2-2-2 with Gray up front.
Sir Shep Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 3 minutes ago, Webbo said: I hope all these people calling for change won't complain if it doesn't work. Well I dare say we'd lose if we played the same 442 so it's good to try something different. I do however reserve the right to complain should we still go on and lose!!
benpicko Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 Now just to keep the ball on the floor for a few seconds
Marshall Cockney Fox Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 If we don't impose ourselves early, we will get overun. Effectively 3 wingers and a striker on the park who will lose interest quickly if we can't feed them. We will be either awesome or gash. Place your bets??????
Dr The Singh Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 1 minute ago, Bob Weasel Fox said: Who gives a Fock what the formation is formations don't win games players do lets hope ours turn up for a change I remember a Chelsea team struggling playing 442, and people were saying g the players are not bothered, the manager changed it to 352, and guess what..... Didn't we do the same under Pearson and got out of relegation??
weller54 Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 1 minute ago, Marshall Cockney Fox said: If we don't impose ourselves early, we will get overun. Effectively 3 wingers and a striker on the park who will lose interest quickly if we can't feed them. We will be either awesome or gash. Place your bets?????? Is awesome 5000/1?
Sir Shep Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 3 minutes ago, Webbo said: I hope all these people calling for change won't complain if it doesn't work. Well I dare say we'd lose if we played the same 442 so it's good to try something different. I do however reserve the right to complain should we still go on and lose!!
ClaphamFox Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 11 minutes ago, shiv said: Finally no more 4-4-2! The use of semi-colons and commas in the club's official tweet indicates 4-2-3-1.
ARM1968 Posted 31 December 2016 Posted 31 December 2016 It's time for awesome. Only so much gash anyone can take tbf.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.