Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Koke

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

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, TJB-fox said:

Do you understand the concept of must win? 

Yes... that would really be the game against Southampton in the cup.

 

BUT beat WHU and top 4 is an absolutely realistic prospect.

 

Financially, top 4 is much better than winning the cup.  Although if we do win the cup, I may have to turn and be a Tottenham fan.... I'm forgetting what it feels to be a REAL Leicester fan of 24 years 😂

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, weller54 said:

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!!

In which case, at least lose by fielding your best players in their preferred positions and go out fighting and having a go. We've beaten them once and United found a way recently. Yes, we'd be massive underdogs but if you don't buy a ticket, you won't win a prize. Just sitting back and inviting them on to three central defenders, two of which aren't the most mobile, is a recipe for almost certain defeat. 

Edited by volpeazzurro
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FoxyJim1987 said:

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. 

Agreed, 5 at the back doesn't have to be defensive, it's the way Rodgers employs it I think. It's no coincidence that when he changes it between the now almost clockwork 65-70 minutes, our performances seem to drastically improve. Are there many current top winning teams in Europe currently using this formation every week? We always look conjested in midfield playing unadventurous supposed passing football which is ponderous and allows teams to get back and defend in numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just Dont understand the apprehension on this forum....

We are going through our most exciting period....Why The miserable thoughts,

to a man we should be so excited & looking forward  in what Lays before us....

This is what we & many other teams have been Gagging for....!!!

or have we become so American...That we want to know who dunnit,  from the beginning...

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ricey said:

So after beating Sheffield United 5-0 and Man Utd 3-1, with this system, we should have changed it against Man City of all teams? I bet you weren’t say that before the match. No one was saying that before the match.

I did actually, it's on here somewhere. 

Sheffield were incredibly poor let's be honest. United was our best match for a long while for me but, whilst the table doesn't lie, many of our results have been very fortunate in that in playing that system, with many of those teams we played, we could very easily have been 3 down at halftime!

When Rodgers has then tinkered with it in the second halves, it is only then that we have improved and dragged out a result, even the tv pundits have mentioned it during the games. So why not start that way? Anyone will struggle against Man City but when I've watched us against them and Liverpool (albeit they collapsed when we changed things, though a little fortunately they also contrived to beat themselves), it's easy to see that we're going to get overun against those two teams in particular in midfield. With the block we were playing, it invites them on in waves. With no extra midfielder, you were rarely going to get the ball to Iheanacho or Vardy, you simply just have to camp in your own half like an attack v defence training session. Unfortunately, Man City have just the sort of players to get through. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

 If we continue this negative 5 at the back

Ricardo - Fofana - Evans - Soyuncu - Castagne/Justin is far from negative !!!!!!!

 

6 hours ago, FoxyJim1987 said:

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. 

:appl:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, FoxyJim1987 said:

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. 

It depends on the way it's deployed. Against Man City it was definitely 5 at the back. When watching yesterday (particularly first half) you could see the three solid banks in formation. 5-3-2 and all in our own half on the defensive.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, UpTheLeagueFox said:

Ricardo - Fofana - Evans - Soyuncu - Castagne/Justin is far from negative !!!!!!!

 

:appl:

I think it depends how it's deployed but also what personnel you have available. Fofana and Evans have been great. Ricardo, admittedly coming back from serious injury looks uncomfortable and frustrated when pushed further forward, he seems to hovver in no-mans land somewhat unsure of what to do. He's not a winger by far, we've seen that before and we seem to lose his better defensive qualities and his devastating runs from deep when not in a 4 where he stood out arguably as one of the best in his position in Europe.

 

Souyuncu too looks far from comfortable as a right footed player when trying to cover out wider on the left regularly and it has also been picked up on by pundits, yet he then gives a man of the match performance for Turkey when played in a more natural position. 

 

Why is it when we resume back to some kind of four at the back in a second half, we appear to improve dramatically, look less disjointed, more sure about what we're doing and strangely, as well as a better attacking side, look less likely to concede compared to the first halves?

