The two either side of Normann the key now?

[birchfest 397]

Normann looks every bit a top flight player, and whilst different to Skipp (I'd say he's like a hybrid of some elements of Skipp, some of Vrancic and even a bit of David Fox at his spraying best) it seems that at least that position is pretty much nailed down for him now. The key now seems to be who we can put in around him who will offer the work rate defensively, but also capable of creating those guilt edge chances for Pukki and Sargent. 

 

So far it seems Lees-Melou and McClean are the preferred options, both in the 4-3-3 and the 5-3-2, however with players such as Cantwell and Dowell waiting in the wings to come in (not to mention actual wing options in Tzolis and Rashica), would it require sacrificing one of the current two to add that spark? 

 

Would that require another formation shift, perhaps for games we should hopefully view as winnable at home (Newcastle, Southampton, Brentford, Leeds, Wolves) and back to a 4-2-3-1? 

Something like:

                          Krul

Aarons    Kabak    Hanley     Giannoulis 

            Normann     Mclean/Gilmour

  Cantwell        Dowel        Tzolis

                          Pukki 

 

Games away where we need the physicality and experience to weather a storm and be looking to get a decent point could see us using the same 5-3-2 that we had in Burnley, could be useful for Chelsea, West Ham etc

 

And then for games where we are able to accept we need to attempt to counter and there will be space to do so we have the 4-3-3 with pace bring the prime objective; Leeds away for example something like 

 

                           Krul

Aarons   Kabak    Hanley     Giannoulis 

    Lees-Melou  Normann  Mclean

   Rashica         Pukki          Tzolis

 

 

Anyway, feel free to tear it apart. I just feel slightly more buoyed to have a player in the centre who looks to be a 'first name on the team sheet' player. The defence tided itself up and if we can just become a little more creative offensively I think we have some really positive results to come. 

[Jim Smith 2,325]

I agree we will need to tweak it, even if its sticking to the same formation but getting more creativity and pace into the midfield and forward line. We cannot play 9 defensive players week in, week out or we will just never win. 

[canarydan23 4,060]

I wish Normann had a twin.

[Robert N. LiM 4,409]

34 minutes ago, birchfest said:

Normann looks every bit a top flight player, and whilst different to Skipp (I'd say he's like a hybrid of some elements of Skipp, some of Vrancic and even a bit of David Fox at his spraying best) it seems that at least that position is pretty much nailed down for him now. The key now seems to be who we can put in around him who will offer the work rate defensively, but also capable of creating those guilt edge chances for Pukki and Sargent. 

 

So far it seems Lees-Melou and McClean are the preferred options, both in the 4-3-3 and the 5-3-2, however with players such as Cantwell and Dowell waiting in the wings to come in (not to mention actual wing options in Tzolis and Rashica), would it require sacrificing one of the current two to add that spark? 

 

Would that require another formation shift, perhaps for games we should hopefully view as winnable at home (Newcastle, Southampton, Brentford, Leeds, Wolves) and back to a 4-2-3-1? 

Something like:

                          Krul

Aarons    Kabak    Hanley     Giannoulis 

            Normann     Mclean/Gilmour

  Cantwell        Dowel        Tzolis

                          Pukki 

 

Games away where we need the physicality and experience to weather a storm and be looking to get a decent point could see us using the same 5-3-2 that we had in Burnley, could be useful for Chelsea, West Ham etc

 

And then for games where we are able to accept we need to attempt to counter and there will be space to do so we have the 4-3-3 with pace bring the prime objective; Leeds away for example something like 

 

                           Krul

Aarons   Kabak    Hanley     Giannoulis 

    Lees-Melou  Normann  Mclean

   Rashica         Pukki          Tzolis

 

 

Anyway, feel free to tear it apart. I just feel slightly more buoyed to have a player in the centre who looks to be a 'first name on the team sheet' player. The defence tided itself up and if we can just become a little more creative offensively I think we have some really positive results to come. 

Good post. I've been thinking about this. There's been a lot of criticism of how we've bought too many players and should have spent the same money on fewer, better players. I think there might be something in that.

But the advantage of our recruitment approach is we now have a lot of different tactical options, as your three different line-ups suggest. It's going to ask a lot of DF and the players to get it right game by game, but it probably is the best avenue for us to survive. 

