Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Shyster

Cracked Diamond

Recommended Posts

The diamond has been polished and will remain a gleaming gem in Lambert''s career - alas, the most precious of those stones are transparent and as with the diamond formation, it''s becoming transparent to the opposition.Albeit slightly earlier than I predicted/expected, cracks have formed in the diamond - we''ve witnessed major clefts in the seasons second outing against the Cumbrians, where the latter had our formation sussed, and I''m certain the fissuring would prevail in return outings against sides for the rest of the season. Alas, Lambo has partly addressed the situation with the signing of a pacey wide man, but I am still concerned about the lack of pace down the right - call me old fashioned, but I want the option of a 4-4-2 with two nippy out & out flankers who can whip balls into the horse, ''cause there''s no way Holt can keep tracking back in the New Year as he has been doing thus far.Teams in the second half of the season will also stamp out Hoolahan''s effectiveness by sticking a couple of players on him, which is why it''s imperative creativity comes from elsewhere on the pitch, and it is my belief that both wings should be utilised with equal & even pace; not necessarily within the same games where the lone, swift winger may suffice, but we need those options and hopefully Hoolahan on the bench for reversion purposes to maintain the promotion charge.Provided we sell no one in January and sign McNamee & Martin there will surely be no funds for the acquisition of a decent right winger - so do we hope that Whaley comes back and comes back in his present good form? Or do we hope that there''s another player currently in the squad that can cut the mustard in that vital right berth?I sincerely hope that Lambo isn''t relying on one of the youngsters such as Daley.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Shyster"]The diamond has been polished and will remain a gleaming gem in Lambert''s career - alas, the most precious of those stones are transparent and as with the diamond formation, it''s becoming transparent to the opposition.

Albeit slightly earlier than I predicted/expected, cracks have formed in the diamond - we''ve witnessed major clefts in the seasons second outing against the Cumbrians, where the latter had our formation sussed, and I''m certain the fissuring would prevail in return outings against sides for the rest of the season. Alas, Lambo has partly addressed the situation with the signing of a pacey wide man, but I am still concerned about the lack of pace down the right - call me old fashioned, but I want the option of a 4-4-2 with two nippy out & out flankers who can whip balls into the horse, ''cause there''s no way Holt can keep tracking back in the New Year as he has been doing thus far.

Teams in the second half of the season will also stamp out Hoolahan''s effectiveness by sticking a couple of players on him, which is why it''s imperative creativity comes from elsewhere on the pitch, and it is my belief that both wings should be utilised with equal & even pace; not necessarily within the same games where the lone, swift winger may suffice, but we need those options and hopefully Hoolahan on the bench for reversion purposes to maintain the promotion charge.

Provided we sell no one in January and sign McNamee & Martin there will surely be no funds for the acquisition of a decent right winger - so do we hope that Whaley comes back and comes back in his present good form? Or do we hope that there''s another player currently in the squad that can cut the mustard in that vital right berth?

I sincerely hope that Lambo isn''t relying on one of the youngsters such as Daley.[/quote]

Ive no problem with the diamond. 2 defeats in 13 games show that not many teams can cope. we have climbed to 3rd in the league and now you want to completely change the way we play?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ryan1992"]

