BlabyFox Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 As you all probably know, super stevie picked up his 5th yellow card of the season in the last game so who would you pick to replace him alongside Matty?
James. Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 DJ for pace. Dickov potentially to replace him/Fryatt in the 2nd half.
dandannieldanok Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 I voted Dickov, although I'd be satisifed with either him or Campbell.
marbelladave Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 No one! 4-5-1 with Dyer and Gradel given free roles to support Fryatt, King pulling the strings and Oakley and Berner in deeper holding roles. In fact anything but 4-4-2.
James. Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 No one!4-5-1 with Dyer and Gradel given free roles to support Fryatt, King pulling the strings and Oakley and Berner in deeper holding roles. In fact anything but 4-4-2. You wouldn't swap Oakley and King in that formation? I like the idea in theory but would be tempted to have King play deeper instead of Oakley.
marbelladave Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 You wouldn't swap Oakley and King in that formation?I like the idea in theory but would be tempted to have King play deeper instead of Oakley. Swings and roundabouts. Both are better going forward than they are defensively but the lack of a quality defensive midfield player means that either one or both of them have to do some defensive work. I think King is more creative in forward positions but then Oakley is generally more energetic going forward. You can line them up a number of different ways, Oakley and King either side of Berners, Dyer and Gradel/Adams either side of Fryatt in a fluid 4-5-1 / 4-3-3 or even a 4-1-4-1, with Berners in front of the back 4 if you like. The important thing is to be flexible and try different options. If we were playing with a bit more confidence I would go for broke and play Dyer, Gradel and Adams in free(ish) roles behind Fryatt with Oakley and King holding, but as we are not, that might be a bit rash at the moment.
Corky Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 Swings and roundabouts. Both are better going forward than they are defensively but the lack of a quality defensive midfield player means that either one or both of them have to do some defensive work. I think King is more creative in forward positions but then Oakley is generally more energetic going forward.You can line them up a number of different ways, Oakley and King either side of Berners, Dyer and Gradel/Adams either side of Fryatt in a fluid 4-5-1 / 4-3-3 or even a 4-1-4-1, with Berners in front of the back 4 if you like. The important thing is to be flexible and try different options. If we were playing with a bit more confidence I would go for broke and play Dyer, Gradel and Adams in free(ish) roles behind Fryatt with Oakley and King holding, but as we are not, that might be a bit rash at the moment. It has been noticeable that both King and Oakley have made more of an impact with Berner playing in the DM role.
RowlattsFox Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 If we went with a 4-3-3 formation it would be a real kick in the teeth for Dickov and Campbell. Think we should show some faith in one of them and stick with 4-4-2 but be ready to change it if it isn't working. Lets face it, we never play 4-3-3 without it turning into a 4-5-1 and leaving the striker isolated.
Munzie Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 I'd like to see us flood the midfield positions with just Fryatt up top. We're away from home against a team playing above all expectations. It's going to be tough. With both defensive and attacking options coming from midfield, this would provide extra cover in defence when required together with the ability to break fast, and in numbers, on the counter. That said, I can see a more conservative option being selected by Pearson with one of DJ 'no confidence' Campbell, Barry 'over the hill' Hayles, or Paul 'ouch my back' Dickov coming in for Howard.
marbelladave Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 It has been noticeable that both King and Oakley have made more of an impact with Berner playing in the DM role. Going forward maybe, but defensively? 2 of Berners 3 league games in that position were against Brighton and Swindon..........
Corky Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 Going forward maybe, but defensively? 2 of Berners 3 league games in that position were against Brighton and Swindon.......... So what is the alternative? Wesolowski is injured. Kishishev? He's got a lack of match practice. Who else do we put in there?
marbelladave Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 If we went with a 4-3-3 formation it would be a real kick in the teeth for Dickov and Campbell. Think we should show some faith in one of them and stick with 4-4-2 but be ready to change it if it isn't working.Lets face it, we never play 4-3-3 without it turning into a 4-5-1 and leaving the striker isolated. I do not recall us playing anything but 4-4-2 with the current squad, maybe we should try something different. If you pick the right players in their right positions the formation takes care of itself! Dickov should certainly have a roll to play from the bench but I fail to see what Campbell has done to deserve consideration for a starting spot.
marbelladave Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 I'd like to see us flood the midfield positions with just Fryatt up top.We're away from home against a team playing above all expectations. It's going to be tough. With both defensive and attacking options coming from midfield, this would provide extra cover in defence when required together with the ability to break fast, and in numbers, on the counter. That said, I can see a more conservative option being selected by Pearson with one of DJ 'no confidence' Campbell, Barry 'over the hill' Hayles, or Paul 'ouch my back' Dickov coming in for Howard. Agreed in virtually all respects and like you I expect to see a very conservative approach
marbelladave Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 So what is the alternative? Wesolowski is injured. Kishishev? He's got a lack of match practice. Who else do we put in there? I offered several alternatives including a 4-3-3 and going back to the Oakley / King central partnership. I think the real problems are further forward and I have spelt out my ideas for tackling them many times before. BTW Kishishev does not play because he does not have any match practice and he has no match practice because.......
Koke Posted 17 November 2008 Posted 17 November 2008 If we went with a 4-3-3 formation it would be a real kick in the teeth for Dickov and Campbell. Think we should show some faith in one of them and stick with 4-4-2 but be ready to change it if it isn't working.Lets face it, we never play 4-3-3 without it turning into a 4-5-1 and leaving the striker isolated. Even that wouldn't be bad. 4-5-1 with Adams and Dyer on each wing. And a midfield trio consisting of King-Berner-Oakley. There is a lot of creativity in there, and I'd give Dyer and Adams free license to do as they please, as long as they support Fryatt and don't leave him isolated. This could actually work.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.