Midlands Yellow 4,090 Posted October 25, 2021 7 minutes ago, hogesar said: Well, he was the least poor of the 3 Saturday (backed up statistically too with a quick check) so shouldn't really be surprising. Well why didn’t you say, on that evidence make him captain too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,760 Posted October 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, Midlands Yellow said: Well why didn’t you say, on that evidence make him captain too. You tend to know you've lost the argument when you stretch to extremities for no real reason. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Midlands Yellow 4,090 Posted October 25, 2021 7 minutes ago, hogesar said: You tend to know you've lost the argument when you stretch to extremities for no real reason. Lost what argument? Apart from yourself I doubt anyone else is picking him but let’s wait and see. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Yellow and Green 335 Posted October 25, 2021 Either: a) 4-2-3-1 with classic Farkeball Krul Aarons Kabak Hanley Williams Normann Mclean Rashica Cantwell Tzolis Pukki or b) 4-3-3 with Rashica, Tzolis and Sargent emulating the Liverpool system. Krul Aarons Kabak Hanley Williams Gilmour Normann McLean Rashica Tzolis Sargent Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
unique 443 Posted October 25, 2021 It is pointless for anyone to place Cantwell in their line-ups…. Farke wants him on his hands and knees begging for forgiveness for whatever misdemeanour he may or may not have committed. Only then will he be available for selection two weeks following that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,760 Posted October 25, 2021 1 hour ago, BigFish said: That's not a dream, it is a nightmare. Haven't we proved that 4231 doesn't work for us at this level yet? We proved it when we had significantly worse players (on paper) 2 seasons ago. And even then i'd argue the football that season was better and more competitive than we've seen this season so far. As @Indy says, we did buy players clearly for this shape, or a slight variation of it. Rashica and Tzolis two big signings for us. I also think, with the benefit of hindsight now, that every Farke starting eleven needs a number 10 of some kind. Otherwise Pukki is painfully isolated, we don't have dynamic enough midfielders centrally to offer that link up. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 3,322 Posted October 25, 2021 Just now, hogesar said: We proved it when we had significantly worse players (on paper) 2 seasons ago. And even then i'd argue the football that season was better and more competitive than we've seen this season so far. As @Indy says, we did buy players clearly for this shape, or a slight variation of it. Rashica and Tzolis two big signings for us. I also think, with the benefit of hindsight now, that every Farke starting eleven needs a number 10 of some kind. Otherwise Pukki is painfully isolated, we don't have dynamic enough midfielders centrally to offer that link up. I think it’s clear 5 at the back doesn’t work, we need to be brave, apply pressure score the first goal and the game dynamic changes. Play 5 at the back and three midfielders and all we do is invite pressure all game and at this level even the worst five teams have a potent strike force! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
hogesar 9,760 Posted October 25, 2021 12 minutes ago, Indy said: I think it’s clear 5 at the back doesn’t work, we need to be brave, apply pressure score the first goal and the game dynamic changes. Play 5 at the back and three midfielders and all we do is invite pressure all game and at this level even the worst five teams have a potent strike force! I don't mind a back 5 (or 3) but I don't see how we're developing a style with it thus far. Had we been able to contain Chelsea, heck, even if it was a 2-0 loss but we showed defensive discipline and created a couple of chances you could argue that there was some development here. With the players we currently have available, and with the necessity to win against Leeds, I don't see a back 5 being the right call for this one. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ged in the onion bag 857 Posted October 25, 2021 Going to be a long old season now. Time to get our identity back right now, much more important than points.... which means 4 at the back and more of the lads from last season playing to help the new ones understand it. Just hope Farke does not 'big up' the opposition ever again.... telling his players what they were up against ... just like he said we expected to be 20th last time.... ridiculous attitude to competitve sport. That he gives himself a good talking too about his Cantwell nonsense - not being 100% ready, as if any of the 11 on saturday were!... Take a 30% Cantwell over any 100% Sargent.... on Saturday the lads very first touch flew off his foot about 20 yards. Sadly, think we've bought a dud there. Kabak looks every bit a statue. Krul Aarons, Omobamidele, Hanley, Giannoulis / Williams Normann, Sorensen (absolutely deserves a chance now) / Gilmour. Cantwell, Rashica / Tzolis Idah / Pukki What to do with Sargent, Kabak and Lees-Melou, haven't got a clue! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,680 Posted October 25, 2021 7 minutes ago, hogesar said: I don't mind a back 5 (or 3) but I don't see how we're developing a style with it thus far. Had we been able to contain Chelsea, heck, even if it was a 2-0 loss but we showed defensive discipline and created a couple of chances you could argue that there was some development here. With the players we currently have available, and with the necessity to win against Leeds, I don't see a back 5 being the right call for this one. I think 5 can work but not how we've set up with it. 3 solid but not especially creative central midfielders leave the strikers too isolated, especaily as Pukki isn't likely to create much himself and Sargent is off the wave length. If we want to persist with 3 at the back you either have to remove one of the midfield 3 for someone to paly number 10 (Cantwell the obvious choice) or take out one of them and one of Sargent and Pukki to allow 2 of Cantwell/Tzolis/Rashica to flank the striker. Playing 3 at the back isn't inherently negative and defensive but the way we're choosing to do it is. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Indy 3,322 Posted October 25, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, king canary said: I think 5 can work but not how we've set up with it. 3 solid but not especially creative central midfielders leave the strikers too isolated, especaily as Pukki isn't likely to create much himself and Sargent is off the wave length. If we want to persist with 3 at the back you either have to remove one of the midfield 3 for someone to paly number 10 (Cantwell the obvious choice) or take out one of them and one of Sargent and Pukki to allow 2 of Cantwell/Tzolis/Rashica to flank the striker. Playing 3 at the back isn't inherently negative and defensive but the way we're choosing to do it is. This three at the back will never work with two slow thinking and to react CB in Hanley and Gibson. It’s strange that arguably our best CB has been Omobamdele, strong quick and reads the game better. Now Gibson is out no doubt he’ll have his chance, but like Hogs I don’t think 5 at the back and Tzolis & Rashica sitting on the bench will go down too well come Sunday! Personally Hanley isn’t a premiership defender never was that’s why we got him cheap from Newcastle. We might do better developing Kabak & Omobamdele as a pairing knowing that we’re pretty much looking to the championship next year and to grow better players for our future return (hopefully) in a couple seasons. Edited October 25, 2021 by Indy Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
king canary 7,680 Posted October 25, 2021 29 minutes ago, Indy said: We might do better developing Kabak & Omobamdele as a pairing knowing that we’re pretty much looking to the championship next year and to grow better players for our future return (hopefully) in a couple seasons. I'd be very surprised if Kabak is here if we go down. Agree with giving Omo more game time, I'd be tempted to see what a Kabak/Hanley/Omo back 3 looks like at some point too. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Canarywary 110 Posted October 25, 2021 Choosing a defensive formation is difficult when we've gone straight from 2 clean sheets to a 7-0 loss. 3 at the back obviously felt like an improvement for Burn and Brighton but now what? Like King C said, the gap between our midfielders and forwards seems vast. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Alex Moss 2,165 Posted October 25, 2021 18 hours ago, Kuwait Canary said: Have so wanted to see Gilmour played behind Pukki for ages, not my call of course, but just think his assets would be best deployed there for both him and for us. I like the look of that team and it’s basically what I was going to post. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Grumpy 123 Posted October 25, 2021 20 hours ago, Kuwait Canary said: Surprised that people are putting Demi in a defensive four.This would be my line up but I would like to see Williams and Aarons at full back. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