[quote user="Shyster"]The diamond has been polished and will remain a gleaming gem in Lambert''s career - alas, the most precious of those stones are transparent and as with the diamond formation, it''s becoming transparent to the opposition.Albeit slightly earlier than I predicted/expected, cracks have formed in the diamond - we''ve witnessed major clefts in the seasons second outing against the Cumbrians, where the latter had our formation sussed, and I''m certain the fissuring would prevail in return outings against sides for the rest of the season. Alas, Lambo has partly addressed the situation with the signing of a pacey wide man, but I am still concerned about the lack of pace down the right - call me old fashioned, but I want the option of a 4-4-2 with two nippy out & out flankers who can whip balls into the horse, ''cause there''s no way Holt can keep tracking back in the New Year as he has been doing thus far.Teams in the second half of the season will also stamp out Hoolahan''s effectiveness by sticking a couple of players on him, which is why it''s imperative creativity comes from elsewhere on the pitch, and it is my belief that both wings should be utilised with equal & even pace; not necessarily within the same games where the lone, swift winger may suffice, but we need those options and hopefully Hoolahan on the bench for reversion purposes to maintain the promotion charge.Provided we sell no one in January and sign McNamee & Martin there will surely be no funds for the acquisition of a decent right winger - so do we hope that Whaley comes back and comes back in his present good form? Or do we hope that there''s another player currently in the squad that can cut the mustard in that vital right berth?I sincerely hope that Lambo isn''t relying on one of the youngsters such as Daley.[/quote]

Ive no problem with the diamond. 2 defeats in 13 games show that not many teams can cope. we have climbed to 3rd in the league and now you want to completely change the way we play?

[/quote]

[:O] Oh dear Christ alive, why do I bother?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Shyster"][quote user="ryan1992"]

[quote user="Shyster"]The diamond has been polished and will remain a gleaming gem in Lambert''s career - alas, the most precious of those stones are transparent and as with the diamond formation, it''s becoming transparent to the opposition.

Albeit slightly earlier than I predicted/expected, cracks have formed in the diamond - we''ve witnessed major clefts in the seasons second outing against the Cumbrians, where the latter had our formation sussed, and I''m certain the fissuring would prevail in return outings against sides for the rest of the season. Alas, Lambo has partly addressed the situation with the signing of a pacey wide man, but I am still concerned about the lack of pace down the right - call me old fashioned, but I want the option of a 4-4-2 with two nippy out & out flankers who can whip balls into the horse, ''cause there''s no way Holt can keep tracking back in the New Year as he has been doing thus far.

Teams in the second half of the season will also stamp out Hoolahan''s effectiveness by sticking a couple of players on him, which is why it''s imperative creativity comes from elsewhere on the pitch, and it is my belief that both wings should be utilised with equal & even pace; not necessarily within the same games where the lone, swift winger may suffice, but we need those options and hopefully Hoolahan on the bench for reversion purposes to maintain the promotion charge.

Provided we sell no one in January and sign McNamee & Martin there will surely be no funds for the acquisition of a decent right winger - so do we hope that Whaley comes back and comes back in his present good form? Or do we hope that there''s another player currently in the squad that can cut the mustard in that vital right berth?

I sincerely hope that Lambo isn''t relying on one of the youngsters such as Daley.[/quote]

Ive no problem with the diamond. 2 defeats in 13 games show that not many teams can cope. we have climbed to 3rd in the league and now you want to completely change the way we play?

[/quote]



[:O] Oh dear Christ alive, why do I bother?
[/quote]

Why not explain why you think he''s wrong then rather than just resorting to acerbic put downs? Personally, I think you both make very valid points.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="macdougalls perm"]Because even if, as you say, teams start marking Hoolahan with two men that still works to our advantage as far as I can tell - i.e. we have an extra man to create openings.[/quote]

Exactly!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote]Because even if, as you say, teams start marking Hoolahan with two men that still works to our advantage as far as I can tell - i.e. we have an extra man to create openings.[/quote]

Only if that extra man is a creative player in the first place.At present, with Hoolahan marked out, where''s the creativity coming from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Shyster"]The diamond has been polished and will remain a gleaming gem in Lambert''s career - alas, the most precious of those stones are transparent and as with the diamond formation, it''s becoming transparent to the opposition.

Albeit slightly earlier than I predicted/expected, cracks have formed in the diamond - we''ve witnessed major clefts in the seasons second outing against the Cumbrians, where the latter had our formation sussed, and I''m certain the fissuring would prevail in return outings against sides for the rest of the season. Alas, Lambo has partly addressed the situation with the signing of a pacey wide man, but I am still concerned about the lack of pace down the right - call me old fashioned, but I want the option of a 4-4-2 with two nippy out & out flankers who can whip balls into the horse, ''cause there''s no way Holt can keep tracking back in the New Year as he has been doing thus far.

