Walshy5 Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 With 3 million pound signing Waghorn being wasted playing wide and Fryatt not being suited to the loan striker role is it time to go back to the basic 4-4-2. Thoughts please.
HonradaRaposa Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 England. South Africa. World Cup. 2010.
dandannieldanok Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 If we had a quality right-winger I'd say yes, but we don't.
bettso Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 Fryatt definitely doesnt fit into 4-3-3. There is a place for both formations. If we play 4-3-3 Howard is a must. No good playing a single central striker if they cant hold the ball and bring the two wide strikers into play. 4-4-2 with Fryatt and Waghorn would be superb but as someone has said, we need a right winger to be successful.
davieG Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 Playing 442 means we have to put a CM on the wing as 2 from 3 of Oakley, KIng and Wellens was proved to be inadequate on many occasions by Pearson, hence Oakley on the right. Whether Abe could make the difference I don't know but judging from Moreno's stint in midfield 1st half against Leeds I don't think he would.
jack-lcfc Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 our team is mainly made up of british based players brought up playing 4-4-2, try it tomorrow night there is nothing to loose.
Legend_in_blue Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 NP didn't solve the RM position in two years. PS hasn't done anything about it either. We can't play 4-4-2 unless Oakley or Gallagher plays there and both fill a round hole with too many rough edges to it...
Heart-Shaped Fox Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 The problem we have is that there are too many players that we could play, and using 4-3-3/4-2-3-1 (whatever the last games formation was) accomodates most of them. 4-4-2, means we leave out one of Howard, Fryatt, Waghorn, and Gallagher (unless he is on the left or right). Wellens, Oakley and King cannot all play in it like they do in the current one. It can work, but at the moment I dont always think it will for us.
Sooper Steve's shin Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 With 3 million pound signing Waghorn being wasted playing wide and Fryatt not being suited to the loan striker role is it time to go back to the basic 4-4-2. Thoughts please. Freudian slip?
Sooper Steve's shin Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 The team took a while to get used to it, but the Cardiff and (to a lesser extent) Coventry games showed they can make it work. Waghorn has been working under Sousa for less time than the rest, so will take time to adjust but could well grow to flourish in the role as one of the wide attacking options. He has the pace and skill to make it work, plus lots of energy, a willingness to come inside and an ability to shoot. I think it's a system that Sousa has faith in and it can work, but (like all things) needs a bit of time. I think it suits our midfield three of Wellens, Oakley and King much better than the way we were trying to play them last season. Dyer has also been blossoming with extra attacking responsibilities and it's even getting the best out of Neilsen (which defensive tactical genius Nigel Pearson failed to do, and he signed him!). Difficult to say we should drop the system just as we're getting used to it because it doesn't suit one or two players. It's true that we've lacked someone with the strength, ability and goalscoring knack to make the central striker position their own, but this is slightly compensated by the increased goalscoring threat coming from the two wide forwards (Dyer/Waghorn) and the dedicated attacking central midfielder (King). Think back to last season when we had Dyer or Gallagher on the left with more defensive duties and Oakley/N'Guessan on the right with similar issues (and less goalscoring threat). 60+ shots in three games shows to me that it's not the system that's failing us, but the finishing.
Fox92 Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 I think we need a quality left and right sided winger first. First of all, I like what Sousa has done with Dyer. I think playing him on the right makes him more dangerous at times because he is very strong on his left foot, cutting inside, and can even trouble the opposition on his "weaker" right foot. Then, the wingers could swap constantly throughout the game. With a new wide man, Oakley/Gallagher/Waghorn shouldn't have to be pushed out wide in a position that they can't really play. A new right and left sided winger though? Halmosi doesn't play regular anymore and he is Championship quality.
lildave3 Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 Swear Waghorn played this role loads last year and everyone loved him?
chesterfox Posted 20 September 2010 Posted 20 September 2010 Swear Waghorn played this role loads last year and everyone loved him? it;s just another symptom of the same problem that namely tactics are over complicated - my understanding of 4-3-3 is that it becomes 4-4-2 as soon as one of the front 3 has the ball and 4-5-1 as soon as the opposition have the ball. Playing 4-3-3 shouldn't stop Waggy or Dyer going into the box!!
Guest ttfn Posted 21 September 2010 Posted 21 September 2010 England. South Africa. World Cup. 2010. Uruguay. South Africa. World Cup. 2010.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.