Jools 584 Posted November 7, 2016 A tad reluctant to knock out the old cliches, but surely the best form of defence is to attack with our ongoing crisis in the former area of the pitch.Keep things simple -- Neil has to drop the complex 4-2-3-1 - we neither have the coaching skills nor intelligent playing staff to execute it for a duration that would render us in the promotion places - Players that play in the double pivot of successful 4-2-3-1''s are the likes of Kaka, Xavi, Mascherano, Meireles, Mikel, Kramer, Dahoud, Gundogan etc, etc... We have Tettey, Dorrans, Thompson & Howson [:|]A 4-4-2 with out & out wingers and two forwards please, Neil [Y] Do what you''re familiar with man. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Move Klose 303 Posted November 7, 2016 Yer i think maybe a move for Gundogan in January could be on the cards. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 7, 2016 4-4-2 means no place for Hoolahan though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 3,283 Posted November 7, 2016 Scoring goals isn''t an issue, defending is.I''m all for two up top but we need width and to play our best players in their best position.I''m all for the diamond to come back, with Thompson deep, width with Murphy & Pritchard and Wes off the front two.But our defence would need to up their game or this to work.One up top does over load our midfield which goes against us sometimes as we sit so deep. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jools 584 Posted November 7, 2016 [quote user="morty"]4-4-2 means no place for Hoolahan though.[/quote][Y] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,578 Posted November 8, 2016 We don''t have the players for 4-4-2.Our three strikers are all big guys with no pace so won''t work as a pairing. Our best midfielders are Wes and Pritchard and they don''t work in this system. The midfielder most suited to a traditional 4 man midfield is out injured until January. Neil (or whoever chose these players) has backed himself into a bit of a corner that this squad is really only built to play with one up top and five in the midfield. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Syteanric 1 Posted November 8, 2016 If 4 4 2 works and Hoolahan doesn''t play so be it.You fit players into the system, not system round players Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 8, 2016 That won''t go down well with a few people... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Crabbycanary3 994 Posted November 8, 2016 Or how about 4-1-3-2, with the full backs dominating the first 60 yards, instead of expecting them to cover 95 yards? Do we put too much emphasis on the full backs, and their (attacking) roles, and not enough on giving the lone striker help (how many knock downs/ second balls, did we NOT get on Saturday?) Jerome knocked down to Laffs (2nd striker)to score after all. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Highland Canary 76 Posted November 8, 2016 Guess we can''t afford Hooper. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 8, 2016 "Paging Jaeme2 to the thread"..... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,618 Posted November 8, 2016 You don''t have to have a big-guy-little-guy partnership up front. It''s not obligatory. I''ve called for 4-4-2 but as discussed the biggest loss then is Hoolahan.Something isn''t working though - recently we''ve looked so poor in defence yet despite having 3 attacking mids Jerome also looks incredibly isolated. How does that work!? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Van wink 2,994 Posted November 8, 2016 If we are going to play like we have been recently I don''t think a change of formation is going to make a great deal of difference to be honest. Individual mistakes are costing us. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Making Plans 936 Posted November 8, 2016 [quote user="morty"]4-4-2 means no place for Hoolahan though.[/quote]Based on the last 3 games does he really warrant a place at the moment. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,618 Posted November 8, 2016 Yes, when you consider the even more abject performances from those around him (bar one or two, of course) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,578 Posted November 8, 2016 @hoegsar No you don''t have to have big guy/little guy but you need players with complementary attributes. Two big guys with not very much pace together is easy to defend against - hold a high line, show the wide players inside.I''ve mentioned before that I think we have the players to use a similar formation to Chelsea. It would allow us more strength in the back, would utilise our attacking full backs and allow us to use Pritchard and Wes without shoving one of them on to the wing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,618 Posted November 8, 2016 I agree with your theory of playing a similar way to Chelsea. But, just to be awkward, Jerome has quite a bit of pace! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy_Bones 441 Posted November 8, 2016 [quote user="king canary"]Neil (or whoever chose these players) has backed himself into a bit of a corner that this squad is really only built to play with one up top and five in the midfield.[/quote]I''d argue that there''s a case for a 3-6-1 instead: Ruddy Bennett Klose Bassong Pinto Thompson Dorrans Brady Pritchard Hoolahan JeromeThis drops a number of our most recently underperforming players, keeps both Hoolahan and Pritchard in creative positions, gives us width with the attacking wing backs, and both grit and composure in the middle (although I still think Tettey has more to offer this year). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,618 Posted November 8, 2016 I like it. But I can''t help but feel this is all a bit of a pointless discussion as i''d be very surprised to see us make such a dramatic change, particularly since Alex Neil has been pretty dependant upon 4-2-3-1 for the past 12 months and during our promotion 4-1-4-1 for the most part. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,578 Posted November 8, 2016 @IndyYep that is the exact formation and personnel I like the look of. @HoegsarI don''t think he does. He has a bit of a burst but if I was a defender I''d not be too worried about him getting in behind. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy_Bones 441 Posted November 8, 2016 Agreed Hog,It''s far too forward thinking for AN to seriously consider, as he''s made it blindingly obvious that he wants to play one way, and one way only, but when the $hit''s hitting the fan, it''s no time for him to be stubborn and refuse to consider changes, and this could be the sort of thing we absolutely need at the minute.One thing is for certain, regardless of formation, some players MUST be dropped based on recent form, and if that doesn''t happen then we knowing we''re pi$$ing into the wind... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Van wink 2,994 Posted November 8, 2016 It will be a relief when Pinto comes back in, I don''t think Brady has the work rate atm Indy to play that position. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy_Bones 441 Posted November 8, 2016 The problem is that he''s the better of the two when it comes to him vs Olsson IMHO, and it''s surely got to be better than playing him right wing! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
morty 0 Posted November 8, 2016 I really don''t think we can play 4-4-2 without Howson. I struggle to think of a midfield pairing that doesn''t include him.For me he is the biggest miss right now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,618 Posted November 8, 2016 Yep. I was starting to really like the idea of Howson & Dorrans as a central midfield pairing, particularly against the weaker teams where don''t really need a natural DM like Tettey. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rogue Baboon 0 Posted November 8, 2016 No small, pacy striker?Oh for Dwight Gayle, even a Lewis Grabban... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lappinitup 629 Posted November 8, 2016 The binners have been watching 4-4-2 for the last four years, they reckon it''s a throwback to the 80''s and call McCarthy a dinosaur. [:S] Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nutty nigel 7,509 Posted November 8, 2016 I wish we were dinosaurs... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Horse Renoir 1 Posted November 8, 2016 Would prefer this:------------Ruddy--------------Martin Klose BassongPinto---------------------Brady-----------Thompson----------------Murphy Hoolahan-----Jerome --Oliviera---------3 CB''s to help us at set pieces and a mix of pace and experience at the back. Two very good wingbacks for this league to provide width. A DM who will stick to his position and break up play well. Two creative central players to fit AN''s philosophy and two strikers to help us put chances away. For the options we have this seems like the most balanced team to me. Wish I had a bit more faith in our coaching team to implement an unusual style like this as well but whatever. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SwindonCanary 455 Posted November 8, 2016 I believe it''s not the formation or who plays, it''s how we play. I do wish we would press higher and move the ball quicker, but then again Pep Guardiola can''t do it, at Man. City like he did at Barcelona but Jurgen Klopp seems to be doing it well at Liverpool ! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites