Silverdaz Posted 22 February 2015 Posted 22 February 2015 This. On his heels, shot to near post, rolls over the line, no deflection - he stands and watches from 4 ft away, no dive. Another player to add to the too old category. It's ok though our manager accepts mistakes - only from the over 30s though, for reasons only known to himself. yeah that's right blame the keeper again when he no chance with either goal he was just caught wrong footed for Naismiths goal, I thought he looked solid today feel more comfortable with him in than Hamer but hopefully Kasper will be back soon
Father Ted Posted 22 February 2015 Posted 22 February 2015 Also, there is no way that James and Cambiasso will be able to play that well and at that intensity for the rest of the season. 5-4-1 will put far too much strain on the front 5 over time.
MooseBreath Posted 22 February 2015 Posted 22 February 2015 Why can't we play a 3-5-2? Seems completely ideal. We can still play 3 at the back albrighton on the right and Schlupp on the left who are made for that position. Whilst also having 3 in midfield with the option of Cambiasso, James + Hammond/Drinkwater or either Mahrez/Nugent dropping deep whilst still having two up top (or again you can play Nugent/Mahrez in behind either Ulloa/Vardy/Kramaric). So much more flexible and fluid than a rigid 5-4-1 that we've been playing and also shifts the donkeys that are Simpson and Konchesky out of the team. Wing backs have to attack and defend. Barely any of our wide players are capable of doing one of those jobs effectively never mind both. I think if we had Schlupp and de Laet as wing backs they would both effectively have to play as full backs to avoid continuously getting caught out defensively. That would leave us with no attacking outlet on the wings which would either mean we had to somehow plow right through the middle, or the likes of Mahrez and Kramaric would end up drifting wide anyway just to find space. It would end up as a 541 only a more chaotic version with players out of position.
Rushden fox Posted 22 February 2015 Posted 22 February 2015 Wing backs have to attack and defend. Barely any of our wide players are capable of doing one of those jobs effectively never mind both. I think if we had Schlupp and de Laet as wing backs they would both effectively have to play as full backs to avoid continuously getting caught out defensively. That would leave us with no attacking outlet on the wings which would either mean we had to somehow plow right through the middle, or the likes of Mahrez and Kramaric would end up drifting wide anyway just to find space. It would end up as a 541 only a more chaotic version with players out of position. Disagree..wing backs are attacking players that can also defend...if Guppy can do it so can Delaet and schlupp. It's about the back 3 covering across until they are back in position. I for one think that's our strongest formation with our players and the state we are in.
MooseBreath Posted 22 February 2015 Posted 22 February 2015 Disagree..wing backs are attacking players that can also defend...if Guppy can do it so can Delaet and schlupp. It's about the back 3 covering across until they are back in position. I for one think that's our strongest formation with our players and the state we are in. That's fine if you've got three capable centre backs who can provide cover like Guppy had. But we haven't. Our centre backs can't even do their own jobs properly never mind cover for wandering wing backs. Even with five at the back today we still could have easily conceded six goals or more. We've played four at the back all season and have been getting worse and worse. I don't even want to imagine how exposed we would be with only three at the back.
cc_star Posted 22 February 2015 Author Posted 22 February 2015 That's fine if you've got three capable centre backs who can provide cover like Guppy had. But we haven't. Our centre backs can't even do their own jobs properly never mind cover for wandering wing backs. Even with five at the back today we still could have easily conceded six goals or more. We've played four at the back all season and have been getting worse and worse. I don't even want to imagine how exposed we would be with only three at the back. Good points, so perhaps back 5 is our best (least worst) option Worse than that what you've said though, they also had Lennon in front of them mopping everything up... And Savage doing the work of 10 We'd be on the receiving end of record top flight defeats if we went 3 at the back without the tactics to play a CM or two defensively
MHC Posted 22 February 2015 Posted 22 February 2015 I think the problem is that we haven't got enough players synchronised to play alongside one another within the systems we approach games with. Make no mistake, there is some very good footballers at this club. Cambiasso is great, but he is best played as part of a central midfield trio. Kramaric likewise, but he's better as one of two forwards and whoever is his strike partner is of equal importance. Kramaric strikes me as a player who requires his team mates to bring out the best in him. He can create moments of magic for sure, but not on a regular enough basis to provide us with the impact we currently require. This could go on for every player at this club, my point is; we could have four or five players who are most comfortable playing in a 4-3-3 alongside players with a certain style of play. We could also have four or five players who perform best within a 3-5-2 alongside players who compliment their own style of play. Maybe we don't have enough players comfortable to play together within a certain formation or tactic. Pearson has to take the blame for this, he is responsible for squad recruitment and tactics; and if he is too short sighted to see that multiple formations would be required in order to frustrate and penetrate our opposition then it is his fault that we didn't recruit sufficiently to address these challenges. The players are momotivated, no doubt about that; but are the players synchronised with the systems we play? Are the players capable of drawing out the best from each other with their own style of play? I don't think so. It's Nigel Pearson's job to address this and he has failed, unfortunately.
the messenger Posted 22 February 2015 Posted 22 February 2015 1 Hamer 2 de laet wing back 3 shlupp wing back 4 Huth 5 Waslewski 6 Upson 7 cambiasso 8 James 10 King 9 Kramaric 11 Ulloa
Rushden fox Posted 23 February 2015 Posted 23 February 2015 1 Hamer2 de laet wing back3 shlupp wing back4 Huth5 Waslewski6 Upson7 cambiasso8 James10 King9 Kramaric11 Ulloa Take out was and put in Moore, speed and energy
Swiss_tony Posted 23 February 2015 Posted 23 February 2015 hamer de laet was huth schlupp hammond james Cambiasso albrighton nugent kram
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.