 

As I mentioned, what current successful team currently uses a 5 in Europe? I'm asking because I genuinely don't know. I usually associate a 5 with sides facing relegation that try to pack their defences unless you go back to exceptional wing backs like Cafu or Marcello etc who employ a 5 in such an atracking role some allude too. Also, just because you play a 4 doesn't mean that you can't have attacking fullbacks and certainly Ricardo is a great example of one of those. A 5 against a full strength Liverpool or Man City, just for me, leaves a certain predictability about how the game will pan out before it even starts, being outnumbered in midfield and putting yourself under pressure. 

Edited by volpeazzurro
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 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 

The benefit of Amartey being in there means we can always switch to a 4-2-3-1 if needed.

 

Schmeichel

 

Amartey

Evans 

Fofana

Castagne

 

Ndidi

Tielemans

 

Ricardo

Iheanacho

Perez

 

Vardy 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, volpeazzurro said:

I think it depends how it's deployed but also what personnel you have available. Fofana and Evans have been great. Ricardo, admittedly coming back from serious injury looks uncomfortable and frustrated when pushed further forward, he seems to hovver in no-mans land somewhat unsure of what to do. He's not a winger by far, we've seen that before and we seem to lose his better defensive qualities and his devastating runs from deep when not in a 4 where he stood out arguably as one of the best in his position in Europe.

 

Souyuncu too looks far from comfortable as a right footed player when trying to cover out wider on the left regularly and it has also been picked up on by pundits, yet he then gives a man of the match performance for Turkey when played in a more natural position. 

 

Why is it when we resume back to some kind of four at the back in a second half, we appear to improve dramatically, look less disjointed, more sure about what we're doing and strangely, as well as a better attacking side, look less likely to concede compared to the first halves?

 

As I mentioned, what current successful team currently uses a 5 in Europe? I'm asking because I genuinely don't know. I usually associate a 5 with sides facing relegation that try to pack their defences unless you go back to exceptional wing backs like Cafu or Marcello etc who employ a 5 in such an atracking role some allude too. Also, just because you play a 4 doesn't mean that you can't have attacking fullbacks and certainly Ricardo is a great example of one of those. A 5 against a full strength Liverpool or Man City, just for me, leaves a certain predictability about how the game will pan out before it even starts, being outnumbered in midfield and putting yourself under pressure. 

Cags and wes in a back three is not defensive.  It allows cags to be as aggressive as he likes without leaving a big hole behind him. And the two of them are very comfortable breaking forward and releasing a midfielder into the space that creates.   How many times have we seen the three of them together?  Maybe let them play a few more times and see how it goes. You can’t judge the formation with DA in it because he doesn’t come out with the ball with any confidence. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will be a back 5, unless Barnes is fit. Without Barnes we can’t generate the width, so we need to get it from the full back areas. So it will be a back five. 
 

It’s the hardest of these five games coming up, these five games are massive, we need to go all out to avoid a repeat of last season. We can’t afford to rely on those last three games again, otherwise we could be in last season’s situation all over again. 
 

We can do it, but all emphasis needs to be placed on these next five games! Get the job done boys! 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, volpeazzurro said:

I think it depends how it's deployed but also what personnel you have available. Fofana and Evans have been great. Ricardo, admittedly coming back from serious injury looks uncomfortable and frustrated when pushed further forward, he seems to hovver in no-mans land somewhat unsure of what to do. He's not a winger by far, we've seen that before and we seem to lose his better defensive qualities and his devastating runs from deep when not in a 4 where he stood out arguably as one of the best in his position in Europe.

 

Souyuncu too looks far from comfortable as a right footed player when trying to cover out wider on the left regularly and it has also been picked up on by pundits, yet he then gives a man of the match performance for Turkey when played in a more natural position. 

