If we end up ditching 5 at the back..

[cambridgeshire canary 6,742]

How's about something like this instead? 🤔

[Petriix 2,842]

That works for me as long as the wide midfielders work really hard defensively. I'm also not certain that Gilmour has the positional discipline to play that role. I'd put Sorensen in there and play Gilmour at number 10 with Cantwell on the left.

[yellowrider120 765]

No way should Cantwell simply saunter back in to the team ahead of Dowell. Dowell has the creativity we are sorely lacking and has not 'rocked the boat'. 

The agonising choice for Herr Farke (in my humble opinion) is whether to play two centre backs or three. In theory (and based on Burnley and Brighton), we are less likely to concede with three 'at the back'. You will find (I would guess) that in any event either PLM or the Lord Mayor will be dropped as well as Sergeant. Three at the back would allow (in order of priority) Gilmour, Rashica / Tzolis and Dowell to be shoe horned in. Two at the back would probably mean Dowell still misses out.

If we COULD keep a clean sheet then we 'only' (quite 'how' though is the massive question!) need to score once to get the points. If Leeds score, though, can anyone seriously envisage us scoring TWICE?! Exactly.     

[Petriix 2,842]

1 minute ago, yellowrider120 said:

No way should Cantwell simply saunter back in to the team ahead of Dowell. Dowell has the creativity we are sorely lacking and has not 'rocked the boat'. 

The agonising choice for Herr Farke (in my humble opinion) is whether to play two centre backs or three. In theory (and based on Burnley and Brighton), we are less likely to concede with three 'at the back'. You will find (I would guess) that in any event either PLM or the Lord Mayor will be dropped as well as Sergeant. Three at the back would allow (in order of priority) Gilmour, Rashica / Tzolis and Dowell to be shoe horned in. Two at the back would probably mean Dowell still misses out.

If we COULD keep a clean sheet then we 'only' (quite 'how' though is the massive question!) need to score once to get the points. If Leeds score, though, can anyone seriously envisage us scoring TWICE?! Exactly.     

You're completely missing the point. We've tried packing the defence and midfield and it isn't working. It would be utter insanity to persevere with the same system and expect a different result.

Without the goal threat of players like Cantwell, teams are able to commit numbers forward with impunity. Any variation with 3 centre backs and/or 3 central midfielders would be a continuation of the negative tactics which have repeatedly resulted in failure.

We need a balance between attack and defence. Otherwise the attackers are isolated and ineffective. We saw it with the 4-3-3 and even more so with the 5-3-2. It's time to get back to the system which got us promoted.

[ged in the onion bag 855]

Why Kabak, he can't run?    Is he really better than Omobamidele?   He doesn't have that much experience to call on himself.  

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,893]

4 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

How's about something like this instead? 🤔

 

Very creative and exciting going forward but that midfield is so lightweight a 5 year old could smash through it.

F*ck it. Farke should do it; we're f*cked anyway.

"It's better to burn out, than to fade away."

OTBC 

[yellowrider120 765]

1 hour ago, Petriix said:

You're completely missing the point. We've tried packing the defence and midfield and it isn't working. It would be utter insanity to persevere with the same system and expect a different result.

Without the goal threat of players like Cantwell, teams are able to commit numbers forward with impunity. Any variation with 3 centre backs and/or 3 central midfielders would be a continuation of the negative tactics which have repeatedly resulted in failure.

We need a balance between attack and defence. Otherwise the attackers are isolated and ineffective. We saw it with the 4-3-3 and even more so with the 5-3-2. It's time to get back to the system which got us promoted.

Twas not me 'completely missing the point'. If you want to castigate anyone then please direct your ire at the German Camp Commandant who pretends to be our manager! Nowhere in my post did I say I wanted / endorsed the 'three at the back' tactic, merely that Farke will be having sleepless nights wrestling with his defensive structure. Upon that decision rests the remainder of the team set up. 

[Monty13 2,235]

Assuming they were all up for the fight it’s a good team on paper, probably about as good as we can muster.

I’d personally change Kabak for Andy O. I think Kabak is great with the ball but I think Andy O might be the better defender from what I’ve seen. Which if dropping back to a 4 is more important.

[Jersey Canary 143]

6 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

How's about something like this instead? 🤔

Gilmore has proven he can’t play in a 2 in midfield or in a 3 so it’s Cantwell or Gilmore for me. Lees Melou in Gilmore’s place above. 

[Petriix 2,842]

2 hours ago, Jersey Canary said:

Gilmore has proven he can’t play in a 2 in midfield or in a 3 so it’s Cantwell or Gilmore for me. Lees Melou in Gilmore’s place above. 

Gilmour hasn't been tried in a 2 man midfield because we've not played a system involving it at all this season. I don't have enormous faith in his defensive attributes, but he might do better with a more disciplined and deeper role.

[Fen Canary 834]

10 hours ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

How's about something like this instead? 🤔

I’d go something similar, except I’d go for a more defensive option along with Normann in central midfield such as Sorensen or PLM, with Gilmour/Cantwell battling it out for the more attacking midfielder role. 

[RugbyCanary 94]

8 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

I’d go something similar, except I’d go for a more defensive option along with Normann in central midfield such as Sorensen or PLM, with Gilmour/Cantwell battling it out for the more attacking midfielder role. 

I would agree with this side except......Andy o for kabak (better defensively I feel) and Sorenson/plm/McLean instead of Gilmore.