NathanC93 Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 It's definitely not the finished article but when it comes together coming forward it does look good. I saw it as an alternative to 442 but Pearson seems to be sticking with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red5 Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 The French wonder isn't a winger and refusal to move away from 442 is the reason we collapsed from February onwards.... And we do have the squad for 352 I agree with this, I think 352 failed yesterday because De-laet was ill and we had no cover without changing the system Knocky in 442 can only work in a diamond, he is way too slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueFox55 Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 We looked far better at the start of last year playing 4-4-2 than we do now playing 3-5-2. When we switched to 4-4-2 yesterday we improved massively Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 We looked far better at the start of last year playing 4-4-2 than we do now playing 3-5-2. When we switched to 4-4-2 yesterday we improved massively Not much point comparing it to the start of last year as every team now know that if they put three in the middle they stand a good chance of getting points off us. The new formation obviously strengthens our spine a bit more. When did we switch to 4-4-2???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickelbyfox Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 Just think with this formation to work - need someone to hold onto the ball and take it forward rather than playing to the sides - aka Knockaert. Everyone else yesterday looked to pass on the ball like a hot potato or force wide. Also Miquel will need to start as Whitbread just doesn't know how to play with the ball out of defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shade Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 Hi everyone To be honest, as some have already said, I really don't see a problem with 352. I think there are two issues slightly holding us back at the moment which hopefully can be resolved given a little tweaking and a little time. The first issue is that the formation is new and has to be given a few weeks before it can be properly assessed and judged. The second is that, yes, I think the personnel were slightly wrong yesterday but hopefully NP saw that too and will make the necessary adjustments. I think at home we have to be a little more attacking. If I were the manager (and obviously I'm not, I'm a sad little, small penised loser like the rest of us on here pretending I could be a manager when in actual fact I have little to no managerial experience outside Champ Manager 01/02) I would like to see a line up at home of either: Schmeichel Moore Morgan Miquel RDL Schlupp King James Knocky Vardy Nugent Or: Schmeichel RDL Moore Morgan Konch King James Knocky Marshall Dyer Nugent I think with a little more time and a few more attacking players on the pitch the 352 could be a useful and dangerous formation. I think the team we played yesterday could be very good away from home where we struggled last year. We never looked in trouble yesterday and whilst, yes, it was rather a dull game, it is important to sort out the back first, keep clean sheets and then work from those foundations to become a little more creative. I feel fairly confident after the start we have and so many people moaned last year about having no Plan B that I cannot quite fathom why the same people are now crying out for 442 again. It is nice to know that we can play both formations and I believe both will be used over the season. Anyway, come on you fvcking foxes!!!! In NP we trust!! Rumble X yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfox Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 Just been doing some thinking. I'm liking the 3-5-2 formation so far, but there is three ways we can set our team up in my opinion. Just a few things on some players, Konchesky needs to be dropped, Schlupp or Bakayogo need to come in, you need pace at wing back and Konchesky doesn't offer it. Konchesky was slow going forward and tracking back yesterday, which led to Whitbread being exposed, and due to Whitbread being slow he struggled sometimes, but on Whitbread he didn't play that bad yesterday, he is a useful player to have, because of his height and physical presence, second half he dominated the air and cut out the long balls. When Smith came on, I thought this could end up being bad, but Whitbread won a lot of headers against him. Moving onto the formations, I can understand why we played a straight three across the centre of midfield yesterday, Austin and Murphy are physical powerful players, and having three in the centre would be better, having that extra man sometimes helped, it didn't first half because Austin kept picking up the loose balls, but as the game progressed, Drinkwater and King especially found time on the ball, and linked up well, which let us play freely and create opportunities. Ideally at home though, we should be setting up with either Knockaert or Marshall in a CAM role. Away from home, I would set us up two ways, a defensive midfielder needs to come in on loan in my opinion, we haven't had that bite to the midfield since the days of Savage and Lennon, yesterday we could of done with a physical player in midfield. Against the more physical teams away from home I would play a defensive midfielder, then James alongside Drinkwater or King. Then against the less physical teams, who we can match up against we should play a straight three across the midfield like yesterday, with James, Drinkwater and King. 3-5-2 Home Schmeichel Moore - Morgan - Whitbread/Miquel De Laet - James - King - Bakayogo/Schlupp Knockaert/Marshall Vardy - Nugent/Wood 3-5-2 Away(Against more physical teams) Schmeichel Whitbread - Morgan - Miquel DEF MID De Laet - James - Drinky/King - Bakayogo/Schlupp Vardy - Nugent/Wood 3-5-2 Away(Against less physical teams) Schmeichel Moore - Morgan - Miquel De Laet - James - Drinky - King - Bakayogo/Schlupp Vardy - Nugent/Wood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 I think for 3-5-2 to work creatively we MUST have that creative midfielder as one of the midfield three. This is the man with good vision and a quick pass to get the two wing backs in. Our midfield three is SOLID. I can't see us conceding too many goals. But going forward with pace and flair, it's too pedestrian. Frankly, it's not good enough to continually open up the opposition. Why it worked well for Hull last season was due to players like Koren. Good on the ball, quick feet, looking to play those slide rule balls that attacking players thrive on. We don't have such a player. It would be really easy to get on the back of the likes of Vardy and say he's not scoring goals. He won't until he's given the type of feed he thrives upon. Even Wood's shot that hit the post