Can Hoops and RVW be our Cole and Yorke ?

[wcorkcanary 3,796]

In the late 90''s (98 i think) Fergie had both Cole and Yorke on the books but felt they couldnt effectively play together, too light, too similar, not little and large etc etc. but his hand was forced by injuries and suspensions, this led to him having an unexpected bonus ...a pair of intelligent , mobile, unselfish strikers who knew exactly when and where to supply the ball to their partner....the rest is history and a defenders nightmare. Does anyone else feel that Hoops and Ricky can do this for us? I would love to see CH give this a try, it would certainly give defenders more to think about than our current ''feed off the big man'' scenario. Imagine the two of them making clever runs onto balls from the midfield or wingers.

[CDMullins 378]

Problem with playing 2 up top is who do you drop?Our best midfield 3 has been Fer, Tettey and HowsonWith Pilks and Snoddy outwideWho do you drop to accomodate the second striker? And would our midfield be strong enough with only 4 in?

[Tetteys Jig 780]

I''d quite like to see just Howson and Fer in the middle, or Tettey and Fer. Then play 2 out wide and then the two up front.

[AJ 1,002]

Simply you drop Tettey, one of Fer or Howson drops deep during attacks to cover the other midfielder.

As Hughton has said though, you can only do this against the smaller teams because you have to have enough of the ball in attacking positions for it to be effective - and getting caught on the counter is always an issue.

[Syteanric 1]

I''d sooner someone was our Solskjaer and Sheringham...

 

Bayern Munich in Barcelona....1999

[Reggie Strayshun 0]

It''s got interesting parallels, this one. In truth both Andy Cole and Dwight Yorke had a percentage chance conversion rate that was pretty poor. They needed a lot of opportunities given to them before they scored one, but of course at ManU they had the quality of midfielders and wingers to do just that. So their goals scored total was respectable. At other clubs, because the service was not too good, they were less effective (possibly with the exception of Cole''s Newcastle period)I wonder if this is the case at Norwich. Of course we simply don''t know about RVW, but latterly Hooper has been showing signs that he''s the kind of guy that if you give him the ammunition, he''s very adept at using it. Certainly that''s the reputation he gained at Celtic. Obviously Norwich are never going to be able to afford the same quality of midfielders that MU did back then, but it''s yet another reason why the whole setup of the side should be far more adapted to regular chance creation as opposed to what we''ve seen far to much of over the last year...ie the emphasis on stoppoing the other team from scoring.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

Cole and Yorke played in an era when pretty much everyone used 4-4-2 and the Man U midfield was superior enough to win out more times that less. The way the game is played has changed a lot since then (the change of the offside rules has been a big part in that) and playing the traditional 4-4-2 is a risk - O''Neill was probably the last manager to try it and his Sunderland team were headed for relegation before he was sacked.

 

I can''t see RvW and Hooper working together well, unless one of them is prepared to adapt their game and operate in a deeper position, meaning they will score fewer goals - playing two strikers whos natural instinct is to play off the defender''s shoulder will mean they are both isolated and the midfield is overrun.

[GJP 73]

Horses for courses.

 

Sometimes we could just play Fer and Howson with RVW and Hooper upfront (maybe one playing off the other) and other times maybe we''ll need to play Tettey in the midfield too and drop Hooper, for example.

[mrs miggins 0]

apart from their both white, I think so

[Hog 0]

Just seems like modern managers will refuse the old style 442 at all costs as its not the "continental" style..

Personally I would love to see its return

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="Hog"]Just seems like modern managers will refuse the old style 442 at all costs as its not the "continental" style.. Personally I would love to see its return[/quote]

I think it is rarely used as it leaves too much space on the pitch for players to operate ''between the lines''. The change in the offside rule adding ''phases of play'' means that strikers can happily stand in what was previously considered an offside position without infringement - this meant that defenders had to start dropping deeper to prevent that. When the defenders dropped deeper suddenly the game became much more stretched, the distance between each teams defensive lines was greater than ever before - the knock on effect was a 4 man midfield couldn''t possibly hope to cover the whole area - clever managers and players realised that using this new space was the best way to win games and the need for an extra midfielder was born.

 

There have also been other factors such as rule changes around tackling and it becoming increasingly easy to win penalties etc. The rules of football changes, as do the types of players, so no system is going to be appropriate over a sustained period of time - especially when new systems are often developed to directly counter the ''in trend'' formation.

 

Managers will employ any system they think will get them results - they''d play with 8 strikers if they thought it would work.

[The Great Mass Debater 1,033]

Think the closest we''ve had to this in recent years has been the understanding between Wes and Holt. They had a partenership and an inuitive understanding of each others movements. Other notable club partnerships would be the Murphy twins in the youth cup. Each time I saw them play they seemed able to pick each other out almost as a reflex. I wonder if that might be their future, as a partnership?

[Tetteys Jig 780]

We had Holt and Wes, but then often had a ''winger'' like Martin or whatever you dress him up as who scored and attacked too.

I guess Pilks gets a few goals and Snoddy doesn''t do bad, but I don''t see why RVW can''t adapt and be that complete forward next to the more advanced Hooper, who also is no slouch.

[Shack Attack 0]

[quote user="Hog"]Just seems like modern managers will refuse the old style 442 at all costs as its not the "continental" style..

Personally I would love to see its return[/quote]Are you suggesting that modern managers are ignoring 4-4-2 because it''s unfashionable? Given that any manager is only safe in his job if his team is performing then that seems unlikely. 4-4-2 has lost popularity because teams who play that way tend to struggle over the course of a season.Having said that I''m not sure many modern teams play with one formation that can be expressed in numerical terms in both defence and attack so this may be a moot point.

[wcorkcanary 3,796]

Personally, my ideal set up to allow these two up front

together would be 4-1-3-2 with Tettey being the 1 in front of the back 4. the 3 being Fer, Howson or Pilks,(sometimes both) plus whoever is the right man for the job on the day. I do like Snoddy but pace exites and scares in equal measure and he just doesnt have it.

[wcorkcanary 3,796]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]

I''d sooner someone was our Solskjaer and Sheringham...

 

Bayern Munich in Barcelona....1999

[/quote]

Can see Hooper being more like Teddy in 5 years, same goes for Ricky, Jamie Cureton/Mark Robbins were our Solskjaer.