Have we ever played this formation?

[RumbleFox]

Have already mentioned this on a thread but wanted to start a new one as I am simple and needy.  Have we ever played (in recent years) four at the back, five in midfield and one up top (and I don't mean in a way that is basically 433).  I just feel it would be worth a go as we have some good central midfielders but they are all slightly lightweight and none of our strikers are really on fire.  I also think we have to play four at the back so 352 is probably not a great idea.  I just feel the following set up (and you can change the players) would be decent:

 

                                           Kasper

 

                            RDL    Wes    Was    Konch

 

                                 Drinkwater    James

 

                                Knocky    King    Dyer

 

                                           Vardy

 

I know knocky may be better in the centre and King back for either Drinkwater or James but no one else can really play on the right.  Also, I am aware that some folk don't think Vardy could play as a lone striker.  I am more concerned with the set up than the personnel.  I just feel it would be worth a shout.  It may not work but many of the top teams are setting up like this at present.  Just think it might make us more solid in the middle without further halting our creativity.  We have some good players and are doing well and I am a big Pearson bummer as you all know (luckily for him my penis is so tiny he doesn't even feel it) but a bit of a shake up might work?

 

Anyway, would like to hear what you all think.  As I said, maybe you could juggle the players around but I like the look of it and I may be wrong but I cannot really remember us trying this formation?

 

Thank you all you lovely people.

 

Rumble.

 

X

[Jonaldinho]

I would like to see us try it, especially away from home. We're yet to establish a good alternative to 4-4-2 as 4-3-3 doesn't seem to work for us, so it's worth a shot.

Rather than Knocky, I'd like to see GTF 'in the hole' (cue Mick McCarthy gif.) He's got a good touch and I'm sure he will create chances for us if he has runners around him.

Knowing us though, it would become a 4-5-1, the striker would become isolated and we'd create nothing.

[AKCJ]

Would love us to sign a right footed Lloyd Dyer and play Knocky down the middle.

[GingerrrFox]

 

I'd love it if Nigel played this ****er.

[MooseBreath]

It's essentially 442 with one of the forwards dropping back into midfield, so you could argue that we played it everytime we played Beckford when he was too busy not feeling pressure to get forward.

But I can't remember us trying it intentionally. I much prefer it to 433 and 352 for crowding the midfield as it maintains attacking width. But I think it would need someone a bit more talismanic than King in the hole for it to work. Maybe if we got a new right winger then Knocky could play in there.

[Wink]

Have already mentioned this on a thread but wanted to start a new one as I am simple and needy.  Have we ever played (in recent years) four at the back, five in midfield and one up top (and I don't mean in a way that is basically 433).  I just feel it would be worth a go as we have some good central midfielders but they are all slightly lightweight and none of our strikers are really on fire.  I also think we have to play four at the back so 352 is probably not a great idea.  I just feel the following set up (and you can change the players) would be decent:

 

                                           Kasper

 

                            RDL    Wes    Was    Konch

 

                                 Drinkwater    James

 

                                Knocky    King    Dyer

 

                                           Vardy

 

I know knocky may be better in the centre and King back for either Drinkwater or James but no one else can really play on the right.  Also, I am aware that some folk don't think Vardy could play as a lone striker.  I am more concerned with the set up than the personnel.  I just feel it would be worth a shout.  It may not work but many of the top teams are setting up like this at present.  Just think it might make us more solid in the middle without further halting our creativity.  We have some good players and are doing well and I am a big Pearson bummer as you all know (luckily for him my penis is so tiny he doesn't even feel it) but a bit of a shake up might work?

 

Anyway, would like to hear what you all think.  As I said, maybe you could juggle the players around but I like the look of it and I may be wrong but I cannot really remember us trying this formation?

 

Thank you all you lovely people.

 

Rumble.

 

X

Im sure we played something like this against Fulham.

 

                        Schmeichel

 

Was         Wes                Miguel      Schlupp

 

               Hammond        James

 

Knocky              Drinkwater          Dyer

 

                          Wood

 

Basically gave Drinkwater the chance to get further forward and be more creative, whilst being fairly solid (I say that but we conceded 3 )

[mmfoxuk]

I like the idea of the formation although I would play it slightly differently. I would go for this;

 

                                             Kasper

 

                            Moore    Wes    Was    Konch

 

                                       King   James

 

                                Vardy    Knockaert    Dyer

 

                                           Wood/Nuge

 

Could be effective and gives the option to switch to 442 If it's not working pushing vardy up top and knocky out to the wing.

[Dan LCFC]

 

I'd love it if Nigel played this ****er.

 

Mazzarri's Napoli. They made 3-4-2-1 look brilliant.

[cityfanlee23]

so essentially a 4231?

