4-5-1 ?

[Petriix 2,834]

It looks like we''ll finally be giving it a try. I''ve been wanting to see this for a while - we''ve got a fantastic midfield and we''re lacking in strikers so it makes perfect sense.

[Robert N. LiM 4,240]

May sound pedantic, but I hope it''s 4-2-3-1, with Fox and Crofts holding and Wes, Lansbury and Surman all given licence to roam around.

Really good side on paper at this level.

[Ernie 0]

Seems to be working really well particually as mentioned the lack of strikers.  I think the best use of players we have available.

[Lewie - Holt Our Saviour 0]

It''s 4-2-3-1 we are playing today.

[Legend Iwan 30]

A formation I''ve been saying we should use for quite a while. Meeting mostly distain from people who felt we would have the same result as the match against Donny earlier in the system, yet didn''t take into account the difference in players.

With Holt being the only striker who looks up to it at the mo, we should have been using this since half-way through January.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,735]

the only question is , can it work at home?, would we be able to break teams down who sit back and defend?.

It can work, if you have the right people to make it work,with the right balance of attack and defence within that 5.

One of the best examples i remember of a team that made this work was Tottenham 86/87 who played one up front in Clive Allen and he scored 49 goals that season, but they had a bit of everything in the midfield...

Crofts Fox

(Hodge) (Hoddle)

Lansbury Hoolahan Surman

(Allen.P) (Ardiles) (Waddle)

Holt

(Allen.C)

[Petriix 2,834]

[quote user="Lewie - Holt Our Saviour"]It''s 4-2-3-1 we are playing today.[/quote]Guys,

4-2-3-1 is a variation of 4-5-1

with four defenders, five in the midfield and one up front. The other common

variation of 4-5-1 is

4-1-4-1 but that is still 4-5-1.

Crofts and fox also had a bit more freedom when we were in possession....

Either way, the formation worked very well. I really think it is the best way

to play our best players at the same time. We look more solid defensively and

seem to have more options going forward. I hope we persevere with it.

[Canary_on_the Trent 0]

Certainly worth a go but I did have my concerns about the lack of pace & width from the quintet but the passing & movement was superb so more than made up for it. More importantly it gave Hoolahan the freedom he craves whilst allowing Crofts to make the breaks into the box we haven''t seen for a while now.

[Yelloow Since 72 54]

I also think it worked well, but saw it as a 4-5-1 with variations. Wes sometimes was forward with Holt, or dropped back into a double support with Lansbury as they played off Holt. The effect was to seem to have an extra player on the pitch most of the time and Barnsley never really came to terms with it. Credit too to Ruddy for his fine save early on, as but for that Barnsley might have got on top.