Jump to content
Koke

West Ham (A) Sun 11/04/21 @ 14:05

Recommended Posts

Think a back 4 is the way to go but concerned about the lack of width in a diamond. So I’d go for a flat 4-4-2 and keep it tight.

 

Would like to see Castagne and Ricardo swapped as I think Castagne is much better on the right on the overlap, but I’m guessing it must have been worked on and reviewed in training and this was the preferable approach. 
 

Was tempted to bring Maddison or Perez in for Iheanacho but think the Iheanacho-Vardy axis deserves another chance as it has proven it can work. And then we can bring Maddison on if it’s not working. 
 

                  Schmeichel 

Ricardo - Fofana - Evans - Castagne 

Praet - Ndidi - Tielemans - Albrighton

           Iheanacho - Vardy

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Schmeichel

 

Amartey

Evans

Fofana

 

Ricardo

Tielemans

Ndidi

Castagne

 

Perez

 

Vardy

Iheanacho

 

I’d persist with this system, looked good in previous games. Wouldn’t change it due to one result against champions elect 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t think he’ll ditch a system that has looked so good for us after one defeat to Man City. I also think he’ll want 3 CB’s to deal with Antonio, as he caused us a lot of problems earlier in the season.

 

Maddison for Perez and Ricardo for Albrighton.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Cardiff_Fox said:

The way I read is that we avoid defeat we can pull off top 4 before those final three games.

 

If we lose, we will probably be requiring something in those games. 

 

The key will be our defending. The amount of silly, avoidable goals we’ve conceded from all forms has been an Achilles heel. That will be the decider - we handed West Ham three goals in the reserve. Poor defending on all of them rather than pure skill and craft 

I agree. Lose and there’s a bit more pressure on. Still a lot of teams around us have to play each other, but avoiding defeat would be massive. Winning would secure it for me. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, winteriscoming said:

                    Kasper 

Ricardo  Fofana Evans Castagne 

        Tielmans Ndidi Praet 

               Maddison 

            Nacho Vardy 


Would start soyuncu instead of Fofana but looking unlikely he’ll be available. 

Spot on for me. Ditch the three at the back bollocks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a good chance, given the fixture times next weekend, that we'll start this match 4 points clear of 5th. Lose and it could be down to 1 point, with Chelsea, West Ham, Liverpool and Tottenham all right behind us. This is a truly massive game which will really test the team's mettle. Let's do this!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Ricey said:

I don’t think he’ll ditch a system that has looked so good for us after one defeat to Man City. I also think he’ll want 3 CB’s to deal with Antonio, as he caused us a lot of problems earlier in the season.

 

Maddison for Perez and Ricardo for Albrighton.

I think because of the opposition(only 1 lump up top and a very strong 3 man midfield with strength and a runner in the hole lingard) that’s why he should adjust accordingly.

The fact Soyuncu is out too means it’s even less attractive to do this when you have to bring Amarty in - more static rubbish and less energy that you could have with a Praet in midfield.

Its a huge game and we can’t afford to lose really. After seeing West Ham rip us last time(funnily enough a carbon copy after we played City, played so defensive then stuck to a 5 atb with Amarty in funnily and got over run in the middle and battered) I think there’s no better time to actually adjust in this one looking at everything.

No that’s not an over reaction to playing City, it’s called tactical awareness, knowledge of the opposition and learning from experiences.


The 5 atb worked well vs teams with weaker midfields that Wilf and Youri can dominate even 2 v 3. Against a top 3 , you over work them and stop Youri playing. West Ham are as good as anyone in the centre and that’s there main strength, so it would be ludacris to give them an extra man in there and put Amarty in when they have Antonio up top only.

 

West Hams weakness for me is when you attack them and break the lines. They don’t have great CBs and when you get at them they can crumble.

Clog the middle with a 3, have Madders in the hole to cause them an issue going backwards and then support Vards and Nacho.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, deanolegend1989 said:

I think because of the opposition(only 1 lump up top and a very strong 3 man midfield with strength and a runner in the hole lingard) that’s why he should adjust accordingly.

