Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Matt Morriss

Hooper - return of the diamond?

Recommended Posts

If we do get Hooper I think we need to be playing him regularly up front with Holt, as this looks a dream partnership, Hooper sniffing around penalty area and Holt doing what he does best.

So unless we go with a 442 surely a switch back to the diamond is the way to go as we have to have Hoolahan in to make the most of Holt and Hooper?

If we can ride out this rough patch a full strength February side could look like this and for me we''ll be fine:

Bunn

Whittaker Turner Bassong Garrido

Tettey

Snodgrass Johnson

Hoolahan

Holt Hooper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GH + GH would be a decent partnership.

I think the diamond could work. The only thing I would change from your line up is Johnson. I seem to remember (maybe) we tried him in that position in the diamond under Lambert, and it didn''t really work out.

Not sure who else I''d put there though. Guess someone from Pilks, Surman, maybe Howson?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surman in the Johnson position. It''s his idea position on the pitch, would really flourish there I believe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to see Hughton moving away from having two more defensively minded midfielders - which also makes it kind of hard to see where a new striker fits in unless they''re playing upfront on their own.

 

But I think Hughton would see the diamond as leaving us too open. Imagine if we played against an expansive side like Liverpool without having numbers in midfield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely it will be 4-4-2.

 

-----------------------Ruddy-------------------------

Martin-------Bennet-------Bassong-------Garrrido-

-Snodgrass------Howson--Tettey-------Pilkington-

-------------------Holt-----Hooper-------------------

 

Howson as  the box to box player instead of having 2 defensive midfielders. Looks good to me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Joanna Grey"]Where the frak did that back four come from mrs miggins? An ''ideal'' team would have Whittaker, Turner, Bassong and Garrido surely?[/quote]

 

I don''t think there''s much between Martin or Whittaker so either or.

 

Bennet for me is better than Turner despite his prem experience and is older and slower whereas we''ve paid for a 22year old defender who I believe is as good as Turner, yet has great potential to be a better prem player that Turner once was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="mrs miggins"]

Surely it will be 4-4-2.

 

-----------------------Ruddy-------------------------

Martin-------Bennet-------Bassong-------Garrrido-

-Snodgrass------Howson--Tettey-------Pilkington-

-------------------Holt-----Hooper-------------------

 

Howson as  the box to box player instead of having 2 defensive midfielders. Looks good to me

[/quote]

Ryan Bennett ???

Howson ????

Have we not been spanked enough ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don''t really like these constant fantasy line-ups, but I have to say OP that I would settle for that one for the rest of the season.

 

Pilkington as sixty minute sub should we be chasing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Six Pack"][quote user="mrs miggins"]

Surely it will be 4-4-2.

 

-----------------------Ruddy-------------------------

Martin-------Bennet-------Bassong-------Garrrido-

-Snodgrass------Howson--Tettey-------Pilkington-

-------------------Holt-----Hooper-------------------

 

Howson as  the box to box player instead of having 2 defensive midfielders. Looks good to me

[/quote] Ryan Bennett ??? Howson ???? Have we not been spanked enough ?[/quote]

 

Turner''s made so many mistakes (way more than Bennet, who i will admit conceded a penalty against the hammers)

 

And i''m guessing you would put johnson in the middle instead of howson......and people say hughton is defensive

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Six Pack"][quote user="mrs miggins"]

Surely it will be 4-4-2.

 

-----------------------Ruddy-------------------------

Martin-------Bennet-------Bassong-------Garrrido-

-Snodgrass------Howson--Tettey-------Pilkington-

-------------------Holt-----Hooper-------------------

 

Howson as  the box to box player instead of having 2 defensive midfielders. Looks good to me

[/quote] Ryan Bennett ??? Howson ???? Have we not been spanked enough ?[/quote]

EXACTLY !  what I was thinking .... Bennet and Howson are merely passengers ,,, my ar*e still stings from saturdays spanking !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure eithetr tettey or BJ are up to the anchor role on their own - but if we do go with 2 up front (which is not a used formation anymore as you end up overrun in midfield) then I would go

 

Martin   Bennett  Bassong   Gariddo

                 Tettey

Snodgrass            Pilkington

                 Wes

       Holt       Hooper

 

There are 4 choices for me

Tettey or fox for me - but tettey reads the game better defensively than fox and passes better than BJ (who scored tweeted he has passed the ball away more than any other prem player this season)

Pilkington or Surman - Pilks has more pace,  surman better defensively;   pace wins out just

Bennett/Turner -  Alongside Bassong I genuinely dont think either are bad - and I think bennett has more potential - happy with turner

Martin/Whittaker - again - either or for me.

 

Wes - streets ahead of Howson.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure eithetr tettey or BJ are up to the anchor role on their own

_____________________________________________

Nah, because Johnson didn''t do it enough last season :S

And is Wes really that much better than Howson? Wes has all the show and flash of a great footballer but I think he is the lowest scoring "in the hole" player in the premier league... ever? Howson has not had a fair crack at the whip in that position at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread to me encapsulates our difficulties with the formation to use.