Teams in the second half of the season will also stamp out Hoolahan''s effectiveness by sticking a couple of players on him, which is why it''s imperative creativity comes from elsewhere on the pitch, and it is my belief that both wings should be utilised with equal & even pace; not necessarily within the same games where the lone, swift winger may suffice, but we need those options and hopefully Hoolahan on the bench for reversion purposes to maintain the promotion charge.

Provided we sell no one in January and sign McNamee & Martin there will surely be no funds for the acquisition of a decent right winger - so do we hope that Whaley comes back and comes back in his present good form? Or do we hope that there''s another player currently in the squad that can cut the mustard in that vital right berth?

I sincerely hope that Lambo isn''t relying on one of the youngsters such as Daley.[/quote]

what a dumb post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spot on Shyster,

There is always a home and away game for each team so we must shuffle it to stop the losing sides against us in the return matches.

The lad from Barnet should be the key i''m hoping, but i''m sure someone will shoot me down for not knowing players positions or statistics.

Anyway i''m with you

OTBC since 1969

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The diamond arises in order to accommodate Hooly, as it was to accommodate Hux - we play(ed) 4-3-3. As Hooly is far and away our most creative player, but is an unorthodox midfielder (unreliable nearer our own goal), it is almost inevitable.We cannot accommodate both Hooly and Macnamee, unless the latter can do some defensive work, because effectively our midfield would be just two players, - Lappin (to provide crosses from the left) and Smith/Hughes - that is not a midfield. To some extent we have overcome this by getting the full-backs to go forward.. Other teams play 4-3-3 very successfully, but the midfield does not usually comprise two plus an attacking winger. The limitations of Macnamee as a defender would seem to apply to Whaley as well, if he comes back.I am not too bothered about two or three people marking Hooly, - it means that one or two are unavailable to mark others and he needs to evade his markers only once or twice a match to create havoc. The problems on Saturday are what we have already encountered - a parked bus, 4-5-1, with a packed midfield which retreats to crowd their half, but even then Hooly escaped to provide Holt''s goal.I don''t feel that the diamond is bust yet, but we clearly need to adapt to orthodx 4-4-2 with pace on the wings, when the situation requires it. In other words we need tactical flexibility which will require our opponents to have it as well.If we soldier on with the diamond alone, I think that we may have what we have seen lately, - little progress in the first half, but goals in the second when sheer tiredness makes the tight marking something difficult to maintain.We have to be, in PL''s word, patient, even if this seems like attrition. Meantime, they must practice other formations until we have more players or until a serious injury occurs which leaves us without , say, Holty, Hooly, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Chelsea have used the diamond for years now and there still on top. Opposition teams can figure out how to play against a diamond sure, but it doesnt matter what formation you play, speak to a player or manager and theyll tell you that. The best team will win whether there playing with or against a diamond. If the commitment and quality is there the best team will win, no matter who plays 442, a diamond or whatever.The fact we lost to Carlisle was nothing to do with them figuring out how to stifle our diamond formation, it was to do with Nelson being pathetic in defence and an overall off day from the rest of the team.As evidenced last night by beating Southend 3-0. Dont forget Carlisle are a team in form, if we''d have played 442 we''d have still lost becuase the attitude and commitment wasnt there on the night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Shyster"][quote]Because even if, as you say, teams start marking Hoolahan with two men that still works to our advantage as far as I can tell - i.e. we have an extra man to create openings.[/quote]


Only if that extra man is a creative player in the first place.

