Can we play the 433/451 Combo...

[davieG]

with Fryatt in there?

I think not.

[Fez of Mahrez]

with Fryatt in there?

I think not.

Looked good against Newcastle and Blackpool.

[Webbo]

I was thinking about this this morning. Imo we can if Waghorn remains as the spearhead and Fryatt plays to the right.

[Austin]

I was thinking about this this morning. Imo we can if Waghorn remains as the spearhead and Fryatt plays to the right.

THIS ^ .. Think it could work given time.

[davieG]

Looked good against Newcastle and Blackpool.

Didn't see Blackpool but I thought that was more 442 with a middle 4 of Gallagher, Oakley, King & N'Guessan with Fryat & Waghorn up front and I can't say it was that noticeable an attacking 433 more a very defensive 451 against Newcastle.

Recent performances have been much more noticeably 433 with Dyer and Gallagher/N'Guessan all getting further forward much more to support Waghorn.

But perhaps your right I just can't see him putting in the same effort and causing the same disruption against strong defences that Waghorn does, he's also not so keen on holding the ball up to allow the wingmen and midfield to get forward prefering to make his own way to goal.

I'm not suggesting he's not got a vital contribution to make should he get back more that he'll be able to offer the option of changing to a 442 if we need to..

[dandannieldanok]

But perhaps your right I just can't see him putting in the same effort and causing the same disruption against strong defences that Waghorn does, he's also not so keen on holding the ball up to allow the wingmen and midfield to get forward prefering to make his own way to goal.

I'm not suggesting he's not got a vital contribution to make should he get back more that he'll be able to offer the option of changing to a 442 if we need to..

Disagree, Fryatt poses a different threat not a lesser threat. Fryatt has shown on numerous occassions he can cause disruption to defences by simply gliding past defenders with his skill. He embarrassed defenders of Sheff Utd and Newcastle recently. Also I thought in the games before his injury his work-rate was excellent.

[davieG]

Disagree, Fryatt poses a different threat not a lesser threat. Fryatt has shown on numerous occassions he can cause disruption to defences by simply gliding past defenders with his skill. He embarrassed defenders of Sheff Utd and Newcastle recently. Also I thought in the games before his injury his work-rate was excellent.

Well I never said he didn't pose a threat and by implication that it was different hence I felt it wasn't suited to a 433.

His workrate may have been excellent of late especially compared to previous games but when it comes to being the first line of defence Waghorn's contribution is unbeatable and probably matches that of Fryatt & Howard combined.

To be virtually a loan striker requires endless energy and stamina this is something else that Fryatt lacks in comparison with Waghorn.

[Cobbo]

Didn't see Blackpool but I thought that was more 442 with a middle 4 of Gallagher, Oakley, King & N'Guessan with Fryat & Waghorn up front and I can't say it was that noticeable an attacking 433 more a very defensive 451 against Newcastle.

Recent performances have been much more noticeably 433 with Dyer and Gallagher/N'Guessan all getting further forward much more to support Waghorn.

But perhaps your right I just can't see him putting in the same effort and causing the same disruption against strong defences that Waghorn does, he's also not so keen on holding the ball up to allow the wingmen and midfield to get forward prefering to make his own way to goal.

I'm not suggesting he's not got a vital contribution to make should he get back more that he'll be able to offer the option of changing to a 442 if we need to..

It was 4-2-3-1 at Blackpool - N'Guessan on the left and Waghorn on the right with Gallagher just behind Fryatt.

I don't think we're currently really playing a 4-3-3 offensively, I think it is a 4-2-3-1 as mentioned, with Oakley in behind Waghorn and the 2 wingers.

[davieG]

It was 4-2-3-1 at Blackpool - N'Guessan on the left and Waghorn on the right with Gallagher just behind Fryatt.

I don't think we're currently really playing a 4-3-3 offensively, I think it is a 4-2-3-1 as mentioned, with Oakley in behind Waghorn and the 2 wingers.

I'll not disagree with that formation either way it's a much more attacking formation than our 442 and utilises the players we have better and relies quite on lot on the style, strength and stamina of Waghorn. I just don't think Fryatt with Oakley behind will carry the same sort of threat or provide the same level of first line defence.

But it seems I'm on my own here so we'll have to wait and see if it ever happens for a run of games.

[Cobbo]

I'll not disagree with that formation either way it's a much more attacking formation than our 442 and utilises the players we have better and relies quite on lot on the style, strength and stamina of Waghorn. I just don't think Fryatt with Oakley behind will carry the same sort of threat or provide the same level of first line defence.

But it seems I'm on my own here so we'll have to wait and see if it ever happens for a run of games.

I agree it's certainly a point to raise.

I think we'd be able to accommodate them both. Waghorn does a good job out wide, which will mean we would miss his strength in the middle, however, I don't see a problem with Fryatt and him interchanging positions throughout games.

Both are good on the last man & both can join in build up play from deep & create chances for others that way, making them both fairly versatile players.

[davieG]

I agree it's certainly a point to raise.

I think we'd be able to accommodate them both. Waghorn does a good job out wide, which will mean we would miss his strength in the middle, however, I don't see a problem with Fryatt and him interchanging positions throughout games.

Both are good on the last man & both can join in build up play from deep & create chances for others that way, making them both fairly versatile players.

Maybe but I'd be loathed to lose either Dyer or Gallagher who offer such variety to the team, having said that I'd prefer Gallagher in the Oakley role so perhaps

King Wellens

Dyer Gallagher Fryatt

Waghorn

would work.