yesterday he made himself. There was no quick play, final ball in, chance scenario. For this reason. I'd stick with the 5-3-2 away from home. It should see us conceding fewer goals. But we need to consider something else at home, I would suspect because I don't think we have the main player to make it work.... That central midfielder with the range of passing that's crucial to get the front lads (or the wing backs) in. Time will tell and it's just my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 12 August 2013 Author Share Posted 12 August 2013 I just don't see it. Our creative players are on the bench and the selected players are creating nothing. In addition at Wycombe there were gaping holes in the centre of our defence, granted less so yesterday. The wing backs cant go past their opposing full back, either by instruction or lack or will to take the risk, and the centre of midfield is creating little or nothing. Yesterday our best period by far was when we went back to a more familiar system that allowed our creative players to attack the opposition later in the second half. Maybe I am watching a different game to everyone else but I just do see how our squad can be effective regularly using 3-5-2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evs_the_fox Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 Yesterday our best period by far was when we went back to a more familiar system that allowed our creative players to attack the opposition later in the second half. You mean while playing 352, just with Knockaert behind the front two? Because we never changed formation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 12 August 2013 Author Share Posted 12 August 2013 You mean while playing 352, just with Knockaert behind the front two? Because we never changed formation. We did change when De Laet went off, Morgan signaled it to the rest by holding up 4 fingers, maybe you missed it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5waller5 Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 We did change when De Laet went off, Morgan signaled it to the rest by holding up 4 fingers, maybe you missed it? I didn't see that and couldn't work out what formation we were playing after the changes to be honest!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bayfox Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 We did change when De Laet went off, Morgan signaled it to the rest by holding up 4 fingers, maybe you missed it? well if we did it wasnt obvious. looked like moore shifted over one and lloyd went lwb with konch moving to lcb. then knocky being allowed a free role as tuesday. if we did go 4 what was the midfield meant to be as we had no one wide right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GingerrrFox Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 We stayed playing 3-5-2 yesterday we didn't change formation once. If we went to 4-4-2 like people keep saying who played right wing? Because Knocky didn't and neither did King or Drinkwater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 12 August 2013 Author Share Posted 12 August 2013 We stayed playing 3-5-2 yesterday we didn't change formation once. If we went to 4-4-2 like people keep saying who played right wing? Because Knocky didn't and neither did King or Drinkwater. Konch left back, Moore right. Dyer left wing, no one right wing as Knockaert played through the middle, although Drinkwater did drop wide right at times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 It was more a 3-4-1-2 when Knockaert came on, even Moore commented post match on being moved forward second half! So yes we more or less stayed the same. We were still playing with 3 centre backs as Konchesky moved to LCB with Morgan RCB and Whitbread in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 12 August 2013 Author Share Posted 12 August 2013 It was more a 3-4-1-2 when Knockaert came on, even Moore commented post match on being moved forward second half! So yes we more or less stayed the same. We were still playing with 3 centre backs as Konchesky moved to LCB with Morgan RCB and Whitbread in the middle. They were clearly lining up as a 4 without the ball, and Morgan even held up 4 fingers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bayfox Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 They were clearly lining up as a 4 without the ball, and Morgan even held up 4 fingers. maybe he's anti coalville and only has 4 digits!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambert09 Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 Away from home it's perfect, at home I think we should just go 442 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dpjfox Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 imo we didn't play 3-5-2 it was more like 5-3-2 which is certainly no good at home!!! We need a left sided RDL (hopefully Baka )and a creative central midfielder to replace one of our 3 defensive central midfielders Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mack Posted 12 August 2013 Author Share Posted 12 August 2013 imo we didn't play 3-5-2 it was more like 5-3-2 which is certainly no good at home!!! We need a left sided RDL (hopefully Baka )and a creative central midfielder to replace one of our 3 defensive central midfielders If we are going to stick with it then we must get some creation into the middle of the park, and that would be Knockaert in for King in my opinion. In addition the wing back have to be allowed / have the bottle to beat the full back and get a cross in or else they are just full backs and we are then a 5-3-2 with no width or creation from wide. A worrying thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GingerrrFox Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 Konch left back, Moore right. Dyer left wing, no one right wing as Knockaert played through the middle, although Drinkwater did drop wide right at times. You're wrong. Wes played RCB, Whitbread moved to the middle and Konch played LCB. Moore moved to RWB and Dyer played LWB. Midfield 3 of King, Drinkwater and Knocky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheUltimateWinner Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 We kept 3-5-2 The players were just confused at their positions and what formation they were playing for a short period until pearson got his instructions across. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 We did change when De Laet went off, Morgan signaled it to the rest by holding up 4 fingers, maybe you missed it? well Morgan was wrong it was Morgan, Whitbread and Konch as a back 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
5waller5 Posted 12 August 2013 Share Posted 12 August 2013 well Morgan was wrong it was Morgan, Whitbread and Konch as a back 3 Let's hope, that given he was not only one of them but our captain, that he did know what we were doing!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.