At present, with Hoolahan marked out, where''s the creativity coming from?
[/quote]

Out of our present squad I''d say that Hughes is capable of using the extra space to create openings. Anyway, I wasn''t arguing with you - was just saying that you could elaborate on why we should break the axiom ''don''t change a winning team'' [:)] 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why can''t Holt keep tracking back ?  Surely that is just the way he plays.  If he gets a game off every 10 or 15, as he seems to for 5 yellow cards, barring injuries he should stay fit.That said I am all for having a plan B, and so is Lambert if his signing of McNamee is anything to go by.  Hoolahan should start if he is able to, so I''d stick with the diamond unless we get stuck in games and need a change around 60 minutes.    What worries me is the possible sale of Hoolahan in January.  As you say he is our main creative outlet.Most teams in this league can''t cope with our fitness levels it seems - or is it just me that thinks we win a lot of matches in the last half an hour ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Barclayman"]Chelsea have used the diamond for years now and there still on top. Opposition teams can figure out how to play against a diamond sure, but it doesnt matter what formation you play, speak to a player or manager and theyll tell you that. The best team will win whether there playing with or against a diamond. If the commitment and quality is there the best team will win, no matter who plays 442, a diamond or whatever.The fact we lost to Carlisle was nothing to do with them figuring out how to stifle our diamond formation, it was to do with Nelson being pathetic in defence and an overall off day from the rest of the team.As evidenced last night by beating Southend 3-0. Dont forget Carlisle are a team in form, if we''d have played 442 we''d have still lost becuase the attitude and commitment wasnt there on the night.[/quote]

I''ve seldom read so much squit on this message board.Comparing our team to that of Chelsea is tantamount to sticking a red hot poker up ones own anus and saying our players had an off day at Carlisle suggests to me that you failed to watch the match.Yes, Nelson was awful, but other players failed that day because the manager of Carlisle had our diamond sussed, and that was instilled into his team which is why our formation was stifled.You probably did view the match, but obviously you can''t read the game very well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Shyster"]You probably did view the match, but obviously you can''t read the game very well.[/quote]..whereas you read the match so well, you left shortly after half-time ? [;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="blahblahblah"][quote user="Shyster"]You probably did view the match, but obviously you can''t read the game very well.[/quote]..whereas you read the match so well, you left shortly after half-time ? [;)][/quote]

Lake Windamere is gorgeous by moonlight.   [:D][;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote]

[quote user="Shyster"][quote]Because even if, as you say, teams start marking Hoolahan with two men that still works to our advantage as far as I can tell - i.e. we have an extra man to create openings.[/quote]

Only if that extra man is a creative player in the first place.At present, with Hoolahan marked out, where''s the creativity coming from?[/quote]

Out of our present squad I''d say that Hughes is capable of using the extra space to create openings. Anyway, I wasn''t arguing with you - was just saying that you could elaborate on why we should break the axiom ''don''t change a winning team'' [:)] 

[/quote]

Precisely, mac, the only player you can come up with is Hughes, and how many times has he figured this season?Now read my initial post again and may be, just may be, you might see why I''m harping on about the need for creative and pacey wide men within a change of formation.I won''t hold my breath though. [:P]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not seen any evidence of the diamond (or 433) being flawed.

However I do think that we need some options - the cover beyond the starting 11 is not looking good enough from a creative view point,  lose any of the three forwards and we lose our potency and we have seen performances drop when russell and smith aare not present;  I suspect it would be the same with lappin who gives us the perfect balance we need for a 3 man midfield to work.

The biggest gap is right so hopefully we can gain a wide right man (pace optional - we have not had it so far and stormed up the table looking a match for every team in the league) and a target man then we can go 442 if needed 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ZippersLeftFoot"]

I have not seen any evidence of the diamond (or 433) being flawed.

However I do think that we need some options - the cover beyond the starting 11 is not looking good enough from a creative view point,  lose any of the three forwards and we lose our potency and we have seen performances drop when russell and smith aare not present;  I suspect it would be the same with lappin who gives us the perfect balance we need for a 3 man midfield to work.

