MattGamble92 Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 Everyone wanted us to change back to this formation. It was simple apparently. Change back to 4-4-2 and we'll start winning. Granted, we beat Palace 3-0 but thats after a dire first half and 2 wonder goals. For me, we haven't had one good 90 minutes with Pearson and it is no different to under Eriksson. The best and most effective football we have played for the last 5-10 years was the period we had a 4-3-3 with the yak, Gally and Dyer up front. You knew you were turning up to the Walkers and going to see us rip sides apart and it was brilliant. The way we countered Donny at home in the 5-1 and the way we destroyed Derby at Pride Park, it was brutal. The best thing about the 4-3-3 with the yak and dyer was it stretched sides so much and when it wasnt dyer taking on two on the left, it was king running through the centre or wellens breaking down the play and finding a killer pass. But things turned sour. Not because of 4-3-3, but because of loan players who eventually weren't prepared to roll their sleeves up because they couldnt give a shit about the club. So we moved on to this season we eradicated the loan problem by signing permanent players. But for me the formation changed from a 4-3-3 with players that ran at you on the attack i.e the dyer, to a 4-3-1-2 with 4 central midfielders, no width and generally no movement or plan B. Now we are left with 1 natural winger at the club playing a formation that needs 2 wingers to even have a chance of not becoming pedestrian with no movement. Very rarely does a team gain any sort of consistency after throwing all pre season plans out the window and changing manager. And it is looking increasingly likely this season is becoming a write off. If we are going to play this "great" 4-4-2 we need a strong, aggressive CM that has stamina and 2 wingers with the ability to stretch the play and go past players in the january window. But i have faith Nige will sort it out.
yag101 Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 So why does 'Nige' play the 4-4-2 when we clearly don't have the personnel for it? Clearly he should change the system til he has the players he needs, but appears to lack the tactical knowledge to do so.
muzzy1981 Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 Agree with everything said and for me the the reason Sven got all the loan players in was due to the the new owners insisting on promotion when sitting bottom of the league and having no pre-season. If Sven had been given the target of promotion this season then he would have bought more permanent players last Jan and they would be established first team regulars now, ie Bamba. Yes the Thai's have bought money and a bit of excitement but made some fundamental errors on the way. I think Nige wil get it right eventually but lets hope the owners have learnt form there mistake with Sven.
Libertine Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 4-3-3 is much more suited to us I feel (it was generally Vassell not Dyer btw, but irrelevant), especially with the CMs we have which aren't strong enough in a 2. Still desperately need wingers for that formation, but it allows for a much more fluent attacking style IMO.
Adster Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 It WOULD work if we actually had quality wide men in midfield, and decent, creative, non-lightweight center midfielders in the center.
paddy Agyemang Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 Get rid of wellness n Johnson then bring a quality creative talisman in the middle n 2 out wide
Captain... Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 Didn't we play 4-3-3 in the second half? Beckford left forward, Nugent middle, Gally right Abe in midfield with King and Wellens? That was how it looked to me.
Guest Col city fan Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 It WOULD work if we actually had quality wide men in midfield, and decent, creative, non-lightweight center midfielders in the center. Of course it would! But don't you play the right team in the right formation? If we don't have the players to play 442 you don't play it surely?
Happy Fox Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 Of course it would! But don't you play the right team in the right formation? If we don't have the players to play 442 you don't play it surely? We haven't got any other alternative for the time being January cannot come soon enough miracles are required from NP and Walsh to get us out of this situation
davieG Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 Didn't we play 4-3-3 in the second half? Beckford left forward, Nugent middle, Gally right Abe in midfield with King and Wellens? That was how it looked to me. Sure did
Corky Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 We were far too narrow under Sven this season, we had central midfielders playing out of position (no natural left-sided player had Konchesky doing two jobs) so Pearson needed to change things and widen the pitch and stretch the game. It worked for a while but both Dyer and Gallagher (who is not a wide player) are inconsistent so it isn't going to work every week. We either need to play three up front or stick with 4-4-2 with better wingers.
foxcrewman Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 Why not play 3-5-2 with Peltier and Konchesky as wing backs? We would have three at the back (St Ledger, Mills, Bamba) and three in midfield (where we seem to be always overrun). Still have two up i.e. Beckford and Nugent. It worked OK with Martin O'Neill. Why not play 3-5-2 with Peltier and Konchesky as wing backs? We would have three at the back (St Ledger, Mills, Bamba) and three in midfield (where we seem to be always overrun). Still have two up i.e. Beckford and Nugent. It worked OK with Martin O'Neill.
Jimmy Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 there is a reason no one plays 3-5-2 anymore and with the players you mentioned it'd be a defensive 5-3-2 anyway
foxcrewman Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 Jimmy, OK. What's the reason? I'm looking for alternatives and apart from changing the players who don't appear good enough I can't see our 4-4-2 being a winning formula.
Ross 'LCFC' Turner Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 It's not 442 it's the midfield - simple. Not protecting the defence and not providing for the strikers. Wellens, Dyer, Danns, Gallagher - get rid of the lot. We need a tough tackling midfielder that will break the play up and allow King to get forward, and we need 2 fast, tricky wingers so we can start driving at teams and look dangerous. Kebe and Cameron Stewart please.