The fact Soyuncu is out too means it’s even less attractive to do this when you have to bring Amarty in - more static rubbish and less energy that you could have with a Praet in midfield.

Its a huge game and we can’t afford to lose really. After seeing West Ham rip us last time(funnily enough a carbon copy after we played City, played so defensive then stuck to a 5 atb with Amarty in funnily and got over run in the middle and battered) I think there’s no better time to actually adjust in this one looking at everything.

No that’s not an over reaction to playing City, it’s called tactical awareness, knowledge of the opposition and learning from experiences.


The 5 atb worked well vs teams with weaker midfields that Wilf and Youri can dominate even 2 v 3. Against a top 3 , you over work them and stop Youri playing. West Ham are as good as anyone in the centre and that’s there main strength, so it would be ludacris to give them an extra man in there and put Amarty in when they have Antonio up top only.

 

West Hams weakness for me is when you attack them and break the lines. They don’t have great CBs and when you get at them they can crumble.

Clog the middle with a 3, have Madders in the hole to cause them an issue going backwards and then support Vards and Nacho.

 

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, murphy said:

Not keen on these wingless 4 atb teams.  We need some width.  5 atb has worked well for us recently.  I'm sure that Man City would have beaten us with a back four or five.

Yes but without a RW and without Barnes we are relying on our full backs or wing backs for width. Plus Kelechi is in such good form he has to play meaning 2 up front. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

With the likes of Ndidi and Kelechi back Thursday night, Riccardo and Maddison lacking game time and Caglar inexplicably missing due to friggin Covid. yesterdays game a bit too soon. 

 

Against West Ham though, I really think we will be ready.

 

Riccardo has to play RB to deal with an in-form and pacey Lingard. Ndidi needs to win the battle with Soucek and I reckon we will grab what we need,

 

Kasper

Riccardo - Fofana - Evans - Caglar - Castagne

                   Ndidi - Tielemans

              Kelechi -          Maddison

                           Vards

 

If Caglar is still injured, Id switch to a 442. Amartey isnt good enough in a 5 and gets caught out way too much. His distribution is poor too IMO. I`d look at adding a central midfielder, possibly creative like Praet instead of Cags if injured.

 

West Ham 1-3 Leicester

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Reg Vardy said:

Amartey made to pick up Antonio.....five at the back would also work to offset Lingaard....

Antonio would/will bully Amartey.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If we approach the game with the intention of winning, like an aspiring top 4 side should, then we have better players and can win. If we continue this negative 5 at the back, crowded and disjointed 'let's not lose' approach, then it's a lottery. Notwithstanding yesterday and against a Championship standard Sheffield United, our position in the table belies our performances and in several games, against poor opposition, we should have been 3 down by halftime.

 

Only when Rodgers has changed it in the second halves do we look anything like decent. Yes, the table doesn't lie but, we've ridden our luck on many occasions. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

“Rodgers confirmed that Turkish defender Caglar Soyuncu tested positive for Coronavirus while on international duty. The most important thing is he is feeling fine. I very much doubt he’ll be available next weekend. “ 

  • Sad 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, filthyfox said:

No, this is a must win.

Then we can put three points to bed, but they will feel like 6.

Do you understand the concept of must win? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jazzy_Jeff said:

Schmeichel

 

Amartey

Evans

Fofana

 

Ricardo

Tielemans

Ndidi

Castagne

 

Perez

 

Vardy

Iheanacho

 

I’d persist with this system, looked good in previous games. Wouldn’t change it due to one result against champions elect 

Agreed. Until Barnes returns, we don't really have the players to make the most of 4-2-3-1. We could play a diamond, but I don't think we'll see that unless it's a second half and we need a goal.

 

Like you said, the 3 at the back with Vardy and Nacho up front was working well until yesterday, and there is no shame in losing to Man City. I didn't expect to get anything from that, anyway.

 

I might start Maddison or Praet for Perez, but I think Ayoze's been pretty good lately in his preferred position. We've got a much stronger bench than we've had recently in any case.