The biggest gap is right so hopefully we can gain a wide right man (pace optional - we have not had it so far and stormed up the table looking a match for every team in the league) and a target man then we can go 442 if needed 

 

[/quote]

Thank goodness for posters such as ZippersLeftFoot.I was beginning to feel as though I was stranded on a desert island.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Shyster"][quote]

[quote user="Shyster"][quote]Because even if, as you say, teams start marking Hoolahan with two men that still works to our advantage as far as I can tell - i.e. we have an extra man to create openings.[/quote]


Only if that extra man is a creative player in the first place.

At present, with Hoolahan marked out, where''s the creativity coming from?
[/quote]

Out of our present squad I''d say that Hughes is capable of using the extra space to create openings. Anyway, I wasn''t arguing with you - was just saying that you could elaborate on why we should break the axiom ''don''t change a winning team'' [:)] 

[/quote]


Precisely, mac, the only player you can come up with is Hughes, and how many times has he figured this season?

Now read my initial post again and may be, just may be, you might see why I''m harping on about the need for creative and pacey wide men within a change of formation.

I won''t hold my breath though. [:P]
[/quote]

 

I pretty much agree with you Shyster (and will be rewording your post later in the week[;)]).

To say that the diamond has worked so far, therefore it will continue to work is a pretty facile argument. I believe that it was instituted to solve two specific problems, namely our incessant leakage of goals and Hoolahan''s apparent inability to play in a system that didn''t allow him a completely free role. Just like every system it can be negated, in this case by marking Hoolahan on a man to man basis and flooding the midfield. many teams in thsi League aren''t good enough to do so, but some are.

The key is not which system we play, but being able to switch, on the pitch and during the game, from one to another. That''s easier said than done, because not only does it require well disciplined players, but also having the right personnel on the park to effect the change. That, I believe, is why we''ve never sucessfully switched to 4-4-2 under Lambert, because Hoolahan on the left weakens us considerably and Whaley never hit the mark. With McNamee I believe that we will be able to have this option, but we could do with another winger, preferably Adomah, (as Shyster has been saying all season) to give us the chance to really go at defensive teams with pace on both flanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Shyster"]


I was beginning to feel as though I was stranded on a desert island.
[/quote]

Would that really bother you? Seems as though you''re only interested in your own opinion anyhow [:D]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote]Would that really bother you? Seems as though you''re only interested in your own opinion anyhow [:D][/quote]

Wrong - read Beau''s excellent and expert post/opinions above.All in his own words by the way. [:D][;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Shyster"][quote]Would that really bother you? Seems as though you''re only interested in your own opinion anyhow [:D][/quote]


Wrong - read Beau''s excellent and expert post/opinions above.

All in his own words by the way. [:D][;)]
[/quote]

Just take the p1ss out of them Shyster.....

It saves the headache and makes your tea taste better somehow......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How long have you been waiting to start this thread then Shyster [;)]

In a way I agree with you and have done since the start of the season. Under Bryan Gunn we seemed to lack organisation and solidity, pace and creativity which unsurprisingly led to our relegation last season and our poor start this. The first thing Lambert did was to make us more organised defensively by lining up with two banks of four and providing more protection for our defence. This solved the first problem and results started to improve but it took the introduction of the diamond-ish (just for King Canary [;)])formation to accommodate Wes alongside Holt and Martin to improve our creativity.

Now our only remaining problem is our chronic lack of pace. Earlier on the willing running of Korey Smith and the discovery that Spillane could rampage up and down the right hand side all game long seemed to have gone some way to solving this problem. But now the former looks in need of a rest (although he played a blinder last night by all accounts) and the latter is injured and has now been replaced by a full back who we are told is very solid but doesn''t get forward that much. In a nutshell this means that if an opposition manager does his homework he can push his back four ten yards or so further up safe in the knowledge we lack the personnel to get behind them. And that of course means we rely far too much on Wes and Chris Martin to produce something special to feed Grant Holt.

