dayday Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 Had a look back at what formations he used for Liverpool, and to my surprise he was quite flexible depending on opposition, he often used a 3-5-2, 4-3-3 and even a 4-4-2 diamond. Do you see him doing that for us?, and what do you think we are most suited to with the current squad.
Claridge Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 Playing Morgan is a step in the wrong direction that’s for sure
davieG Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 I’m not convinced this team is capable of dealing with different formations having said that I think their problems are more fundamental as they seem unable to get the fundamentals right like passing and movement. They also seem to lack the ability to see what’s happening around them in particular the runs made by Vardy and even Nacho. Hopefully this will improve with experience but they’ll need to gain that quickly.
Fox In The Box 90 Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 Id consider playing maddison in a deeper role potentially where he can get on the ball more and orchestrate the play. Id also maybe think about playing 433 but pushing the wing backs higher, and using Ndidi in a DM role dropping back into an auxilliary centre back position when we have possession so we can switch between 433 and 343.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 12 minutes ago, davieG said: I’m not convinced this team is capable of dealing with different formations having said that I think their problems are more fundamental as they seem unable to get the fundamentals right like passing and movement. They also seem to lack the ability to see what’s happening around them in particular the runs made by Vardy and even Nacho. Hopefully this will improve with experience but they’ll need to gain that quickly. I think it is extremely apparent that we have a team that is resistant to change.
fazzyfox Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 It may take a while to see what he's doing - if we revert to four at the back vs Fulham it won't neccessarily mean he's abandoned a failed experiment, it could be horses for courses and will continue to switch between two or more formations. Will he have an alternate plan for Man City away for example? If three at the back is permanent then Simpson may as well leave tomorrow and it'll be interesting whether Amartey is seen as a potential CB in a 3, I'm not saying he's one of the best three but as cover.
urban.spaceman Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 Personally I think he deserves a lot of credit for having the balls to play a completely unique formation on his first game, and after only having met the players on Thursday. We were beaten by individual errors today - Kasper especially for the second which was a sucker punch, and the first was offside but regardless, a common occurrence at the start of games this season. For what it’s worth I think we played reasonably well in the second half. He’s got 10 dead rubbers essentially to figure out where to improve, and that can only be a positive thing.
Beechey Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 50 minutes ago, Claridge said: Playing Morgan is a step in the wrong direction that’s for sure As long as he gets to see the weak points of our squad, I don't care who he plays. Providing he doesn't allow performances like that from Morgan (or others) and then offer a contract extension or continue playing him.
volpeazzurro Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 1 hour ago, Fox In The Box 90 said: Id consider playing maddison in a deeper role potentially where he can get on the ball more and orchestrate the play. Id also maybe think about playing 433 but pushing the wing backs higher, and using Ndidi in a DM role dropping back into an auxilliary centre back position when we have possession so we can switch between 433 and 343. I can see the reasoning behind Maddison but think he'd be bullied and knocked off the ball far too easily. Also like Silva, he's not quick enough of thought and can't see or track runners which would be part of his duties. At the moment he's neither one thing or another and is probably worth resting whilst he gets some coaching and perhaps some confidence back.
Vardinio'sCat Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 I think Tanner said it was 3-4-3, but I didn't really work that out at the time.
Pete from the USA Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 After watching that game I couldn't shake the feeling that the players just need coaching and practice. They are too nervous and hesitant going forward and can't play quick, crisp passes. Puel had the right idea but just couldn't get them to do it. Will Rodgers do better?
Deeg67 Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 Again, Rodgers' essential preferred formation is none - he considers himself a Cruyff disciple (or at least, inheritor). Even Cruyff lined up a certain way at the whistle and of course so will Rodgers, but people are reading too much into rigid formations. The most important thing to Rodgers' preferred style is positional flexibility during the match. The problem as always with total football is you need a very specific set of players to successfully play it. Attackers who defend, defenders who attack, MF who go everywhere. At the very least, even if they don't have the ideal skill set they need to have a relentless workrate. That's what was clearly missing last night, and so vexing under the circumstances. There are guys on this roster who would clearly seem to have the skill and inclination to play this system. Ricardo and Chilwell surely, and Tielemans. Probably Barnes, maybe N'didi or Hamza. I don't think Vardy fits Brendanball personally, but right now he's our only finisher. Morgan obviously can't do it, and that creates a huge cascade failure. If it's a back three, Harry obviously can play this way and so can Soyuncu and Benkovic (reportedly). Evans in the center with two of those guys on either side can work - it it's a back four, two of them plus Ben and Pereira can work. In time, and in theory. But it's going to be a long process.
womp Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 i think a lot of people are over rating vardys football smarts. tielemans should be playing at 10 instead of maddison at the moment. formation is fine,will take time to get use to as will other tactics during the game. leadership in the game is a problem. interesting that the clubs who bought the most players are all showing erratic form(except liverpool).
