4-5-1......or 5-3-2 ??

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 2,073]

Looks to be 2 clear ways we can go with this squad...

The personnel may be different....but

........rhodes. .....

Hernandez....McLean. ..leitner....Marshall

. .................tryball. ...........

...Lewis. ...klose. ...Hanley. ...passlack

.....................Krul. ..............

.

Or

.

................rhodes. .....pukki.....

...........McLean. .....leitner........

Lewis..........tryball. .......Marshall

........klose. ...zimmerman. ....Hanley. ..

..................Krul. ...............

.

Which do you think ?....one gets 2 strikers on the pitch and makes us "possibly " tighter at the back

.......the other gets 2 men higher up the pitch on wide areas.

Which do we prefer or can/will Farke change from game to game or even within a game?

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,486]

With Raggett about to go out on loan Norwich won’t be able to play three centre backs for a sustained period. Especially as Hanley and Klose are both quite injury prone.

The German tour suggests that the 4-1-4-1 will be the formation of choice this season and 3-5-2 will be plan B.

Will learn more from the next two friendlies as you would expect Farke’s staring XI for Birmingham will get a run out.

[ZLF 342]

It does look like 4141 but only as i have residual concerns that we are not strong enough perming 2 from 3 of Hanley, klose and zimm.

To cap a good summer a further cb to enable a solid cb line whether as a pair or a three would be wonderful.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,486]

Problem with getting an extra centre back where do you get someone who will be 4th choice? Which is basically pointless if a back 4 is the intended formation. 4th choice guy won’t even make the bench.

It seems Godfrey will be used as a utility centre back to cover if needed and with Norwich’s squad already pretty large getting someone else in seems too much.

I think the squad is pretty much done, there might be a young loan player sprinkling but ultimately Norwich are there, almost two weeks early.

[HertsCanary93 223]

Has there been anything concrete about Martin yet?

Whatever people say about him, he is 100% good enough to be 5th choice CB if we had a crisis playing 3 at the back.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 2,073]

[quote user="HertsCanary93"]Has there been anything concrete about Martin yet?

Whatever people say about him, he is 100% good enough to be 5th choice CB if we had a crisis playing 3 at the back.[/quote]

....oh christ no!.....rather call up odusina from the U23s before we went there

[ZLF 342]

Agree with that beth. I was thinking more another hanley style headliner rather a 4th choicer, optimistic i know but see little point in more of the same when the friendlies have seen last seasons frailties unresolved. Costly and unlikely but we all love to dream..

I dont think russ will be the answer.

[KeiranShikari_2 0]

Clearly doesn''t fancy Raggett this season and thankfully doesn''t rate Martin.

If we''re going to regularly be playing a 3 then we need another even with Godfrey seemingly being seen as a capable option. 

Suppose something will happen when/if Martin/Oliveira/Ivo leave.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,486]

If Norwich get a new ‘headliner’ centreback are you dropping Hanley or Klose? They are probably two of the highest paid players at the club.

I don’t think Norwich’s habit of conceding goals is due to the quality of the centrebacks, I think there are deeper issues than that unfortunately.

Ultimately to get a new first choice centreback is a £3m/£4m purchase at least - which without moving on a few more players is probably beyond Norwich right now.

[king canary 8,944]

Not a huge fan of how Farke set us up in the 4-1-4-1 formation last season as he seemed to want to stuff the team with lightweight playmakers and expect the guy in-front of the back 4 to cover everything.

Against Millwall we played Vrancic, Maddison, Murphy and Wes as the 4 in midfield and unsurprisingly saw lots of the ball but got destroyed.

[lake district canary 4,878]

[quote user="king canary"]Not a huge fan of how Farke set us up in the 4-1-4-1 formation last season as he seemed to want to stuff the team with lightweight playmakers and expect the guy in-front of the back 4 to cover everything.

Against Millwall we played Vrancic, Maddison, Murphy and Wes as the 4 in midfield and unsurprisingly saw lots of the ball but got destroyed.[/quote]

He tried something like that line up late in the season too, I forget where, but it didn''t work then either.  With the players that we have now, the most creative playmaker four in midfield (when all fit) looks to be Hernandez, McLean, Vrancic and Buendia. With a good DM behind them, and a striker who scores in front of them, that sort of line up should work well, so it will be interesting to see how things develop.

