cc_star Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 We know Sven like collecting centre-half's perhaps he wants to try 5 at the back away from home, Naughton & Van Aanholt (as he settles in better) have certainly got the legs, they'll also be able weigh in in the mid-field more to stop us conceding so much possession there which means we're vulnerable to long range shots, its a very mobile back-line. Worthy of further thought, or a non-starter? Weale Bamba - Mee - Bruma Naughton - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Van Aanholt Abe - Wellens - King Gallagher/Vassell - Yakubu
StanSP Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 I'll stick with 4-3-3. It's worked a treat, especially at home, so why change? Plus, if one them was to get injured, we'd have to go back to what we are now anyway. Too much chopping and changing isn't good for the team! This is why we've been consistently good and grinding results out and getting defenders/midfielders/strikers scoring. We've kept the same shape and formation and the players are used to it. Changing it would mean they've got to get used to that new one and I reckon we wouldn't see the same results if we changed it now.
Webbo Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 If we do sign Bruma I wouldn't be surprised to see Bamba given the midfield anchor role ahead of of Abe.
stever Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 If we do sign Bruma I wouldn't be surprised to see Bamba given the midfield anchor role ahead of of Abe. Hmmm not sure. Has he had that much experience in a more midfield role? Possibly a good move but can we afford for it not to work at the minute?How's about playing Bamba just in front of back 4, king, wellens and yuki in the middle, with vassell and gallagher up front WEALE BERNER ---- MEE ------- HOBBS ------ NAUGHTON BAMBA WELLENS ---------------- ABE KING VASSELL -------------- GALLAGHER
Kitchandro Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 I'll stick with 4-3-3. It's worked a treat, especially at home, so why change? Plus, if one them was to get injured, we'd have to go back to what we are now anyway. Too much chopping and changing isn't good for the team! This is why we've been consistently good and grinding results out and getting defenders/midfielders/strikers scoring. We've kept the same shape and formation and the players are used to it. Changing it would mean they've got to get used to that new one and I reckon we wouldn't see the same results if we changed it now. Agreed. We are on a roll lets not rock the boat.
StanSP Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 Also, with that kind of formation, Dyer wouldn't be involved. That would be extremely harsh on him as he's nourished under our style of play with 4-3-3. He wouldn't work as a wing-back; he hasn't got the defensive mind like Naughton/PVA do.
Bob Weasel Fox Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 I'll stick with 4-3-3. It's worked a treat, especially at home, so why change? Plus, if one them was to get injured, we'd have to go back to what we are now anyway. Too much chopping and changing isn't good for the team! This is why we've been consistently good and grinding results out and getting defenders/midfielders/strikers scoring. We've kept the same shape and formation and the players are used to it. Changing it would mean they've got to get used to that new one and I reckon we wouldn't see the same results if we changed it now. Yes StanSP i agree very much so, different formations are what you can try in pre-season or if things are going horribly wrong during a season not when we are on a winning run
Cheese Me Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 Weale Bamba - Mee - Bruma Naughton - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Van Aanholt Abe - Wellens - King Gallagher/Vassell - Yakubu Doubt it very much but that's always been my preferred formation since the MON years, the wing backs give you more in midfield but can also defend, plus you get an extra central striker that you don't have in 4-3-3. Tasty looking team there too. But like I said, can't see this happenning when things are working well right now.
edwbon Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 Doubt it very much but that's always been my preferred formation since the MON years, the wing backs give you more in midfield but can also defend, plus you get an extra central striker that you don't have in 4-3-3. Tasty looking team there too. But like I said, can't see this happenning when things are working well right now. The 3-2-3-2 formation tries to balance attack and defence in terms of player numbers. This formation was used by Liverpool in the 90's. Apparently demands a lot of fitness on the wings, a good understanding of play in the midfield, and the ability to keep the ball as a team.