womp Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 43 minutes ago, Deeg67 said: Again, Rodgers' essential preferred formation is none - he considers himself a Cruyff disciple (or at least, inheritor). Even Cruyff lined up a certain way at the whistle and of course so will Rodgers, but people are reading too much into rigid formations. The most important thing to Rodgers' preferred style is positional flexibility during the match. The problem as always with total football is you need a very specific set of players to successfully play it. Attackers who defend, defenders who attack, MF who go everywhere. At the very least, even if they don't have the ideal skill set they need to have a relentless workrate. That's what was clearly missing last night, and so vexing under the circumstances. There are guys on this roster who would clearly seem to have the skill and inclination to play this system. Ricardo and Chilwell surely, and Tielemans. Probably Barnes, maybe N'didi or Hamza. I don't think Vardy fits Brendanball personally, but right now he's our only finisher. Morgan obviously can't do it, and that creates a huge cascade failure. If it's a back three, Harry obviously can play this way and so can Soyuncu and Benkovic (reportedly). Evans in the center with two of those guys on either side can work - it it's a back four, two of them plus Ben and Pereira can work. In time, and in theory. But it's going to be a long process. would you say ndidi is better defensively and choudhury is better with the ball between the 2 of them? what about barnes instead of vardy? i think is worth a try.
Deeg67 Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 33 minutes ago, womp said: would you say ndidi is better defensively and choudhury is better with the ball between the 2 of them? what about barnes instead of vardy? i think is worth a try. Given that we're playing for next season at this point, Barnes as a striker is definitely worth trying, though I don't think that's his long-term future. Barnes at striker, Ward, Soyuncu, Choudhury paired with Tielemans - we need to see all of these options tried in these last 9 matches. Player power must have no say in the matter. I think Choudhury is something of a middle ground between N'didi and Mendy. He's better with the ball than Wilf, but that's a low bar. I don't think Hamza is a total football midfielder instinctively - he's not inclined to push the game forwards and look for the incisive pass. But his engine and his pressing ability could prove useful in such a system. Ironically probably the two players we have who fit Brendanball most naturally (apart from Chills and Ricardo) are Okazaki and Albrighton, about the unsexiest options on the roster. But Shinji is gone after the season and Albrighton has obvious limitations. One option I might like to see tried this season is a sort of modified 3-5-2, though in my mind I see it as a 3-3-2-2. Soyuncu Evans Maguire Ricardo Choudhury Chilwell Tielemans Maddison Vardy Barnes While I'm loathe to take Tielemans out of his deeper-lying role, I like the idea of he and Maddison as sort of twin #10s, with Barnes playing effectively as a second striker alongside Vardy. I think that could be a very mobile and dangerous attacking formation, though it might be a little soft defensively.
bpfox Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 23 minutes ago, Deeg67 said: Given that we're playing for next season at this point, Barnes as a striker is definitely worth trying, though I don't think that's his long-term future. Barnes at striker, Ward, Soyuncu, Choudhury paired with Tielemans - we need to see all of these options tried in these last 9 matches. Player power must have no say in the matter. I think Choudhury is something of a middle ground between N'didi and Mendy. He's better with the ball than Wilf, but that's a low bar. I don't think Hamza is a total football midfielder instinctively - he's not inclined to push the game forwards and look for the incisive pass. But his engine and his pressing ability could prove useful in such a system. Ironically probably the two players we have who fit Brendanball most naturally (apart from Chills and Ricardo) are Okazaki and Albrighton, about the unsexiest options on the roster. But Shinji is gone after the season and Albrighton has obvious limitations. One option I might like to see tried this season is a sort of modified 3-5-2, though in my mind I see it as a 3-3-2-2. Soyuncu Evans Maguire Ricardo Choudhury Chilwell Tielemans Maddison Vardy Barnes While I'm loathe to take Tielemans out of his deeper-lying role, I like the idea of he and Maddison as sort of twin #10s, with Barnes playing effectively as a second striker alongside Vardy. I think that could be a very mobile and dangerous attacking formation, though it might be a little soft defensively. ur kidding u left ndidi out, his work rate was great, he may not be the best going forward but u need pigs to do the dirty work.
Deeg67 Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 5 minutes ago, bpfox said: ur kidding u left ndidi out, his work rate was great, he may not be the best going forward but u need pigs to do the dirty work. I think Choudhury has the potential to be almost as good at the dirty work, and slightly more competent on the ball. I'd like to at least see it attempted while we're playing effectively meaningless games.