[ZLF 342]

Definitely not just the CBs - but the number of soft goals from that area of the pitch, whether Hanley, Klose or Zimmerman remains a concern, whether they are top earners or not. I would not be worried which was dropped as long we improved.

6 times last season we conceded more than 3 goals, in only one of those (that bizarre Hull away defeat) did Tettey start - showing the value of having a true def mid and the benefit of hopefully have cover in Thompson and Godfrey this season.

We started 10 games with a 3 at the back last season and the 1.4 points gained per game was identical to 4231 (28 starts) although we conceded significantly fewer goals (just under 20% per game).

If a back 4 protected by a tettey or similar cuts out those goals, then great - but it will need a step up in performance from the CBs this season.

[king canary 8,944]

I think you''re missing out the role played by the fullbacks though Zimmer. All of our fullbacks are more naturally attack minded which doesn''t help the central defenders.

I think a back three suits the players we have better. Lewis and Passlack both seem more suited to being wingbacks than traditional fullbacks. The extra cover in behind means Leitner or Vrancic are less concerned with having to defend. The width provided by wingbacks means we can play a bit narrower further up the pitch which will suit players like Hernandez, Buendia and McLean.

[lake district canary 4,878]

[quote user="Zimmers Left Foot"]

6 times last season we conceded more than 3 goals, in only one of those (that bizarre Hull away defeat) did Tettey start - showing the value of having a true def mid and the benefit of hopefully have cover in Thompson and Godfrey this season. [/quote]

In only one of those did Trybull start and he was key in our better defensive run.  On form I think Trybull is as good a DM - if not better - than Tettey - and they certainly worked well together when both in the team.  With Godfrey and Thompson, we have good cover against injuries/suspensions and should not be weak in that area at all this season.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 2,486]

I think 3 at the back can be a bit superfluous, especially if playing against a team that only deploy one striker.

I’d like to see whoever is playing as DM drop much deeper though and sit between the centrebacks when the full backs push forward.

Tettey is great at being a mobile 4 and putting pressure on the ball, but he does tend to stray too far up the pitch chasing the ball, leaving Norwich short at the back. Thompson also seems similar to this from my memory.

I think we either need to see the fullbacks only push up one at a time, leaving more men back or have the central DM stay further back.

I felt a lot of the goals Norwich conceded last season was due to the bluntness of the attack, they committed plenty of men forward in order to score, but were very prone to being counterattacked.

If Norwich’s attack can become more efficient then we may see less players coming out of defensive positions.

The biggest influence on Farke is Tuchel who deployed the 4-1-4-1 regularly at Dortmund. Tuchel would use the wingbacks for width and the wide midfielders would tuck in to provide overloads in the centre of the pitch. I can see Farke doing this also, Buendia is a wide player who comes in from the left and Hernandez wants to do the same on the opposite side. Tuchel had his DM drop really deep to build attacks from the back.

I do think we will see 3 at the back fairly often, especially against teams who play two centre forwards. Farke has shown fluidity in formations and is adaptable, but maybe hasn’t always had the personal to do it.

[king canary 8,944]

@Bethnal

"I’d like to see whoever is playing as DM drop much deeper though and sit between the centrebacks when the full backs push forward.

Tettey is great at being a mobile 4 and putting pressure on the ball, but he does tend to stray too far up the pitch chasing the ball, leaving Norwich short at the back"

This was actually my biggest frustration with how we set up under Neil. A more disciplined defensive midfielder who sat back and let the central defender split to cover attacking fullbacks would have made us much better in that gung-ho season.

"I felt a lot of the goals Norwich conceded last season was due to the bluntness of the attack, they committed plenty of men forward in order to score, but were very prone to being counterattacked."

I agree to an extent but I actually thought we kind of half arsed it- when we were having one of our sterile domination periods of sideways passing we''d have an awful lot of players just in the opposition half but not really ''committed'' to attacking. The issue for me is we have a lot of not very mobile players who could be easily turned by a simple ball over the top. Zimmerman in particular is very slow on the turn and Trybull and Vrancic in midfield were too often beaten by a quick ball over the top of them.