 

It works with leicester on Fifa 

[Dan LCFC]

I stick to our usual 4-4-2 on FIFA

 

I do like 4-2-3-1. It's a more flexible 4-4-2 with better links between attack and midfield.

 

I wouldn't be against trying this...

 

Schmeichel

De Laet - Morgan - Miquel - Schlupp

Drinkwater - King

Knockaert - GTF - Dyer

Vardy

[Ross 'LCFC' Turner]

Im sure we played something like this against Fulham.

 

                        Schmeichel

 

Was         Wes                Miguel      Schlupp

 

               Hammond        James

 

Knocky              Drinkwater          Dyer

 

                          Wood

 

Basically gave Drinkwater the chance to get further forward and be more creative, whilst being fairly solid (I say that but we conceded 3 )

I think Koncheskey was left back and Schlupp was in Dyer's position. But yeh Drinkwater was in behind Wood 

[JoeLcfc1]

haha, was going to i play with this on fifa  

[Johnny Cash]

                         Schmeichel

 

      Wasilewski         Morgan         Moore

 

               Drinkwater        James

 

  RDL                     King                      Dyer

 

                      Knockeart

                                          Wood

 

This is my preferred team, which means it is the right team!

[Langston]

I think GTF could do a really tidy job "in the hole." Even from his brief cameos he's shown more in hold up play than the rest of our strikers combined, it'd be great to have somebody up the field that can hold onto the ball and bring others into play. I dare say whichever striker starts would benefit a great deal, too.

[AdamN]

I seem to remember the general consensus being that King was best running from deep, almost ghosting in unnoticed. He's not got the pace of Dyer or the trickery of Knockaert, so he's unlikely to be taking anyone on in an advanced position, but he does have the quality to get into the right areas and finish a move off, so I reckon he'd be best in a standard CM positon with licence to get forward.

I'd probably be more partial to:

 

            Was       Wes       Miquel

 

                James/Hammond

 

De Laet     Drinkwater     King     Dyer

 

                      Knockaert

 

                    Vardy/Nugent

[Dan LCFC]

 

                         Schmeichel

 

      Wasilewski         Morgan         Moore

 

               Drinkwater        James

 

  RDL                     King                      Dyer

 

                      Knockeart

                                          Wood

 

This is my preferred team, which means it is the right team!

 

 

Something very likeable about that.

[MooseBreath]

We don't have the players to play without full backs though. Neither Knocky nor Dyer are good enough tracking back to play as wing backs. Konch is never going to be a wing back. RDL and Schlupp are more suitable but neither have enough all-round ability yet and we wouldn't be playing to our stengths.

[GingerrrFox]

We don't have the players to play without full backs though. Neither Knocky nor Dyer are good enough tracking back to play as wing backs. Konch is never going to be a wing back. RDL and Schlupp are more suitable but neither have enough all-round ability yet and we wouldn't be playing to our stengths.

 

I think if you had a really solid back 3 of Wasyl, Morgan and Miquel then it would give RDL and Schlupp the confidence to bomb on a bit more and be more attacking in their approach. Knockaert would be better in a free role centrally, it would allow him the creative ability to go and do what he wants which is what we need. When Knockaert and Drinkwater are firing we win games. 

[Stadt]

Vardy would be garbage upfront on his own.

[Finn Claw II]

With this talk of false number 9's how about we play three false central midfielders.  Hammond, Dinky and King sit about 5 meters away from the opposition's midfield, worked a treat against Brighton

[Number 6]

I flipping love a 4231. Each player has clear defined roles. Maintains a solid base whilst still being attacking. I'd like to see it tried but worried our 3 behind the striker wouldn't be creative enough (though think Knocky would thrive).

[David]

for those saying 3 at the back -

 

3 at the back does not work unless you are a much stronger than your opposition, which we are not.

 

If you have a good side and tactically you know what you are doing, 3 at the back is fairly easy to play against.

[Johnny Cash]

If you have a good side and tactically you know what you are doing, 3 at the back is fairly easy to play against.

Surely that goes for every side in every formation..

Something very likeable about that.

I did say it was the right formation

[Langley]

I'd love a 3-1-4-2

 

 

        Schmeichel

Moore Was Miguel

          Morgan

Knocky King James Dyer

      Nugent

                   Vardy

 

Bring back a sweeper is what I say especially with Man City. Morgan in front of the the back three.

[Dan LCFC]

Vardy would be garbage upfront on his own.

 

If he's left 'on his own' then the formation isn't being played properly. A lot of these lone striker formations are due to building up a better link between midfield and attack and the number of natural strikers shouldn't be important.

 

4-4-2 is the only formation we look decent going forward in under Pearson.