Walshie is God Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 This has been bugging me for a while now so time to get it off my chest! I'm getting increasingly frustrated by the insistance both in the forums and on BBC RL that Leicester City play a 4-3-3 formation. It is quite obvious to me that its a 4-5-1, as Nugent has no support what so ever. Bristol City managed more support for their team (and that was pitiful) than we give to Nugent. The so called wide men dont tuck in when the ball is on the opposite side of the pitch, and everyone seems incredibly isolated. If we are to play a 4-3-3 then lets make sure it is a 4-3-3 where there isnt a defensive element to the wider men of the 3 front players. Its time for a change of formation IMO, we are going nowhere with the current personnel playing the current system it just doesn't work I've seen more creativity in my 5 year olds drawing book. Lets switch to a 4-4-2 and give Nugent a little bit of help and maybe then, just maybe then he could be our 20+ goal scorer that we are crying out for. It doesn't matter if we have Nugent, Maynard, Yakubu, Keane, RSC or the man in the fvcking moon twinned with if we continue to isolate our lone front man and leave them feeding off scraps 10 goals is all we're gonna get!! So instead on Nugent give the guy some support and lets spank the tree huggers at the weekend!!!
S1DDO Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 We don't have wide men capable of playing in either of those formations.
Bob Weasel Fox Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 at home this shambles of a formation we are playing is pitiful, play like that away maybe but at home entertain us and attack the opposition, were utterly pathetic at the moment
Walshie is God Posted 18 August 2011 Author Posted 18 August 2011 We don't have wide men capable of playing in either of those formations. Then this is where we need the investment instead of wasting another 5m+ on a forward that will see more life on the outer bleeding hebrides.
Simi Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 I've been wondering myself why it has been called a 4-3-3. Shows no resemblance of it all.
Libertine Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 If we had proper wingers it'd be fine. Swansea last year, Nathan Dyer and Scott Sinclair on the wings. They didn't even have a decent striker but look where they ended up. A decent winger is just as big a priority as a striker I think, we don't seem to be creating anything worthwhile.
aran Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 I think for Forest we should Team: Schmeichel Peltier Mills Bamba SL Konchesky Fernandes King Vassell Nugent Gallagher And maybe we might keep a clean sheet!!
kingfox Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 Our 4-3-3 formation always turns into a 4-5-1 that's why performances are so frustrating. Should be an out to out 4-4-2, whether we play wingers or diamond formation.
Stadt Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 I think for Forest we should Team: Schmeichel Peltier Mills Bamba SL Konchesky Fernandes King Vassell Nugent Gallagher And maybe we might keep a clean sheet!! With 10 men?
Burmesefox Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 I have been screaming for weeks and weeks that we do not play 4 3 3 it is clearly 4 5 1 with an overcrowded midfield hence passing sideways, confused midfielders, and zero penetration. WE PLAY 4 ****ING 5 ****IN 1 - there, nuff said!
Weller in Tights Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 Totally agree with those calling for 4-4-2 Put Vassel up with Nugent (felt Nugent ran his socks off last night and did well considering the support he had), until we buy Nicky Maynard (Please can that be true, his movement was great last nght). Felt Wellens was disapointing. So not sure about the midfiled. Mills should not have been dropped, a player has one bad game, he then needs his confidence building.
alex walker Posted 18 August 2011 Posted 18 August 2011 4-4-2 schmeical Pantsil mills bamba konchesky danns wellens king gally nugent vassell - (poacher)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.