Father Ted Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 Everyone wanted us to change back to this formation. It was simple apparently. Change back to 4-4-2 and we'll start winning. Granted, we beat Palace 3-0 but thats after a dire first half and 2 wonder goals. For me, we haven't had one good 90 minutes with Pearson and it is no different to under Eriksson. The best and most effective football we have played for the last 5-10 years was the period we had a 4-3-3 with the yak, Gally and Dyer up front. You knew you were turning up to the Walkers and going to see us rip sides apart and it was brilliant. The way we countered Donny at home in the 5-1 and the way we destroyed Derby at Pride Park, it was brutal. The best thing about the 4-3-3 with the yak and dyer was it stretched sides so much and when it wasnt dyer taking on two on the left, it was king running through the centre or wellens breaking down the play and finding a killer pass. But things turned sour. Not because of 4-3-3, but because of loan players who eventually weren't prepared to roll their sleeves up because they couldnt give a shit about the club. So we moved on to this season we eradicated the loan problem by signing permanent players. But for me the formation changed from a 4-3-3 with players that ran at you on the attack i.e the dyer, to a 4-3-1-2 with 4 central midfielders, no width and generally no movement or plan B. Now we are left with 1 natural winger at the club playing a formation that needs 2 wingers to even have a chance of not becoming pedestrian with no movement. Very rarely does a team gain any sort of consistency after throwing all pre season plans out the window and changing manager. And it is looking increasingly likely this season is becoming a write off. If we are going to play this "great" 4-4-2 we need a strong, aggressive CM that has stamina and 2 wingers with the ability to stretch the play and go past players in the january window. But i have faith Nige will sort it out. Fantastic post. We were tearing teams for four and five at home last season and Yak was pivotal to that but apparently hes a fat lazy bastard... Svens biggest mistake was not getting the Yak back.
Happy Fox Posted 26 December 2011 Posted 26 December 2011 Fantastic post. We were tearing teams for four and five at home last season and Yak was pivotal to that but apparently hes a fat lazy bastard... Svens biggest mistake was not getting the Yak back. I thought we did want him but apparently it was his wage demands?
MattGamble92 Posted 27 December 2011 Author Posted 27 December 2011 Didn't we play 4-3-3 in the second half? Beckford left forward, Nugent middle, Gally right Abe in midfield with King and Wellens? That was how it looked to me. That is not my point. My point was everyone banged on about how all we needed was a 4-4-2 and everything would be ok again. Clearly not the case. The 4-3-3 last season didn't just work for a period, it simply destroyed teams, so for everyone to write off the 4-3-3 formation and say it has no place in the championship is ludicrous.
MattGamble92 Posted 27 December 2011 Author Posted 27 December 2011 Fantastic post. We were tearing teams for four and five at home last season and Yak was pivotal to that but apparently hes a fat lazy bastard... Svens biggest mistake was not getting the Yak back. Thank you very much. I agree, we needed him back. He added the fear factor to our attacks and he always has a goal in his locker despite his critics (which are being answered week in week out in the Premier League).
ithuriel Posted 27 December 2011 Posted 27 December 2011 Best and most effective football? We failed last season, we we're within touching distance of the play offs and got sussed by team's and it started with Bristol City at home on a friday evening and went down hill from there. The most effective footy was getting out of league one and then the year we reached the play off's but lost out in that penalty shoot out, we had become a decent team again after year's of mediocrity and then Pearson was gently levered out the door by Mandy and Hoos
teblin Posted 27 December 2011 Posted 27 December 2011 Pearson did mainly use 4-4-2 but if my memory is correct we played 4-5-1/4-3-3 for about 10 or 11 games when we were undefeated for a while and in that time we hammered Scunthorpe and forest?
Captain... Posted 27 December 2011 Posted 27 December 2011 That is not my point. My point was everyone banged on about how all we needed was a 4-4-2 and everything would be ok again. Clearly not the case. The 4-3-3 last season didn't just work for a period, it simply destroyed teams, so for everyone to write off the 4-3-3 formation and say it has no place in the championship is ludicrous. That wasn't my point, my point was we switched to 4-3-3 yesterday and didn't look any better for it. it is not a case of 442 vs 433, both of these formations need players in each position that is comfortable playing there and playing with their partner. Whilst not playing badly yesterday in either formation we didn't look comfortable and cohesive, very few quick balls were played forward because we were never sure where people were, Gally started on the right but drifted in to the middle a lot which meant when someone looked for an outlet down the right it wasn't there, Beckford and Nugent pulled out wide a lot, which meant there were often easy balls down the middle but nobody to receive them. (not a criticism, just an observation) We still look like we are trying to gel as a team and work out how each other plays, there were very few quick balls or good link up play because we constantly had to stop, look up, look around and by that time the chance was gone. Changing the formation is not going to be the immediate answer because then we are going to have to learn how to play in that formation. Ideally by now we would be looking to bring players to fit in to an existing functioning formation. I am not saying 442 is the answer but chopping and changing doesn't help things when coming up to January as we need to buy players to fit the formation we play, that was Sven's mistake buy players then fit the formation around them.
Heart-Shaped Fox Posted 27 December 2011 Posted 27 December 2011 Np is making the best out of what he has got at the moment. We will do better with proper wingers in a 442 soon.
Trav Le Bleu Posted 27 December 2011 Posted 27 December 2011 4-3-3 worked great with Vassell, but without him... I don't think it's coincidence that we're not doing so well without him.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.