ThaiFox Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 I've been saying for a while that a back 3 would suit us, but only if you play with Soyuncu, or with someone of equal pace. Evans, Maguire & Morgan are far too slow and I would imagine most nimble strikers would relish playing against those three, especially if our wing backs are caught too far forward. Maguire was poor yesterday and whilst people moan about Morgan I actually think we were more solid when it was Morgan & Evans at the back.
bpfox Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 1 hour ago, Deeg67 said: I think Choudhury has the potential to be almost as good at the dirty work, and slightly more competent on the ball. I'd like to at least see it attempted while we're playing effectively meaningless games. i think ur right he is very good, but again he is a better defender than attacker. maybe we could play both and have tielemans play in the middle of them, thus taking the ball from them to play forwards.
dayday Posted 4 March 2019 Author Posted 4 March 2019 2 hours ago, Deeg67 said: Given that we're playing for next season at this point, Barnes as a striker is definitely worth trying, though I don't think that's his long-term future. Barnes at striker, Ward, Soyuncu, Choudhury paired with Tielemans - we need to see all of these options tried in these last 9 matches. Player power must have no say in the matter. I think Choudhury is something of a middle ground between N'didi and Mendy. He's better with the ball than Wilf, but that's a low bar. I don't think Hamza is a total football midfielder instinctively - he's not inclined to push the game forwards and look for the incisive pass. But his engine and his pressing ability could prove useful in such a system. Ironically probably the two players we have who fit Brendanball most naturally (apart from Chills and Ricardo) are Okazaki and Albrighton, about the unsexiest options on the roster. But Shinji is gone after the season and Albrighton has obvious limitations. One option I might like to see tried this season is a sort of modified 3-5-2, though in my mind I see it as a 3-3-2-2. Soyuncu Evans Maguire Ricardo Choudhury Chilwell Tielemans Maddison Vardy Barnes While I'm loathe to take Tielemans out of his deeper-lying role, I like the idea of he and Maddison as sort of twin #10s, with Barnes playing effectively as a second striker alongside Vardy. I think that could be a very mobile and dangerous attacking formation, though it might be a little soft defensively. I think Choudhry under Brendan will become a better player, he tackles well, presses well and has pace, he could be the cog that drives the midfield forward.
womp Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 3 hours ago, Deeg67 said: Given that we're playing for next season at this point, Barnes as a striker is definitely worth trying, though I don't think that's his long-term future. Barnes at striker, Ward, Soyuncu, Choudhury paired with Tielemans - we need to see all of these options tried in these last 9 matches. Player power must have no say in the matter. I think Choudhury is something of a middle ground between N'didi and Mendy. He's better with the ball than Wilf, but that's a low bar. I don't think Hamza is a total football midfielder instinctively - he's not inclined to push the game forwards and look for the incisive pass. But his engine and his pressing ability could prove useful in such a system. Ironically probably the two players we have who fit Brendanball most naturally (apart from Chills and Ricardo) are Okazaki and Albrighton, about the unsexiest options on the roster. But Shinji is gone after the season and Albrighton has obvious limitations. One option I might like to see tried this season is a sort of modified 3-5-2, though in my mind I see it as a 3-3-2-2. Soyuncu Evans Maguire Ricardo Choudhury Chilwell Tielemans Maddison Vardy Barnes While I'm loathe to take Tielemans out of his deeper-lying role, I like the idea of he and Maddison as sort of twin #10s, with Barnes playing effectively as a second striker alongside Vardy. I think that could be a very mobile and dangerous attacking formation, though it might be a little soft defensively. i was pointing towards that type of line up but at this point in time I like gray over maddison,works harder without the ball and has more skills,maybe im wrong but maddison does the same thing to pass an opponent.yes i think tielemans needs to be up further,he did a brilliant through ball that vardy didnt read.
Ric Flair Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 The single best thing he has said so far is how there must be players closer to Vardy and supporting him in the box when the ball comes in. Yes, he is still the business in the channels but against teams that sit deep we have to then get closer to him and work openings, as the coont will finish it in a flash. If we are going to go 3 at the back then Soyuncu has to play, or even Choudhury as the quarter back. I think Amartey will be interesting under Rodgers in that formation.
hackenbacker Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 10 hours ago, Fox In The Box 90 said: Id consider playing maddison in a deeper role or not playing him at all until he learns to pass the ball quicker and get rid of his "look at me look at me" attitude
Guest Papasmurf Posted 4 March 2019 Posted 4 March 2019 17 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: The single best thing he has said so far is how there must be players closer to Vardy and supporting him in the box when the ball comes in. Yes, he is still the business in the channels but against teams that sit deep we have to then get closer to him and work openings, as the coont will finish it in a flash. If we are going to go 3 at the back then Soyuncu has to play, or even Choudhury as the quarter back. I think Amartey will be interesting under Rodgers in that formation. Any return date for Amartey?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.