Edited October 4, 2021 by Robert N. LiM
Typo

[Don’t be Krul 399]

It seems to me sometimes that we're more worried about nullifying our opponents strengths than playing to our own. Sure we need to be adaptable and flexible, but at PL level Farke thus far has shown an inability to change tack mid-game

[Midlands Yellow 4,009]

3 minutes ago, Don’t be Krul said:

It seems to me sometimes that we're more worried about nullifying our opponents strengths than playing to our own. Sure we need to be adaptable and flexible, but at PL level Farke thus far has shown an inability to change tack mid-game

We won’t stay up doing that especially at home. Need to get something against Brighton and actually have a go at them. I think Farke will set up to do this and hopefully we get a performance and result. 

[Petriix 2,847]

I'd love us to go back to the 4-2-3-1.

It doesn't need to be less solid defensively than the 4-3-3 or the 5-3-2 we have been playing. In fact, in my opinion, it could be far more solid if played correctly.

The problems we've had in midfield this season have been where the 3 have been caught trying to fulfil multiple roles at the same time and (inevitably) failing. If McLean and Lees-Melou are supposed to be helping out in attack then they get caught out of position for their defensive duties; if they stay too deep then the attackers are left isolated. It's the worst of both worlds. If we had a dedicated second CDM and a dedicated number 10 then they would have much clearer responsibilities and be far less likely to be caught out of position.

I'd much rather see our attacking midfielders on the pitch. But they also need to be disciplined and defend in the wide areas with their pace. Tzolis seems to be quite good at this but I'm not at all convinced by Rashica (yet - but remember it took Emi a while to learn how to consistently track back).

With more pace on the pitch, we could actually afford to sit a little deeper as a team and then hit teams with fast counters by playing the sort of passing game that won us two Championship titles in 3 years. And, before you say that we'll lose trying to play that way, look at what Brentford are doing: they don't have better players than us, they're just playing with confidence and trusting their ability to hurt their opponents.

I'd say 'fair enough' if we tried it and it failed, but the sad truth is that we've never once lined up with the 4-2-3-1 this season.

In the early 4-3-3 the wide attackers were too high and didn't provide enough cover to their fullbacks, the midfielders were run ragged trying to be everywhere at once, not helped by Gilmour's inability to defend, and we had a real lack of central attacking threat with just Pukki on his own.

With the 3-5-2 we've become too deep, with the attackers too isolated. We might well have gained two 0-0s in a row had Kabak not gifted Everton the penalty; their second goal came once we'd switched to a more attacking (if a little disjointed) shape and were chasing the game. But, aside from the odd set piece and individual moment of brilliance, we don't look like scoring with this formation and the defence have no outlet for the ball. We just end up hoofing it long and hoping that the front 2 can somehow make something happen. Without those attacking midfielders on the pitch there is simply no creativity and no threat.

If, at the start of the season, you'd have ventured that our starting 11 would include only one out of Sargent, Rashica, Cantwell, Tzolis and Dowell then you would have raised a few eyebrows. I imagine it would take quite an injury crisis to limit our attacking options to that extent. However, that is where we find ourselves; not through injury (apart from perhaps mentally) but through choice.

It seems to me that the attackers are being sacrificed to cover up the shortcomings of the midfield. But I'm hopeful that Normann can sure things up and we will end up coming full circle and arriving back at the 4-2-3-1. Hopefully it won't be too late to pick up the points we need. Two of our most winnable 10 matches have already passed.

[pete 319]

Gilmour must be one of the two players to support MN.  Why? because he can do the defensive job as Kenny and PLM, but has the passing ability to influence further up the pitch.  

[Jim Smith 2,325]

54 minutes ago, Petriix said:

I'd love us to go back to the 4-2-3-1.

It doesn't need to be less solid defensively than the 4-3-3 or the 5-3-2 we have been playing. In fact, in my opinion, it could be far more solid if played correctly.

The problems we've had in midfield this season have been where the 3 have been caught trying to fulfil multiple roles at the same time and (inevitably) failing. If McLean and Lees-Melou are supposed to be helping out in attack then they get caught out of position for their defensive duties; if they stay too deep then the attackers are left isolated. It's the worst of both worlds. If we had a dedicated second CDM and a dedicated number 10 then they would have much clearer responsibilities and be far less likely to be caught out of position.