Although it would definitely leave Weale with no punt outlet.

[TrickyTrev]

We can, but he won't be as effective in the role as Waghorn.

Whatever we do when he returns, the big change in the system has been the commitment to splitting the midfield into two distinct layers, one layer with Gally/N'Guessan, Dyer and Oakley clearly further forward than the other; Wellens and King. This has allowed the attacking three to get up and beyond the lone striker and has led to more goals and goal scoring opportunities from the midfield. It is this change that has stopped us becoming over run in midfield, reduced our dependence on the centre forward for goals and got the best out of our fine attacking midfield players. I hope when we work fryatt back into the side we do not upset this fine balance.

[Guest ttfn]

I disagree entirely.

As hard as Waghorn worked yesterday, he was totally ineffective.

In the words of a Newcastle supporting mate, Fryatt 'bent them over' when we played them a month ago. And he did well against Blackpool.

[fleckneymike]

with Fryatt in there?

I think not.

I think you've spent too long on Bentley's Roof Davie.

[Flynny]

I'd have Fryatt where Dyer is, cutting in on his right to give himself a scoring chance. Dyer's pace is a weapon but only on the counter - in normal play his first touch is awful and any defender only has to stand within a few yards of him to nullify him entirely. Fryatt can run around defenders and shoot with both feet - I honestly think if he were where Dyer was he'd be exactly as much of a scoring threat as before. Before he went he was getting much better at providing assists too and he can be a skillful passer when he wants to be, so even if he doesn't get free it's nice to imagine him taking it round a defender and laying it off for Waggy.

There's also the option of an assymetric formation where we go from 4-4-2 to 4-3-3 when attacking if you don't want Fryatt to be having to be chasing back, although thats a bit advanced for a Championship side.

Re: formation - i'd like to think us playing this formation is Nige building for the future. With a couple of decent additions assuming we don't go up we'll be far more of a goal threat. He's looked to abandon it when we're low on form and confidence ("back to basics", Howard and Fryatt return, etc) and bought it in whenever we're starting to look up the table again. It's a gamble and it's paid off beautifully.

Seriously, a Fryatt - Waghorn - Gallagher front three drips with skill, with Waghorn providing the physical battering ram. I'd love to see it if we make the playoffs.

[Cobbo]

I'd have Fryatt where Dyer is, cutting in on his right to give himself a scoring chance. Dyer's pace is a weapon but only on the counter - in normal play his first touch is awful and any defender only has to stand within a few yards of him to nullify him entirely. Fryatt can run around defenders and shoot with both feet - I honestly think if he were where Dyer was he'd be exactly as much of a scoring threat as before. Before he went he was getting much better at providing assists too and he can be a skillful passer when he wants to be, so even if he doesn't get free it's nice to imagine him taking it round a defender and laying it off for Waggy.

There's also the option of an assymetric formation where we go from 4-4-2 to 4-3-3 when attacking if you don't want Fryatt to be having to be chasing back, although thats a bit advanced for a Championship side.

Re: formation - i'd like to think us playing this formation is Nige building for the future. With a couple of decent additions assuming we don't go up we'll be far more of a goal threat. He's looked to abandon it when we're low on form and confidence ("back to basics", Howard and Fryatt return, etc) and bought it in whenever we're starting to look up the table again. It's a gamble and it's paid off beautifully.

I wouldn't drop Dyer unless we signed a player with similar pace to play in the same role.

Lack of pace just gives defences so much scope to squeeze up the pitch and compress the game. He may not always have a great game (same as anyone) but the threat of his pace is enough to put defenders on their heels & drop deeper.

I don't agree with his first touch being bad - he is pretty technically sound I think & his work rate defensively as well as offensively is fantastic (against Bristol City he tracked back the length of the pitch at full speed and got a block in in our own box).

[Flynny]

I wouldn't drop Dyer unless we signed a player with similar pace to play in the same role.

Lack of pace just gives defences so much scope to squeeze up the pitch and compress the game. He may not always have a great game (same as anyone) but the threat of his pace is enough to put defenders on their heels & drop deeper.

I don't agree with his first touch being bad - he is pretty technically sound I think & his work rate defensively as well as offensively is fantastic (aghainst Bristol City he tracked back the length of the pitch at full speed and got a block in in our own box).

Against Bristol city though Gallagher kept playing cross-field balls to him that he had to chase for 5 yards after attempting to control, assuming a defender wasn't there. We've not been closed down as frenetically as we were at Bristol too often, which might explain it.

He did score the goal so fair play to him, but I was certain he'd be going off soon from 60 minutes on the amount of times he did it. Maybe Gallagher should have stopped doing it. Ah well.

Maybe Gally in Oakley's position like DavieG said would work well but I'd rather have Fryatt on the left of an attacking three than the right. Dyer right forward?

[lcfcadam]

Didn't see Blackpool but I thought that was more 442 with a middle 4 of Gallagher, Oakley, King & N'Guessan with Fryat & Waghorn up front

Until Gallagher got substituted in that game the formation was 1-1-1 (Weale, Gallagher, N'guessan)...

[Corky]

with Fryatt in there?

I think not.

You could but we'd have to play it into Fryatt's feet more, he's not going to charge around like Waghorn and physically get the ball from defenders. Fryatt does run the channels well in fairness but I think we'd have to play a narrower style.

[Sods]

Of course he could, its all about movement when your up there on your own. And i would say one of his best attributes is his movement, getting behind the defence. Its a good problem to have!