AylestoneRaider Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 7 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said: Is it possible to get Gray Barnes Tielemans Vardy and Maddison on the pitch in a formation of reasonable sorts? 4-2-3-1 the formation against Brighton - that was Puel’s preferred formation - he just always picked someone like Ghezzal!
AylestoneRaider Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 7 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said: He really wasn’t. He had a great game. Anyway he won’t be dropped because I am sure Brendan will see the enormous contribution he makes. His distribution is improving now as well.
mozartfox Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 11 minutes ago, AylestoneRaider said: Ndidi was our best player v Watford - absolutely zero chance he’ll be dropped. And Wes was one of the worst - also absolutely zero chance he'll be dropped.
foxinsox Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 On 04/03/2019 at 13:51, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said: Dont think Chilwell is good enough as an attacking player to be a wingback Worked ok on the right when Ricardo and Gray could operate together. 343 or whatever it was seemed to nullify us at the top. I think the 4231 is our best formation atm for our players Chilwell plays wingback for England with Maguire as part of a three. He can do it. On Sunday he was missing someone to overlap with on the wing. When he did bomb down the line, there was neither cover nor anyone to pass to, so he had to cut in. Ricardo much the same. 4231 is our best formation at the moment. Puels problem was not so much the formation as the ponderous attack, when we got the ball forward quickly it was deadly. Kasper Ricardo Evans Maguire Chilwell Tielemans Ndidi Gray Maddison Barnes Vardy
AylestoneRaider Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 1 minute ago, mozartfox said: And Wes was one of the worst - also absolutely zero chance he'll be dropped. I am hoping he brought Wes into the team to help deal with Troy D (which didn’t work for the 1st goal..), but I fear he’ll stick with the big man in a back three.
weller54 Posted 6 March 2019 Author Posted 6 March 2019 9 minutes ago, mozartfox said: And Wes was one of the worst - also absolutely zero chance he'll be dropped. With Benkovic coming into the team next season perhaps Rodgers is just giving Wes the chance to play in the last few games.. After all they're pretty meaningless. Morgan won't be playing next season that's for sure.
st albans fox Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 1 minute ago, weller54 said: With Benkovic coming into the team next season perhaps Rodgers is just giving Wes the chance to play in the last few games.. After all they're pretty meaningless. Morgan won't be playing next season that's for sure. Wes was apparently selected to deal with Deeney mitrovic ............rondon..........many teams have a big striker so maybe we will see more of Wes ...........
AylestoneRaider Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 2 minutes ago, weller54 said: With Benkovic coming into the team next season perhaps Rodgers is just giving Wes the chance to play in the last few games.. After all they're pretty meaningless. Morgan won't be playing next season that's for sure. I really hope Wes finishes for us this season with his head held high and moves down to the Championship. He’d be a great signing for someone (possibly florist).
Nick Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 I find it incredible that after 14 months of playing in a dire 4231 formation that anybody could suggest wanting to see it ever again.
Nick Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 25 minutes ago, AylestoneRaider said: He had a great game. Anyway he won’t be dropped because I am sure Brendan will see the enormous contribution he makes. His distribution is improving now as well. It’s not what Wilf does that makes him an awful lynchpin at the spine of the team. It’s what he doesn’t do.
AlloverthefloorYesNdidi Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 5 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said: I find it incredible that after 14 months of playing in a dire 4231 formation that anybody could suggest wanting to see it ever again. 90 minutes at the weekend was enough for me for 3 at the back
AlloverthefloorYesNdidi Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 25 minutes ago, foxinsox said: Chilwell plays wingback for England with Maguire as part of a three. He can do it. On Sunday he was missing someone to overlap with on the wing. When he did bomb down the line, there was neither cover nor anyone to pass to, so he had to cut in. Ricardo much the same. 4231 is our best formation at the moment. Puels problem was not so much the formation as the ponderous attack, when we got the ball forward quickly it was deadly. Kasper Ricardo Evans Maguire Chilwell Tielemans Ndidi Gray Maddison Barnes Vardy If he had the option to cut in himself sometimes it would work better. He's too one dimensional until he learns to use that right foot at least a little bit Agree about the 4231, until I see evidence otherwise I think its the way to go for the rest of the season at least
Bob Weasel Fox Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 7 hours ago, Guest said: 3 centre backs isn't necessarily negative or defensive. It's our mentality and approach that determine that, not the formation. Burnley play 4-4-2 most weeks and they're one of the most negative, defensive teams about. Yep I understand that but just feels more of an “away” thing to do generally
Nick Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 20 minutes ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said: 90 minutes at the weekend was enough for me for 3 at the back Good to see you are practicing what you’ve been preaching for the last 12 months regarding youth and change and building something then.
Nick Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 There wasn’t a lot wrong with three at the back. What it did do which was plain to see was allow an extra body up top which made Vardy less isolated and the football actually begin to show signs of promise. If Ndidi had wanted the ball at all from the back three except watching them pass it sideways to each other with limited outlet apart from cross balls to Ric or Chills then we might be a team that plays more down the middle and actually creates stuff. It’s lovely having a ball winner but that player needs to be able want and create on the ball too at this level and sadly Ndidi isn’t yet that player with that ability.