 

Why is it when we resume back to some kind of four at the back in a second half, we appear to improve dramatically, look less disjointed, more sure about what we're doing and strangely, as well as a better attacking side, look less likely to concede compared to the first halves?

 

As I mentioned, what current successful team currently uses a 5 in Europe? I'm asking because I genuinely don't know. I usually associate a 5 with sides facing relegation that try to pack their defences unless you go back to exceptional wing backs like Cafu or Marcello etc who employ a 5 in such an atracking role some allude too. Also, just because you play a 4 doesn't mean that you can't have attacking fullbacks and certainly Ricardo is a great example of one of those. A 5 against a full strength Liverpool or Man City, just for me, leaves a certain predictability about how the game will pan out before it even starts, being outnumbered in midfield and putting yourself under pressure. 

I think Inter Milan currently play a 3/5 atb with 2 up top, and they’re not doing too badly in fairness. And I think Real Madrid have played with a back 3 at times this season as well. Not sure I can think of many others off the top of my head.

 

Edit: Actually Atalanta are another that play 3/5 atb 

Edited by Foxes96
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Cags and wes in a back three is not defensive.  It allows cags to be as aggressive as he likes without leaving a big hole behind him. And the two of them are very comfortable breaking forward and releasing a midfielder into the space that creates.   How many times have we seen the three of them together?  Maybe let them play a few more times and see how it goes. You can’t judge the formation with DA in it because he doesn’t come out with the ball with any confidence. 

I think that's fair comment and you're right, it could develop. I also agree about Armarty but bearing in mind, he was also out of position on the left side to some extent and, all things considered I don't think he let himself down .

 

With that in mind though as you mention, with his lesser ability to break forward, would there not have been a good case for a back 4 of Ricardo, Fofana, Evans and Castagne, all quite happy in those roles, particularly Ricardo. A more mobile midfielder could then have been employed to assist against their strong Man City counterparts. Add Praet instead of Perez and you have yet another stronger and dare I suggest it, far superior player. The flaw in my argument would be how fit Ricardo and Praet would have been . However, if they tired, we would have suitable players on the bench.

Edited by volpeazzurro
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Foxes96 said:

I think Inter Milan currently play a 3/5 atb with 2 up top, and they’re not doing too badly in fairness. And I think Real Madrid have played with a back 3 at times this season as well. Not sure I can think of many others off the top of my head.

 

Edit: Actually Atalanta are another that play 3/5 atb 

Thanks, it was a genuine question. I was aware of Atalanta and do think they play well with it, but didn't know of the other two. I think the best way is to be adaptable dependent upon opposition however, I also acknowledge that depends upon what players you actually have available at any given time i.e. Barnes is a huge loss to us at the moment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pliskin said:

It will be a back 5, unless Barnes is fit. Without Barnes we can’t generate the width, so we need to get it from the full back areas. So it will be a back five. 
 

It’s the hardest of these five games coming up, these five games are massive, we need to go all out to avoid a repeat of last season. We can’t afford to rely on those last three games again, otherwise we could be in last season’s situation all over again. 
 

We can do it, but all emphasis needs to be placed on these next five games! Get the job done boys! 

Exactly. Without Barnes we would be very workmanlike in a 4-2-3-1 and for all the supposed issues we have as a team in a 3-4-1-2 it's likely to be worse as a collective in a back 4. Vardy and Iheamacho work brilliantly together and with Maddison or Perez in the 10 we ought to be too strong for many of the opposition we have coming up. Having Barnes back for those final 4-5 games will be ideal as they often can't handle our overload pace.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, cruzFOX said:

I just have one question:

WHEN THE HELL IS BARNES COMING BACK?

He was injured on 28th Feb, and is meant to be out for 6 weeks. He could be expected back in training in about 2 weeks time from now, I think. It's not an exact science, though. Often, players have come back later than Brendan has said they should be back, and Praet was back about a month sooner than initially expected.

 

If I had to guess, I'd say he could back (at least on the bench) by the Palace game on 26th April.

Link to comment
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...