Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
10Jackson

Time for the dimond formation?

Recommended Posts

Seeing as we''ve got Becchio and I can''t see Holt or Holahan could get out of the team how about we star t playing the dimond so we can actually play both Becchio and Holt and they can help each other out!

Bunn

Martin Turner Bassong Garrido

Johnson

Snodgrass E.Bennett/Pilks (unless he''s injured)

Hoolahan

Holt. Becchio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think to set up initially as 4-2-3-1 can have fantastic balance between offensive/defensive phases of play, but for me it is how a game is evolving, and the nature and timing of substitutions that is key. Much as I like CH, I''m unconvinced by his grasp of substitutions ...although he no doubt missed my tenure as England coach [;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Spot on SJ10 that''s exactly what I think, just one change and that would be Whittaker for Garrido. Good post though!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe right with Whittaker but the only reason I would choose the diamond over 442 is that I don'' think Hughton would drop wes! But we could play a wide diamond and woe et is on the right and left is also able to come inside but must help out the full backs!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would prefer 442 - but i like having wingers, i would like to see e.bennet on the right and snodgrass on the left

but id prefer the diamond to the cr@p hughtons churning out week in week out at the minute                    bunnmartin. r.bennet  bassong. garrido                 fox /or tettey       tettey/or fox   johnson                 snodgrass             bechhio    holt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes I do realise my spelling isn''t great but you know just because I can''t spell aswell as others doesn''t mean I don''t know what I''m talking about! I do realise I spelt diamond wrong to start with but I though I''ve already posted this so what is the point I changing it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With Pilkington currently injured why not rest him next week, replace him with Becchio and play the left footed Johnson wide left to retain the solid protectiomn for the back 4 -

 

Bunn

 

Martin, Turner, Bassong, Garrido

               Tetty

Snodgrass             Johnson

 

            Hoolahan

 

Holt                     Becchio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually thinking about it we could play a 4-4-2 holding midfield like:

Bunn

Martin. Turner. Bassong Whittaker/Garrido

Tettey. Johnson

E.Benno. Snodgrass

Holt. Becchio

This could work I think because you still have the holding midfield duo and I think holt and Becchio would work well together!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can''t see any need to change the system too much. Our players seem comfortable with it and are having a reasonably successful season. One option we do now have is for some games, or parts of games, Holt could replace Hoolahan behind Becchio. I''ll be interested to see what the other new forward brings to us. Perhaps he could play either role?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="SimeonJackson10"]Actually thinking about it we could play a 4-4-2 holding midfield like:

Bunn

Martin. Turner. Bassong Whittaker/Garrido

Tettey. Johnson

E.Benno. Snodgrass

Holt. Becchio

This could work I think because you still have the holding midfield duo and I think holt and Becchio would work well together![/quote]

That wouldn''t work at all in the prem im afraid. Maybe in the lower leagues but not here. The reason is that there HAS to be an attacking player to fill in the hole behind the strikers, in between the wingers. Otherwise our play becomes too predictable and we wont make it past the half way line.

The option to make that work is to drop holt/becchio back to line up with the wingers and play behind the out and out striker (suarez roll.)

However. That also isnt possible. Right now hoolahan is that player. This is due to our strikers not being fast enough, and in jacksons case, lack of technical ability and eye for positioning.

And as stated by others, the typical lambert diamond we would get murdered down the flanks.

There''s always a flat 442 but that seems outdated, tried and tested in this league.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How would a 442 with 2 holding midfielders work?

Tettey and Johnson can''t pass a ball more than 10 yards.

There would be a massive gap between them and the strikers. This would be just awful.

Bunn

Whittaker bassong turner garrido

Johnson

Snodgrass Pilks

Hoolahan

Holt

Becchio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Sing Up The South Stand"]I''m sure we did try the diamond last season, but it generally failed.[/quote]

 

We played the diamond quite a number of times last season South Stand. We got quite a number of points from those games.

In think Fox was at the base for most of those games and Hoolahan was an point for probably all the games. And yes the opposition were blombing down the wings but we never got murdered - scorewise. But that was with Lambert though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The diamond did work last season and was the bedrock of our success  - however it did peter out when fox was left out - showing the value of a good passer in midfield.   The diamond may work,   but we are often over run in midfield with 5 so how would that work with 4? 

 

4231 played further up the pitch,  with energy into the tackle with more tempo (particularly in passing and movement) is as attacking a formation as you would like - get 4 players in the opponents box on a regular basis is attacking.   Currently we dont do this!   442 has failed miserably for us this season (fuirst 7 games utilised it with absolutely no joy)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tip of the diamond has been Wes, the width the two wingers and one central midfielder, and the base a further central midfielder. so what Simoen is proposing is to have the usual a diamond without a base by playing 4-3-1-2. This is a very attacking formation, putting great responsibility for defence on the front line of three comprising the wingers and one central midfielder.

 

This is very similar  to the 4-3-3 formation that some of the better teams use, with wingbacks working with wingers. I think that we may have to consider this if we are chasing things in a game we must win, although it will expose the dfence more, but in general I doubt if our present squad could cope with this without conceding more goals.

 

I like the idea of two powerful strikers, but I have serious doubts as to whether we are strong enough at the back at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The diamond was generally pretty successful. I think its best moment was the 3-3 draw away at Arsenal. Something which surprised me a lot given how narrow the system is and how wide the Emirates pitch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="alartz"]How would a 442 with 2 holding midfielders work? Tettey and Johnson can''t pass a ball more than 10 yards. There would be a massive gap between them and the strikers. This would be just awful. Bunn Whittaker bassong turner garrido Johnson Snodgrass Pilks Hoolahan Holt Becchio[/quote]

 

Way too attacking - we would get murdered with this side. 3 attacking midfielders and 2 strikers? Whilst Wes & Snodgrass do work hard I can see us getting over run with this side. If we play a flat 4-4-2 then you could probably play Fox or Howson to try and link things up in the middle of the park but I think we all know a 4-4-2 generally means no Wes.

If Pilks is out for a while then we need to look at who will play that wide left role. Not sure Bennett is as effective as Pilks and Snodgrass at playing the "wrong" side. This probably only leaves Surman unless Kamara can play on the left?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Diamond was great in League 1 and the Championship when we could just out-attack other teams.

Unfortunately you need far more tactical nous at this level and it would be suicidal to play this now, sadly.

It would leave us far too open and opposition would just skin us alive.

Even Lambert ditched it last season. Plus if he loved it that much, he would be trying it at Villa.

That formation was introduced at NCFC purely and simple to get the best out of Wes. We cannot build a team around Wes alone at this level, as we need to be more solid.

As I say, that''s sad as I loved that formation and we were well and truly spoilt for the period we had that, but in football terms I''m afraid diamonds are NOT forever. We do have to move on and play big boys football now.

And one final thing, if it was that easy just to attack and chuck more forwards on, we are even the top clubs playing with just 1 up front?

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  

×