Fez of Mahrez Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 Regardless of who you'd pick, just wondering who would persevere with 4-4-2 and who thinks a switch to 3-5-2 suits our personnel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamesmaster Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 4-3-1-2 hume playing just behind the front 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricey Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 3-5-2 would be worth a go, something like this.... Henderson Stearman - McCarthy - Kisnorbo/Kenton Low - Williams - Johnson/Weso - Hughes - Porter Fryatt - Hume Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loake Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 I think if we had played 3-5-2 pre- season then it would be better, however we didnt, so the players will have to take time to adjust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 3-5-2 as we dont have the players to play an effective 4-4-2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluefoxtim Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 Most teams play the 4-4-2 system so surely a different formation would give the opposition something to think about rather than the straight man for man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shipman Out Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 ...........................HENDERSON STEARMAN McCARTHY KISNORBO SHEEHAN ......................... JOHNSON ...............WESOLOWSKI WILLIAMS ............................HUME .....................FRYATT O'GRADY Fryat plays off the shoulder, Hume given a free role to drift wide, O'Grady used to create space for Fryat to run into and Weso and Williams to find the killer pass. Williams and Johnson take turns sitting in midfield. No protection for Stearman or Sheehan but they can cope but press forward when required. Injuries/loss of form? Hammond can fill freerole drifting wide, Hughes spare Centre Mid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkers Wonderkid Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 its very obvious but true, put it this way, we arent taking any risks at all. we need to play proper wingers if were goin to play 4-4-2 not tiatto and maybury! they're way too defensive, we need to start playing the attacking wingers too get more chance of scoring which is also obvious but true! and at most other clubs th in all divisions they will have attacking minded wingers, which can and do help back too, that will score goals and actually create chances and put some flair into the team which is another thing we lack. i can understand what kelly is trying but he could still play one or the other like low on the right and tiatto on the left?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookwhaticando Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 -----------------Henderson------------------- -------McCarthy Kisnorbo McAuley---------- Stearman ---------------------------Sheehan ---Williams Wesolowski/Johnson Hughes--- -----------------Hume - Fryatt ---------------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxpodder Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 -----------------Henderson------------------- -------McCarthy Kisnorbo McAuley---------- Stearman ---------------------------Sheehan ---Williams Wesolowski/Johnson Hughes--- -----------------Hume - Fryatt ---------------- I'd go for 4-3-3 with Hulme Fryatt and O'Grady up top - we don't vreally have the wide players so lets play to the strengths we have. Midfield Hughes, Johnson and Weslowski (when fit). And 4-3-3 is Rob Hentons suggestion in his match report for the Foxpodder podcast .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ceebeefox Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 Regardless of who you'd pick, just wondering who would persevere with 4-4-2 and who thinks a switch to 3-5-2 suits our personnel? We have to go to 3-5-2 as, let's face up to the facts that in this league (that gets stronger year after year) we are an average side with no money but above average potential. As when we were in the prem under Martin we have to be hard to beat and 3-5-2 gives us solidity down the middle where we often look undermanned. But as with the last 3 managers we have a 2 banks of 4 text book coach again and he aint for changing. We may as well put tram lines down the pitch for our lads to shuttle up and down in like that old table footy game l can't remember, but he seems to love it . As do all these Peter Taylorlike F.A. clones. We needed another quirky MANAGER not a coach like Claridge, Holloway etc ? I wanted to hear that pre-season they had been to that Navy camp in Devon and had their nuts worked off 'em, but l bet they played 5-a-side and practice games with the kids( that's how they looked today anyway). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lookwhaticando Posted 5 August 2006 Share Posted 5 August 2006 3-5-2 for me. Stearman and Sheehan as wingbacks should have enough pace to provide width if we need it, and if we get ourselves into trouble they can drop deep and form a 5-man back line. It could be one of two systems. Normal 3-5-2 and 3-4-1-2 Hendo McAuley/McCarthy/Kisnorbo Stearman/Sheehan (wingbacks) 2 of (Weso/Johnson/Hughes/Williams) Hume O'Grady/Fryatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wasyls Pec Deck Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 As we have no decent wingers, then surely 3-5-2 has to be tried? Common sense, belt in a for a tough ride Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fez of Mahrez Posted 6 August 2006 Author Share Posted 6 August 2006 Personally I'd play this; -------------------------------Henderson-------------------------------- -----------Kisnorbo------------Kenton------------McCarthy----------- --Stearman-----------------------------------------------------Tiatto-- ---------------Hughes---------Johnson----------Williams-------------- -----------------------Hume---------------Fryatt------------------------ I realise players like Stearman and Hume didn't have the best of games yesterday but I still think in the long run they are the best players for those positions. I wouldn't be adverse to dropping them for the Burnley game by any means but as far as a long-term settled side goes, I think it's hard to leave them out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SydneyFC Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 I'd like to see this trialled. -----------------Henderson---------------- -------Kisnorbo----McCarthy------Sheehan Weso------------Stearman Tiatto----------------------------------------Low ------------------Hume--------------------------- ----------------Fryatt-------------------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l444ry Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 It's patently obvious that the lack of at least one natural wide player stunts the potential of this Leicester side. Trying 5-3-2 has to be an option. However, it's players that win or lose games and if they perform as they did against Luton then no system on earth can save them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magictv Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 I'd like to see this trialled. -----------------Henderson---------------- -------Kisnorbo----McCarthy------Sheehan Weso------------Stearman Tiatto----------------------------------------Low ------------------Hume--------------------------- ----------------Fryatt-------------------- Interesting, so that is how you would like us to play when we go down to 10 men is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
escape2victory Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 To be honest it doesnt matter what formation you play if you carnt do the basics right like we did yesterday. Luton looked fitter, looked like they wanted it more, were first to every second ball and passed the ball better. So I dont think a change of system would do anything if they carnt pass or tackle properly. Do the basics then the rest will come, simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamesmaster Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 ...........................HENDERSON STEARMAN McCARTHY KISNORBO SHEEHAN ......................... JOHNSON ...............WESOLOWSKI WILLIAMS ............................HUME .....................FRYATT O'GRADY i quite like that, but whilst you have hume, you dont need williams. i'd rather see a 3-5-2, and have stearman and sheehan as wing-backs. ...........................HENDERSON ............McCARTHY KISNORBO JOHANSON STEARMAN...........................................SHEEHAN .....................JOHNSON WESOLOWSKI ................................HUME © .....................FRYATT........O'GRADY I think weso (if fit) is more capable of learning from johnson, i think williams has lost complete sight of the plot, and should move north. I'd love to see humey feeding the speed of fryatt and ogrady, and feed of the knock downs they provide too. Humey is our best player, our more versatile player, can tackle, run, pass, score and has a brain to go with it. It is therefore essential he plays a more deeper role than just attacker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 5 across the midfield because it suits our midfielders. Having said that I really don't think RK will switch from a 442. Do we even have two players who are good enough defensively and offensively and fit enough to play in the wing back positions? These are key positions in a 3 5 2/5 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gamesmaster Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 Well sheehan and stearman are young and full of entusiasm. I think with the back up of the other defensies, and the 2/3 midfielders, they'd cope for sure. They might not be totally disciplined when in attack (to get back in time). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffolk_fox Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 I remember that when one of our players lost the ball, he fought to get it back. I remember when we used to chase every loose ball. I remember when our attackers were better supported, and didn't collect the ball with their backs to the goal and pass it back to midfield. I remember when the players actually lived up to the addage 'Foxes Never Quit' I think the playing system is only part of the trouble. This current bunch look devoid of any passion or ideas of what to do with the ball when they have it - or they decide on something which is well beyond them (Tiatto's free kick) Sad days indeed, and I have gone through many of them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
l444ry Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 5 across the midfield because it suits our midfielders. Having said that I really don't think RK will switch from a 442. Do we even have two players who are good enough defensively and offensively and fit enough to play in the wing back positions? These are key positions in a 3 5 2/5 3 2 Totally agree. Even Maybury and Tiatto would surely be more comfortable in wing back roles and therefore the balance of the side would improve drastically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gist Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 How about a 4-3-3? Henderson Stearman McCarthy Kisnorbo Tiatto Hammond Johnson Hughes Hume O'Grady Fryatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The People's Hero Posted 6 August 2006 Share Posted 6 August 2006 No. We need more in the midfield. Not less. 4 3 3 will just encourage more hoofball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.0e7438f54a80a2f2566907f77fd7a32a.thumb.png.0ea5e31693d284629c473304eabd4568.png)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.