 

It's a real shame to lose Cags to the 'vid. Fuch international football.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, deanolegend1989 said:

Without Soyuncu , 4 atb for this.

Today we were run over in the middle and we should of brought Praet on at half time to add energy in the middle.

 

Kasper

Castange Fofana Evans Ricardo

      Tielemens Ndidi Praet

                 Madders

              Vardy Nacho

 

Castange at Rb is a better fit. Ricardo did a good job at Lb on Salah so would deal well with Bowen.

We got run over by Rice and Soucek at home but we have Wilf this time. We need a 3rd man in though as Lingard runs off the back as a number 10, so Wilf will be occupied by him breaking the lines so Youri will get over worked by the strength of Rice and Soucek so this is definitely a game for Praet to add legs.

Having Madders then in the hole as well would cause them concern and relieve the press on our other midfielders.

Vardy and Nacho does work. Today they were both icolated so it’s easy to think that needs to change but it was clear today we lost it in the middle and vs the best team in the world right now.


They are strong in the middle but only have Antonio up top so this is 100% a 4 atb, clog the middle and win the battle in there. If Soyuncu was available then it would still be a 4 atb job.

5 atb works when teams are weak in the middle and Youri and Wilf as a 2 can dominate a 3 by being so much better than them(Sheffield Utd and Man Utd with Fred Matic is easy going) but when the opposition have a 3 in the middle of quality we need to control the game.

 

Totally agree and we should have played 4 at the back yesterday and and given ourselves an extra midfielder. Also Praet for the hapless Perez with Maddison to come on later as he did. Pretty poor tactics and team selection yesterday and if we can't show more ambition than that, it's pointless trying to beat Southampton only to meet Man City in a final and repeat it.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Our gutless offering yesterday is already beginning to recede into the distance, particularly after Newcastle's late equalizer against Spurs. If Wolves do the business against West Ham tomorrow, then everything is set up for next week's showdown. If we win then we're odds on for a CL spot, even a draw would make us clear favourites. Frustrating as it was to see us surrender so meekly yesterday, Rodgers' team selection was all about preparing for next week's pivotal fixture. All the pressure will be on West Ham - lose and they aint catching us. With Spurs fading, Chelsea stumbling and Liverpool still way behind we will be firmly in pole position. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to personalise this, as I have no beef with anyone here, but the line of argument that goes 'we should have been 3 down' is the ultimate in after-the-fact what iffery. We weren't, so the possibility is irrelevant. It sounds a bit like 'penalties don't count' to me.

 

And of course, nobody gets away with saying 'we should have been 3 up', such as was the case at Bournemouth last season, because we weren't. And basically putting our league position down to a large amount of luck is pretty damning, to be honest. Try telling the manager that to his face, and I'd expect him to wonder what he has to do to please some people.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, volpeazzurro said:

Totally agree and we should have played 4 at the back yesterday and and given ourselves an extra midfielder. Also Praet for the hapless Perez with Maddison to come on later as he did. Pretty poor tactics and team selection yesterday and if we can't show more ambition than that, it's pointless trying to beat Southampton only to meet Man City in a final and repeat it.

I honestly cannot see any plan working towards beating Manchester City in the final (if we get there)... they're superior to us in every position and their squad is ridiculous!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

If we approach the game with the intention of winning, like an aspiring top 4 side should, then we have better players and can win. If we continue this negative 5 at the back, crowded and disjointed 'let's not lose' approach, then it's a lottery. Notwithstanding yesterday and against a Championship standard Sheffield United, our position in the table belies our performances and in several games, against poor opposition, we should have been 3 down by halftime.

 

Only when Rodgers has changed it in the second halves do we look anything like decent. Yes, the table doesn't lie but, we've ridden our luck on many occasions. 

But 5 at the back is not negative and it's not really 5 is it, it's 3 centre backs and 2 wing backs. We have played with this formation many times, we turned over man utd and man city earlier in the season using it. It allows a true number 10 and 2 upfront, not sure why its negative. If we play 4 atb, how do you play 2 uptop? If you play a midfield diamond then there's little width. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...