So in conclusion we need to add pace to the team to stop teams pushing further up and nullifying the threat of Wes (and Martin who plays a sort of second striker/false nine sort of a role). The problem of course is do we completely tear up a formation that has seen us become one of the highest scorers in the entire Football League? Especially as playing with two out and out wingers (as Shyster likes to see his teams line up) could well make us more vulnerable defensively.

For me the addition of McNamee may well be enough to ensure that the diamond can retain it''s sparkle. He is a pacy, left sided midfielder who one presumes could quite easily play on the left side of the diamond and give us a wide player who can go outside the opposition full back. I know Shyster has already poo-poohed any comparisons to Chelsea but they often play Florent Malouda who was bought as a winger on the left side of the diamond with a more orthodox midfielder on the right. The dynamics of a team are the same whether you''re playing Premier League, League One or Anglian Combination so I don''t see why we shouldn''t reference the way in which they play.

It all goes back to the ''friendly'' disagreements that Shyster and I have had about the deployment of two wingers in the modern game. Hardly any teams play with two out and out wingers these days with most preferring one winger with the other wide midfielder ''tucked in''. Some play with none at all and encourage the full backs to push forward. The next month or so will tell us what Paul Lambert thinks of this issue I suppose, although he may be heavily influenced by financial constraints. If he does go to a 4-4-2 with two pacy wingers then I guess the only way to settle this argument will be to compare our relative points totals under both systems [;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="blahblahblah"]Why can''t Holt keep tracking back ?  Surely that is just the way he plays.  If he gets a game off every 10 or 15, as he seems to for 5 yellow cards, barring injuries he should stay fit.

That said I am all for having a plan B, and so is Lambert if his signing of McNamee is anything to go by.  Hoolahan should start if he is able to, so I''d stick with the diamond unless we get stuck in games and need a change around 60 minutes.    What worries me is the possible sale of Hoolahan in January.  As you say he is our main creative outlet.

Most teams in this league can''t cope with our fitness levels it seems - or is it just me that thinks we win a lot of matches in the last half an hour ?
[/quote]

This would surely imply a good pre-season under Team Gunn.

Now come on, we can''t be having that can we...........

You mean they brought in Holt, Hughes and Askou; refused too sell Russell, Hoolihan and Doherty AND got the buggers fitter than the rest...........

Dear oh dear. Whatever next.

OTBC

OTBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Cluck the Purist...."]

[quote user="Shyster"][quote]Would that really bother you? Seems as though you''re only interested in your own opinion anyhow [:D][/quote]


Wrong - read Beau''s excellent and expert post/opinions above.

All in his own words by the way. [:D][;)]
[/quote]

Just take the p1ss out of them Shyster.....

It saves the headache and makes your tea taste better somehow......

[/quote]

Ah ... you feeling neglected Cluck? [:)]

And I see that you''ve conveniently ignored my original response to this Shyster, where I said that I agreed with you/thought you made a very good point - read it again [:)]  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pacey wingers must have a good end product to be of much use. And most of those are in the Prem.

Would you rather have this seasons Lappin or last seasons Croft?

Remember that pacey full backs with clever wide men are also a good option. Better than another headless Whalley!

OTBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting issue with good points on either side.

However, in my opinion the way we play the diamond is designed to be able to commit between three and five players each time that we attack. Committing more players to the attack provides more options, and massive headaches for the opposition defences. This effectively enables us to keep the ball on the deck and to play it around at our own leisure, giving us more options and ideas in attack.


   But, on the flipside, playing narrow down the middle encourages teams to exploit the width of the pitches, which means the full backs have a lot of work to do tracking up and down the line, effectively playing as wing backs. Although this creates extra pressure, it ultimately forces teams to come out of the blocks and to play free football, enabling us to pick them off on the counter attack. I don''t think the argument about the loss at Carlisle is due to them exploiting the diamond. We couldn''t keep hold of the ball and didn''t use Wes Hoolahan and Grant Holt effectively, meaning that we were toothless in attack. Add this to Carlisle maintaining the hunger, desire and drive to go through compared to our casual approach to the match, then there was only going to be one winner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...