Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
NCFC for life 1993-

Our best formation? Thoughts?

Recommended Posts

Evening one and all....as we approach the last few days of the transfer window I was thinking about our formations that we play. We always seem to go with one upfront....you would think that Hughton might have tried something different seeing as it dosnt seem to be working. It feels in a sense that we are going back to the worthington days. I remember listening to radio Norfolk and us playing 4-5-1 and hardly having a shot on goal in some games! I think best formation is 4-4-2. Does anyone think we should try 3-5-2 at some point? Surely we should give the opposition something to think about...we have become too predictable I think! I feel for the fans who pay to watch and have seen some awful performances as late. Praying for a striker or two by Thursday! Enjoy the ride the next few days!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How can we play two up front when we haven''t got two good enough?

And that is one reason we have played so many games with one up front the other being that Wes has been playing well but cannot play in a 4-4-2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally don''t think the formation matters all too much more the fact we need to go out to try and win the game rather than not lose it. I would like two up front other than that not fussed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4-2-3-1 is a formation that is being used by a lot of premier league opposition recently, so I can understand why Hughton persists with it to match teams up, and to be fair our best moments this season have been using that formation. 4-4-2 is by far our worst formation, I genuinely feel that players look lost when we use it, and lack the knowledge to execute that formation effectively. Our best formation ever since we used it in League 1 and I believe it would be now, is the diamond (4-1-2-1-2). Could play Tettey in front of the back four like Fox used to, have Pilks and Snod on the wings, and Wes behind Holt and Jackson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I totally agree but do you think the manager will go with 2 up top if we sign another striker? I just miss how under lambert we actually went for it and he threw on attacking players to try and get something out the game. Hughton dosnt seem much of a risk taker or a gambler. I miss the risk taking approach!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hughton is definitely a more defensive manager. He''ll try not to lose a game before he tries to win it. And he sticks to what he knows. I doubt he will adventure into formations such as the diamond that he doesn''t know. His subs have been very predictable and repetitive this season too. It would always be Morison coming on, or Howson. So even if we do sign a new striker, I don''t see him going two up top. He''ll rotate with Grant Holt. In a way I feel sorry for Jackson, Kane etc because Hughton''s blatant search for a new striker can''t of done their morale any favours knowing their manager doesn''t believe in them very much!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think we need to rotate formations according to the opposition. Play each game as it comes. Keeps more players involved, keeps the opposition guessing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that we need to keep the opposition guessing. I like Hughton don''t get me wrong but he dosnt seem to have a very good plan B. we have been on the end of some real thrashings and in these games we have shown nothing up front! I just think lambert was a better motivational manager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
People don''t remember the 4-4-2 we played for the first half a dozen games with Jackson and Holt up top then?

It''s not like Hoolahan has been playing in midfield either.

If you look at our formation it is compact but not defensive. Two warriors in the middle with two creative and attacking singers.

What it really needs is a Bridcutt in there to add a bit more quality on the ball and another option going forward.

3-5-2 can work. You could end up with a very congested midfield, or with your wing backs pinned back leaving you with three midfielders.

On top of that how would you change it? R.Martin, Bassong and Turner as the three. Garrido on the left, Whitteker/E.Bennett on the right. Snodgrass, Johnson and Tettey in the middle with Holt and Hoolahan/striker up front?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Is it not more the way they''ve been told to play within the formation? Holt, Hoolahan, Pilks and Snoddy are still four attacking players whichever way you look at it. They''re just forced into playing the more defensive side of their positions the whole time.

Holt is always drifting out wide or coming deep, and the two wingers push inside to make our midfield more compact, but if they could play 4-2-4 when we''re attacking more effectively we''d create a lot more chances. Begs the question about Tettey and Johnson, if our back 7 (including TWO holding midfielders) can''t contain a team reasonably well.

I think the answer is pace - we do not move the ball quickly or accurately enough when we do win it. That first half at Swansea was a great example of us playing to the best of our ability - good movement, a goal from open play and some good set pieces. Would love to see them playing like that again. The missing link is Whittaker!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''d go more with tempo than pace.

We are not moving the ball quickly enough, partly due to poor passing or players taking too much time to pick a pass.

I think this is partly the reason why people think Snodgrass and Pillks play more defensively.

