Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
nycanary

Love Wes in the hole but think the diamond isn't right....thoughts?

Recommended Posts

Hey allCurious what everyone thinks.  I''m just thinking the diamond isn''t right for us and I also think that most teams out there just don''t use it anymore.  Reasons:a.  It leaves the midfield exposed.  There''s not enough muscle in there.b.  It needs quality attacking fullbacks to give the team width.  Martin and Drury are defensively sound but going forward they are not quite strong enough.c.  Most teams that attempt a diamond-like formation have taken to two players in front of the back four and just one upfront.  4-2-3-1.  That beefs up the midfield and leaves a creative role for a Wes like player.  I dont see teams out there playing the diamond anymore.  But the 4-5-1/4-2-3-1 is all the rage at the mo.Against Watford, we were simply outmatched in midfield.  Imagine what the likes of the better Championship teams will do to us.  On top of that, Fox isn''t a tough player.  He''s a finesse player -- and a good one at that -- but it leaves our back four exposed more often than not.  Also, the midfield two of Crofts and Surman have to cover too much area to be effective.  The number of times we had great distribution out wide to Martin or Drury who were in wide open spaces but there wasn''t enough motion toward them to give them the support they needed.  More often than not, they were left on their own to create space and cross the ball.  Too much to ask and it became predictable.  I dont blame our players for that...its just too much ground to cover all the time.  This is why 4-2-3-1 works.  The ''2'' provide more cover to allow the three in front of them to have less defensive responsibility and they are more free to support the attacks.I would LOVE to see Wes in that creative position but I feel like we have to go to 4-4-2 or lose a striker in order to stay defensively sound enough to win games in the Championship.So...we''re looking at either:RuddyMartinWardNelsonDrurySurmanFoxCroftsHoolahanHoltMartinORRuddyMartinWardNelsonDruryFoxCroftsSurmanLappin/SmithHoolahanHoltDunno...what does everyone think?  The diamond worked wonders in League 1.  But in the Championship.....it might not work.  Even Malky said they took advantage of the diamond formation.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Midfield were inept Friday which exposed defense that needs to play as a unit. 2nd half, midfield played better but disunited defense were still shaky. Let them all work it out vs Gillingham.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i thought the same thing during the game on Friday. At this level if you want Wes to play behind the forward/s then it would work better with only one forward and another midfielder.

Not a negative move as some have said on other posts, can be used as an attacking ploy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with what you say nycanary. I think if we play Hoolahan it has to be as an attacking midfielder though, playing him as a left midfielder or centre mid, just doesn''t work as he likes to float about, rather than stick to 1 position, he also shy''s away from tackling duties. I like the look of the 4-2-3-1 but not sure if Lambert would play it. I would have the 2 holding midfielders as Fox and K.Smith, rather than Crofts, i think he was too good on friday to move him.                      RuddyR.Martin   Askou  Ward    Drury                Fox    K.SmithCrofts           Hoolahan        Surman                       Holt    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s too early to play tinkerman.  Let the new players settle into their roles and get used to the tempo of the league, and let''s see where we are in a few games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had very similar thoughts too. Certainly the diamond was not effective against Watford but I felt it was more to do with not having the right players rather than the formation. After all three of the four players used last year were not there. For me to get the best of the diamond you really need a tough tackeling player at the base (Rusty), there is no need for a ball player in my opinion, just someone who can protect the centre halves. Also the two wider players need to work very hard to cover when the oposition have the ball and Cory and Lappin certainly gave us that.

When you compare that to the people who played on Friday then I think you could say that only Crofts fits the bill. Fox is nowhere near the distructive type player that Russell was (although a much better passer) and Surman, although a very skillfull player, is not suited for the diamond.

IMO we either change the personel or we change the formation. Looks like the formation has to be tweeked to me and what you say makes a lot of sense. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly R.Martin and Drury are two good attacking full backs.  R.Martin is not good at the back but he is going forward and so is Drury.

Secondly to play a 4-2-3-1 and drop Chris Martin is a bit silly IMO.  23 goal man from last season and then because the rest of the team played bad (C.Martin played quite well IMO) he gets dropped.  Ludicrous!

Thirdly We don''t have to play Hoolahan.  IMO he is not going to be very good this season so I don''t want us to play formations that suit him instead of formations that suit the team.

Finally, give Friday''s formation and players a chance!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an interesting debate.

For me we have to play the holy trinity of Holt, Martin and Hoolahan because they are so effective as a unit.

I really liked the look of Surman and Korey Smith is a must for me.

That is four attack minded players.

The goalkeeper and defence can wait for a different thread so this leaves one place and that has to go to a defensive player: and that is Crofts because he covers so much ground.

Holt leads the line, Martin and Hoolahan need to sit behind.

Surman goes left, Kory central and Crofts right.

So, it''s a 4-3-2-1 because I trust Martin and Hoolihan to find space and Holt likes to run wide anyway. It has to be mobile.

Lambert shows admirable detachment from his players - enough not to appear to have favourites and he has already discounted waiting to make changes.