I'd much rather see our attacking midfielders on the pitch. But they also need to be disciplined and defend in the wide areas with their pace. Tzolis seems to be quite good at this but I'm not at all convinced by Rashica (yet - but remember it took Emi a while to learn how to consistently track back).

With more pace on the pitch, we could actually afford to sit a little deeper as a team and then hit teams with fast counters by playing the sort of passing game that won us two Championship titles in 3 years. And, before you say that we'll lose trying to play that way, look at what Brentford are doing: they don't have better players than us, they're just playing with confidence and trusting their ability to hurt their opponents.

I'd say 'fair enough' if we tried it and it failed, but the sad truth is that we've never once lined up with the 4-2-3-1 this season.

In the early 4-3-3 the wide attackers were too high and didn't provide enough cover to their fullbacks, the midfielders were run ragged trying to be everywhere at once, not helped by Gilmour's inability to defend, and we had a real lack of central attacking threat with just Pukki on his own.

With the 3-5-2 we've become too deep, with the attackers too isolated. We might well have gained two 0-0s in a row had Kabak not gifted Everton the penalty; their second goal came once we'd switched to a more attacking (if a little disjointed) shape and were chasing the game. But, aside from the odd set piece and individual moment of brilliance, we don't look like scoring with this formation and the defence have no outlet for the ball. We just end up hoofing it long and hoping that the front 2 can somehow make something happen. Without those attacking midfielders on the pitch there is simply no creativity and no threat.

If, at the start of the season, you'd have ventured that our starting 11 would include only one out of Sargent, Rashica, Cantwell, Tzolis and Dowell then you would have raised a few eyebrows. I imagine it would take quite an injury crisis to limit our attacking options to that extent. However, that is where we find ourselves; not through injury (apart from perhaps mentally) but through choice.

It seems to me that the attackers are being sacrificed to cover up the shortcomings of the midfield. But I'm hopeful that Normann can sure things up and we will end up coming full circle and arriving back at the 4-2-3-1. Hopefully it won't be too late to pick up the points we need. Two of our most winnable 10 matches have already passed.

I agree with this. We've switched to the 3-5-2 to try and be more defensively sound but i think we could have achieved exactly the same by playing two dedciated defensive midfielders plus that would give us 4 attacking players for the opposition to worry about.

Even with the 3 at the back we could have two midfielders sitting and play Gilmour or Cantwell in front of them which would give a much better link between the midfield and the forward players. 

[Petriix 2,847]

26 minutes ago, pete said:

Gilmour must be one of the two players to support MN.  Why? because he can do the defensive job as Kenny and PLM, but has the passing ability to influence further up the pitch.  

Sadly Gilmour has shown that the defensive side to his game is still rather immature. I don't doubt that he will develop it...at some point. He simply doesn't read the game well enough when out of possession and has a tendency to get drawn towards the ball, leaving a gaping hole behind him. This is compounded by a reluctance to put his foot in or perform simple tactical fouls in safer areas.

[cambridgeshire canary 6,750]

29 minutes ago, Petriix said:

Sadly Gilmour has shown that the defensive side to his game is still rather immature. I don't doubt that he will develop it...at some point. He simply doesn't read the game well enough when out of possession and has a tendency to get drawn towards the ball, leaving a gaping hole behind him. This is compounded by a reluctance to put his foot in or perform simple tactical fouls in safer areas.

As much as Williams and Gilmour are very much hyped up (mostly by fans of their clubs) they have yet to show any reason to get too excitied about them.. In some ways I much rather wished we decided to spend some money on experenced Prem players

[birchfest 397]

2 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

As much as Williams and Gilmour are very much hyped up (mostly by fans of their clubs) they have yet to show any reason to get too excitied about them.. In some ways I much rather wished we decided to spend some money on experenced Prem players

I think I'm in the minority who think, whilst Gilmour IS an excellent player, he would always find it hard playing for us as opposed to a side that has much more of the ball and doesn't have the same defensive responsibility as he would for Norwich. My worry is we will look back and say the enthusiasm of Scottish and Chelsea fans about him clouded what he could actually offer what we need in terms of a club of our demands and stature. I also don't view him as the progressive player that Buendia was in terms of the passing to create chances, he's much more of a move the ball on to a winger or a number 10 than a direct supplier, you need only look at some of the pass maps of his for Chelsea and Scotland.