As a player at a much lower level I know that players won''t push on or make runs as much if they feel the move will break down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think we should play 4-1-2-1-2 it would by far offered us the most amount of attacking play and with the right defensive central midfielders and best possible back 4 in my opinion would keep a few goals out of the net, I would have holt and Jackson (unless another striker came in) up front with wes or howson just behind them, 2 winger in pilks and snoddy and Johnson or tetty just in front of the back 4 of Whitaker, cafu, bassong and garrido...

Holt Jackson

Howson

Pilks Snoddy

Tettey

Garrido Bassong Martin Whitaker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
absolutely spot on chicken - tempo and movement would transform the team.

Fox when he plays well does not need 2-3 touches of teh ball, he does one touch passing which makes it difficult for opponents to keep a shape.

2 up front is old hat - wigan succeeded with 3-5-2 last season (so well lambert failed trying to copy it) but have moved to 433 more often than not.

451 played hi up the picth with a pressing game, pace and movement can be football as good as it gets. As a system it would get the best from our best players - we are just playing it 10 yards too far back and too slowly imo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and another problem is we get oevrrun in midfield with 5 there - so how can we ease that pressure with one less?

and our attempts at 442 were more disasterous than 451, although tettey has not played in the 442 version.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If we continue with a 451. I would like to try Hoolahan as a deep lying playmaker. The lad can''t shout.

Move him back and have Johnson/Tettey next to him, against weaker PL teams, and let Hoolahan run around like a blue ass fly, starting all the moves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It''s not just the midfield and strikers that get us pressing higher up the pitch. One of the reasons we are better with Bassong is that he moves the whole team higher up the pitch from the back. And one of the reasons we play better with Holt is that we defend better from the front. Football has always been a team game...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Our problem at the moment is middlefield. The part of the pitch we thought is our strongest ^^

4-2-3-1 is a good formation, but for some reason we keep failing to stay in posession, we cant pressure enough high and we cant play the ball enought fast behind the opponents line for our strikers, so our goals come only from crosses and still ball situations.

We possibly could try 3 - 5 - 2, but do we really have 3 enought good CB''s for it?

Bennet - Turner - Bassong

E.Bennet - Tettey/Johnson - Garrido

Snoddy - Hoolahan

Holt-Pilkington

Could work, but I kind a doubt it.

4-4-2 is utter rubbish these days. Even if we got 2 strikers that is just too old school ^^ We would keep losing middlefield even more and by removing Hoolahan for Jackson/Morison our build up game would suffer greatly.

So I would continue with 4-2-3-1 and just trying to be a bit more lively and work on long shots and passing ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Lavanche"]Our problem at the moment is middlefield. The part of the pitch we thought is our strongest ^^

4-2-3-1 is a good formation, but for some reason we keep failing to stay in posession, we cant pressure enough high and we cant play the ball enought fast behind the opponents line for our strikers, so our goals come only from crosses and still ball situations.

We possibly could try 3 - 5 - 2, but do we really have 3 enought good CB''s for it?

Bennet - Turner - Bassong

E.Bennet - Tettey/Johnson - Garrido

Snoddy - Hoolahan

Holt-Pilkington

Could work, but I kind a doubt it.

4-4-2 is utter rubbish these days. Even if we got 2 strikers that is just too old school ^^ We would keep losing middlefield even more and by removing Hoolahan for Jackson/Morison our build up game would suffer greatly.

So I would continue with 4-2-3-1 and just trying to be a bit more lively and work on long shots and passing ^^[/quote]sorry to enter the discussion but a 3-5-2 formation requires a lot of tactical training.it''s not easy to "mount" this schematic in the middle of the season....even if you have 2 great side defenders, it''s difficult to coordinate.see tottenham. even with Bale and Ekotto who are incredible fast with a lot of stamina, they don''t play with this formation.by other way around 4-4-2 is coming back. I strongly believe in it. but not the old scheme with 2 towers that dont go outside the box. that''s the old days.but with 2 pace strikers and with a diamond formation that can wave only one pure winger or without any (just inside middles) you can do pretty damage in the opposite team, mainly in their marking situations (man or zone)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe the 3-5-2 is the answer, but not this season, and hopefully by next season we''ll have more quality to play the formation Hughton likes. Have to say, this looks promising! Our wingers play a strong defensive role anyway....

Whittaker-Turner -Bassong,

Tettey-Johnson,

Snodgrass - Hoolahan - Pilkington,

Holt - Jackson/new striker.

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  

×