For tonight Crofts can be replaced in this system, presumably by Fox.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What do you base that on Boyo?When we got relegated, in my opinion it

was because Hoolahan picked up an injury and missed the last month. If

he had stayed fit i believe we would have avoided relegation. He was

just picking up the form, he had endured whilst playing for Blackpool

the season before. Against Watford on friday, in my opinion and

many others Hoolahan was the best player on the park, he created the

first goal, best his man numerous times, and provided some great

through balls and crosses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="hogesar"]I bet you love Wes in the hole...you sly ol'' doggggg. [:D][/quote]just what i was going to say! lol!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If they start playing as a team, any formation can work (within reason of course....)I quite like Big Slobs formation though....but would like to fit Martin in, as i think he will be our best player this season......

Share this post


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

Firstly R.Martin and Drury are two good attacking full backs.  R.Martin is not good at the back but he is going forward and so is Drury.

Secondly to play a 4-2-3-1 and drop Chris Martin is a bit silly IMO.  23 goal man from last season and then because the rest of the team played bad (C.Martin played quite well IMO) he gets dropped.  Ludicrous!

Thirdly We don''t have to play Hoolahan.  IMO he is not going to be very good this season so I don''t want us to play formations that suit him instead of formations that suit the team.

Finally, give Friday''s formation and players a chance!

[/quote]Agree completely Boyo. I suggested this a few days ago, I honestly feel that we would have alot more balance without Wes, and it would give Fox, Crofts and Surman alot more of a chance to play to their full potential. A midfield of Smith, Fox, Crofts and Surman, for me, could be very good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contrary to what a lot of people think, I thought the forwards played some pretty decent attacking football - there were some nice passing moves. Only problem with playing such attacking football is that it left us very exposed on the counter attack. All Watford had to do was soak up the pressure and hit us on the break, which they did very effectively three times. I think it shows some tactical niavity so perhaps employing a more defensive formation might help. I do think, however, that the defence was poor; Ward doesn''t look fit, and still not sure about Ruddy (hope I''m wrong though), like to see Korey back in the side, and Jackson needs to sharpen up fast or he will lose his place when Holt returns to full fitness. Anyway, keep the faith, trust in Lambert - He doesn''t suffer fools gladly and anyone who doesn''t perform will be playing in the reserves.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
yah i do agree that we cant keep out martin.  this is really a dilemma coz i''m not sure how much defensive cover he would provide in a 4-3-2-1.but this is what we pay lambert the big money for!  to sort this out!i just feel like what we may end up seeing is the same failure of the diamond experiment that we had a few years ago with worthy i think it was.....it just didn''t work.  its also impt we look at this critically....drury is excellent defensively but not going forward.  martin is not great going forward either.  without that, plus strong support from the midfield to interchange passes with, the diamond is chock full of holes you can just pass your way thru with ease.  anyway, it is only the first match but hey, we all want promotion and that starts from game 1!  (except last season of course. :))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Big Slob"]What do you base that on Boyo?
When we got relegated, in my opinion it was because Hoolahan picked up an injury and missed the last month. If he had stayed fit i believe we would have avoided relegation. He was just picking up the form, he had endured whilst playing for Blackpool the season before.
Against Watford on friday, in my opinion and many others Hoolahan was the best player on the park, he created the first goal, best his man numerous times, and provided some great through balls and crosses.[/quote]

We didn''t get relegated because Hoolahan got injured, we got relegated because the team was awful!  We had a team full of loans who didn''t care about the club and two managers who were useless.  Hoolahan on his own would not have saved us.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Big Slob"]I agree with what you say nycanary. I think if we play Hoolahan it has to be as an attacking midfielder though, playing him as a left midfielder or centre mid, just doesn''t work as he likes to float about, rather than stick to 1 position, he also shy''s away from tackling duties. I like the look of the 4-2-3-1 but not sure if Lambert would play it. I would have the 2 holding midfielders as Fox and K.Smith, rather than Crofts, i think he was too good on friday to move him.

                     Ruddy

R.Martin   Askou  Ward    Drury

                Fox    K.Smith

Crofts           Hoolahan        Surman

                       Holt

    
[/quote]

That would require dropping Martin who is at the moment are fittest and most potent striker.

I hate to say it but if you are going to play that formation I would either play Martin out on the right and drop Crofts to be alongside Fox or do a straight swap - Martin for Hoolahan. Martin may not get involved in all of the tricks but he picks out good passes and is a lot stronger on the ball.

I don''t think you can just drop out second top scorer so easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think we should try Chile''s formation from the world cup 3-1-3-3/3-3-1-3. While it is a bit unorthodox it neatly avoids our problem of bad fullbacks by not having them:

Ruddy

Askou Nelson Ward

K.Smith/Fox

Crofts Surman

Hoolahan

Jackson Holt Martin

[url]http://blogs.thescore.com/footyblog/2010/06/16/kj-breaks-down-chiles-formation/[ulr]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
aw it didn''t formation correctly. Crofts and Surman would be very (VERY) attacking wingbacks in this formation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Boyo - Maybe, maybe not it''s impossible to tell. But i think we have to play

Hoolahan in our team. Last season when he got injured towards the end

of the season, the team was just not the same, we lacked any skill,

imagination and variety in most games Hoolahan missed. He got injured

in the match against Tranmere, and in subsequent matches we weren''t the

same side. Hoolahan is our most talented player and needs to play if we

are going to do well this season. Just look at the quotes from managers

last season about him.

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...