AlloverthefloorYesNdidi Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 4 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said: Good to see you are practicing what you’ve been preaching for the last 12 months regarding youth and change and building something then. Swan, I will be supporting this manager when you've lost your rag in 3 or 4 games time The amusing thing about this is the situation has changed not a jot for me . Everything is the same as under Puel, except people are happy about Rodgers for more or less no reason Patience is still the key and this squad will more or less go in the direction it was going in, that has been demonstrated laughably well over the last 2 games Having said that, 3 at the back looked like a step back and has every time we've used it with this squad.
AlloverthefloorYesNdidi Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 Just now, Swan Lesta said: There wasn’t a lot wrong with three at the back. What it did do which was plain to see was allow an extra body up top which made Vardy less isolated and the football actually begin to show signs of promise. If Ndidi had wanted the ball at all from the back three except watching them pass it sideways to each other with limited outlet apart from cross balls to Ric or Chills then we might be a team that plays more down the middle and actually creates stuff. It’s lovely having a ball winner but that player needs to be able want and create on the ball too at this level and sadly Ndidi isn’t yet that player with that ability. Vardy had less touches than anyone on the pitch in the first half I didnt see him more involved at all.
Nick Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 1 minute ago, AlloverthefloorYesNdidi said: Vardy had less touches than anyone on the pitch in the first half I didnt see him more involved at all. Vardy has barely touched the ball all season. But we certainly looked more dangerous than under Puel once we got our act together.
AlloverthefloorYesNdidi Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 Just now, Swan Lesta said: Vardy has barely touched the ball all season. But we certainly looked more dangerous than under Puel once we got our act together. I just didnt see that at all (us looking more dangerous at the weekend I mean) I thought it was one of our worst games all season and we created about 2 good chances including the goal I honestly think people are seeing what they want to see because of Rodgers v Puel It is early days for Rodgers and he looks to be changing things up, so the initial falter may turn out we get things going pretty quickly and even improve over the next few games But to argue that Watford was a step forward in any way, I just didnt see it, sorry
Suzie the Fox Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 7 minutes ago, Swan Lesta said: Vardy has barely touched the ball all season. But we certainly looked more dangerous than under Puel once we got our act together. I have to agree with @AlloverthefloorYesNdidiin the fact i thought we looked all over the place v Watford. Now if this was due to switching formation or not remains to be seen and based on the extremely small size of 1 game, i think its hard to say with any sort of conviction either way. I'm all up for change if it benefits us, but i would have preferred to not have had that much change in BR's 1st game. 3 atb may work given time and its something the fans have been calling out for... Time will tell
Nick Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 What is my opinion of 14 months? Your post makes no sense. It’s actually funny that you think I’m in love with Rodgers for some bizarre reason. You do this all the time. You don’t argue with individuals or their reasoning, you just consider every poster that disagrees with you all hold the values you dislike and attribute your frustrated demons toward them in your blanket resentment accordingly, with limited critical reflection. Im like you supporting Rodgers who has arrived, will try new things with a bunch of players who have shown zero signs under Puel of gelling in any fashion on and off the field and you are blind to holding Puel responsible for that. You watched the players in one formation under Puel fail to deliver for 14 months and you’ve given a new formation under a new manager 90 minutes and don’t want to see it again. That’s just hypocrisy mate, put whatever words around it to fluff it up but you’ve given a new manager with a blank canvass 90 minutes. Hes inherited the same bunch of players with the football coached out of them for the past year and he’s had two training sessions to try and get his messages across. Maybe give some alternative formations a chance because you can’t say with any sincerity whatsoever that 4231 was working.
AKCJ Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 Ward Ricardo Evans Maguire Chilwell Ndidi Gray Tielemans Maddison Barnes Vardy
Nick Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 21 minutes ago, Suzie the Fox said: I have to agree with @AlloverthefloorYesNdidiin the fact i thought we looked all over the place v Watford. Now if this was due to switching formation or not remains to be seen and based on the extremely small size of 1 game, i think its hard to say with any sort of conviction either way. I'm all up for change if it benefits us, but i would have preferred to not have had that much change in BR's 1st game. 3 atb may work given time and its something the fans have been calling out for... Time will tell Yeah I think BR made a bad call in using Wes in a three but I think he had to come in, raise morale and give the Club Captain a chance but it didn’t work out. He may or may not get another one - who knows. Whatever BR tries the football and the dressing room can’t be any worse than under Claude Puel. I hope BR can get us playing some quicker passing football and hope that he can train and improve what we have or acquire some able DM’s who can play with and without the football.
Nick Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 13 minutes ago, AKCJ said: Ward Ricardo Evans Maguire Chilwell Ndidi Gray Tielemans Maddison Barnes Vardy I would love to see this. Ndidi in an Iborra type role just sat in front of the back four with no real remit to get forward, just to release the ball to one of the four in front. Round pegs in round holes putting Ndidi where he can excel.
Foxboy Posted 6 March 2019 Posted 6 March 2019 2 hours ago, Swan Lesta said: Is it possible to get Gray Barnes Tielemans Vardy and Maddison on the pitch in a formation of reasonable sorts? Schmeichel Ric Evans Harry Chillers Tielememans Ndidi Maddison Barnes Gray Vardy
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.