vandamman Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 I think Bamba is well capable of playing defensive midfield, as he's mobile and will win a lot of 50/50 balls. But don't see why we need to change the formation as it has worked very well, the only problem I have with it is Yuki, as he's a bit of ponce and annoys me in that position. So maybe try Bamba in that position, which will also hopefully free up the wing backs. Maybe something to try at home. But cant see Sven changing anything, not particularly a tinker man. However, if Bruma does come up here, I reckon Mee will be dropped as Chelsea would only have let him out if he was guaranteed match time.
edwbon Posted 7 February 2011 Posted 7 February 2011 the only problem I have with it is Yuki, as he's a bit of ponce and annoys me in that position. So maybe try Bamba in that position, which will also hopefully free up the wing backs. Maybe something to try at home. I don't suppose Yuki would have a particularly high opinion of you either if he met you. Still maybe you are right about the position. He might be better employed elsewhere - perhaps as backup for the midfield duo of Wellens and King.
lcfcnoely Posted 8 February 2011 Posted 8 February 2011 Hmmm not sure. Has he had that much experience in a more midfield role? Possibly a good move but can we afford for it not to work at the minute? How's about playing Bamba just in front of back 4, king, wellens and yuki in the middle, with vassell and gallagher up front WEALE BERNER ---- MEE ------- HOBBS ------ NAUGHTON BAMBA WELLENS ---------------- ABE KING VASSELL -------------- GALLAGHER Why would you drop yakubu ?
artursteppe Posted 8 February 2011 Posted 8 February 2011 Hmmm not sure. Has he had that much experience in a more midfield role? Possibly a good move but can we afford for it not to work at the minute? How's about playing Bamba just in front of back 4, king, wellens and yuki in the middle, with vassell and gallagher up front WEALE BERNER ---- MEE ------- HOBBS ------ NAUGHTON BAMBA WELLENS ---------------- ABE KING VASSELL -------------- GALLAGHER Sol played defensive midfield at Hibs in his first season there and the fans loved it. We've had loads of threads on that!!!
sbfox Posted 8 February 2011 Posted 8 February 2011 I think Bamba is well capable of playing defensive midfield, as he's mobile and will win a lot of 50/50 balls. But don't see why we need to change the formation as it has worked very well, the only problem I have with it is Yuki, as he's a bit of ponce and annoys me in that position. So maybe try Bamba in that position, which will also hopefully free up the wing backs. Maybe something to try at home. But cant see Sven changing anything, not particularly a tinker man. However, if Bruma does come up here, I reckon Mee will be dropped as Chelsea would only have let him out if he was guaranteed match time. a) I see Abe throwing himself into WAY more 50/50s than Wellens or King b) that position is more about effective distribution. I haven't seen enough from Bamba to know for certain that he has the quick feet to knock those little passes around in front of the back four. In fact, the very idea of that is fooking terrifying.
Haydos Posted 8 February 2011 Posted 8 February 2011 a) I see Abe throwing himself into WAY more 50/50s than Wellens or King b) that position is more about effective distribution. I haven't seen enough from Bamba to know for certain that he has the quick feet to knock those little passes around in front of the back four. In fact, the very idea of that is fooking terrifying. That's his job and while he's good at harrying he's often out muscled in challenges.
MPH Posted 8 February 2011 Posted 8 February 2011 not sure of the wisdom in changing a formation that has brought us 5 wins in the lase 6 games....
The Blur Posted 8 February 2011 Posted 8 February 2011 I think Bamba is well capable of playing defensive midfield, as he's mobile and will win a lot of 50/50 balls. But don't see why we need to change the formation as it has worked very well, the only problem I have with it is Yuki, as he's a bit of ponce and annoys me in that position. So maybe try Bamba in that position, which will also hopefully free up the wing backs. Maybe something to try at home. But cant see Sven changing anything, not particularly a tinker man. However, if Bruma does come up here, I reckon Mee will be dropped as Chelsea would only have let him out if he was guaranteed match time. England vs Australia half time, anyone??
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.