 

For me, this season and last season, whenever we''ve played the diamond with Wes just behind the two strikers it has left us vulnerable in front of our back 4.  Last season it worked sometimes through Lambert''s gung-ho approach as we normally conceded at least one goal but had a decent chance of scoring one or two as well.  Also, Lambert rotated Wes out of the team a lot too.

 

This season Hughton has settled on 4-5-1 after some early experiments and Hoolahan has been generally excellent when playing just behind Holt, with Tettey and BJ to protect the back 4.  This has worked well in games when Bassong has been there to marshall the back 4.  The perfect examples of this were the Arsenal and Manu games at home, or our away draws at places like Everton and Reading - we were absolutely solid and only had to score 1 goal a game to be able to win or draw.

 

Key to the formation IMO were Ruddy''s great form at the back, Bassong as the leader of the back 4 (who improves the play of those around him as well as his own performance) Tettey coming in to the DM role, Hoolahan playing superbly, Snoddy very threatening on the right, and Holt being able to play up front very effectively on his own.  So I guess it is no surprise that since early December it hasn''t worked as well as all of these players except Snoddy have been injured at some point.  For example at Liverpool our key problem IMO was that we sat back and let them play it around until well into our half - too many times Gerrard was able to stroll around with the ball and have a good look at where to pass it.  Whereas earlier in the season Tettey in particular was controlling that part of the pitch and stopping the other side having time in it.  On Saturday he looked fatigued to me.

 

So where do we go from here ?  No prizes for guessing that Bassong, Tettey, Holt, Hoolahan and probably Snoddy will be rested on Saturday and then Hughton will hope we''re back to full strength for the Spurs and QPR games.  I suspect he''ll bring in a striker, if he can, as a backup to Holt rather than changing the formation, and ditto may look at a CB coming in, we already know he wants backup/competitiion for Bunn.  Whether this is right is a tough call but I think that if we can get back to being tight and organized at the back and keeping some clean sheets, we will survive comfortably. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good analysis ICF.

 

Not sure that we are sitting back deliberately but that teams have sussed that we are vulnerable if they press us high up the pitch. Sunderland 2nd half was another example. We are struggling to break the press and its a low risk strategy for them as we have just an isolated striker up the pitch to deal with defensively. But you are right we do need to find a system to allow us to play further up the pitch.

 

I also agree that Hughton has probably settled on 4-5-1. If and its a big If we get Hooper, Graham or another then, and I know this is not going to be popular, then I think it is Wes that will have to give way. Teams that play a lone striker tend to have a midfielder that has a decent goal scoring record (Cahill at Everton being an example in point)  and this certainly does not describe Wes. In this respect Graham could be a better option than Hooper.

 

Wes has also had some of his most effective appearances as an impact sub and could be used in this role. Ah impact subs! Anybody remember those?

 

COYY

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sussexyellow wrote the following post at 22/01/2013 3:36 PM:

Good analysis ICF.

Not sure that we are sitting back deliberately but that teams have sussed that we are vulnerable if they press us high up the pitch. Sunderland 2nd half was another example. We are struggling to break the press and its a low risk strategy for them as we have just an isolated striker up the pitch to deal with defensively. But you are right we do need to find a system to allow us to play further up the pitch.

I also agree that Hughton has probably settled on 4-5-1. If and its a big If we get Hooper, Graham or another then, and I know this is not going to be popular, then I think it is Wes that will have to give way. Teams that play a lone striker tend to have a midfielder that has a decent goal scoring record (Cahill at Everton being an example in point) and this certainly does not describe Wes. In this respect Graham could be a better option than Hooper.

Wes has also had some of his most effective appearances as an impact sub and could be used in this role. Ah impact subs! Anybody remember those?

It was not the system that did not allow us to play further up the pitch, it was the opposition we were playing against.

It would have been suicidal to play a high line against the pace of Sturridge and Suarez. Defending deeper should have given them less space to move into to use their pace.

Against a less pacy team I think you will find we will play a higher line as we will not want to allow strong aerial players to get into our box and pose threats in the air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree it wasn''t the system that made us drop so deep on Saturday.  It was the players, for whatever reason.

 

Earlier in the season we were defending from the front so as soon as a team crossed the halfway line they were getting pressed by Holt, Hoolahan then BJ and Tettey.  On Saturday Liverpool were often finding time and space for their midfielders well into our half, with BJ/Tettey only starting to challenge when they were well into our half.  You just can''t give players like Gerrard that sort of space in that area.

 

Even if our back line has fallen back towards the edge of our box because we''re up against pacy forwards, we need to be pressing in midfield well in advance of there.  Like I say, really we need to be pressing as soon as they are coming into our half and in the centre of midfield it should be BJ, Tettey and Hoolahan who are doing this.  My guess is that Tettey is still struggling with injury and/or his general fitness level (remember he''s new to the Premier league this year).  Also of course it was Holt''s first game back on Saturday and Howson still finding his feet.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When I saw we were in for both Hooper and Graham I straight away thought that CH is looking to change things around and start to play 442 more often, but cant do it right now with the limited choices he has.......both would Im sure be excellent alongside Holt and Graham in particular would be great at playing the lone role too

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...