toadinthehole 6:50 Sun Nov 22
Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
|
We beat Chelsea, Man City, Arsenal, Liverpool with the same tactic and formation.
playing deep and hitting teams fast on the counter was reaping huge rewards.
Sakho as a lone striker was a key part, he kept defenders busy and ran the channels allowing Payet, Lanzini and Kouyate to roam the empty spaces.
Carroll slows everything down and destroys our fast pace attack. I just don't get why we have changed since he is back.
|
|
|
Replies - Newest Posts First ( Show In Chronological Order)
Sniper
7:12 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
Spot on hermit. Carroll is widely regarded as being unplayable in the air in his day, but that does work better when the opposition are sitting back a bit or tiring. Counter attacking with him does but work. We look a different side completely when he starts. It's also a total waste of sakho who is a constant menace and threat up front, even when not on the score sheet.
|
Hermit Road
6:11 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
The thing is, that he is a good option from the bench with 20 minutes left if s team is defending deep. Apart from that, he shouldn't be anywhere near our starting 11.
|
After8
6:07 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
Northern Sold 11:07 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
Said from day one when we bought him that he's going to be a pile of festering overpaid cunt.... and not one thing he has done has made me change my mind... the sooner Allardyce comes in for him the better
Me too sold, me too.
Although it doesn't bring me any joy to see west ham waste millions.
|
JayeMPee
6:02 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
According to todays Independent Lanzini has said something along the lines of being 'honoured to be linked with Liverpool'. I hope the board have not been complacent, like some on here, and have actually got a new contract signed and sealed!!
|
sidneyshitcunt
5:49 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
Amazed he played Carroll in that game, I'm fucking going for a game of snooker if I see that again.
However, I disagree that Carroll was "a waste of £50m":
reason being under BFS we won 40% of the games when Carroll played, and 20% of the games when Carroll didn't play.
Conclusion: we stayed in the Premier League 2-3 seasons in a row largely thanks to Carroll and has massive suitability for BFS tactics...
|
1964
5:21 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
This is being classed as "Rout".
Definition:
A rout is a chaotic and disorderly retreat or withdrawal of troops from a battlefield, resulting in the victory of the opposing party, or following defeat, a collapse of discipline, or poor morale.
If this is true, then BFS OUT!
|
Russ of the BML
5:12 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
Texas Iron 4:49 Mon Nov 23
Spot on.
|
Texas Iron
4:49 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
BTW...
Carroll was not the reason we lost yesterday.. That was due to Poor Defence and Midfield...
However...his inclusion in the team caused us to be poorly organised and undermanned in MF...with little protection for the defence...
Outnumbered...outfought...outskilled...outplayed in Midfield...and defence...
We contributed to all their goals by direct player error and/or slack marking ...
Bilic must take his portion of the blame for starting Carroll...
|
Texas Iron
4:40 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
Never rated him more than a mobile lamp post...occasional good header...
Not as good as Crouch at their best..
Waste of almost 50 millionquid by the club...
|
Private Dancer
4:37 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
I doubt it. But Bilic also refuses to drop Jenkison, so who knows with the cunt.
|
zico
4:35 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
It's not just Carroll though to be fair. Big immobile lumps of a centre forward whose main strength is in the air have become less effective since lone striker formations have become the norm and unless you have someone in midfield like Nolan was in his pomp getting close and feeding off the knockdowns any striker like Carroll has no chance. I dare say the likes of Giroud would struggle in lesser sides.
The big lumps like Lukaku and Benteke, have more to their game or you play them next to a striker like Vardy in a 442 but we don't have good enough central midfielders for a 442.
I dare say that great big strikers of yesteryear would struggle fighting a lone furrow up front these days.
|
Russ of the BML
4:14 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
Private Dancer 4:06 Mon Nov 23
He won't do it again though will he?
|
Private Dancer
4:06 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
I said on here 3-4 weeks ago that Bilic would start Carroll ahead of Sakho.
|
Steve P
4:00 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
LOL
He's not the player he was, son - of that there is no doubt.
Cracking header of the ball at times. Not much else left in his game, sad to say.
|
Northern Sold
3:59 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
Is Steve P still championing him for the England national squad??
What a fucking loon...
P that is NOT Carroll...
|
penners28
3:55 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
i have always defended carroll. maybe because i just liek the cliche of an english centre forward. however he should be nowhere near our starting 11 now. he just looks unfit to be honest. the transfer fees have massively flattered him I think.
he just looks like a sunday league player,and i wouldnt be surprised if he acts like one off the pitch.
|
Erith Jeff
3:52 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
carroll is fucking dog shit play our strong team maybe we win some games FFS COYI
|
Hammer and Pickle
3:51 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
I think it ought to be clear by now that Carroll is not being played on reasons of merit. However, it is questionable whether there are any purposes served at all by playing him with this squad and manager.
|
Russ of the BML
3:14 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
Bilic chose Carroll in front of Sakho so Sakho should not have played. If you are going to pick a player ahead of another don't then sacrifice another player to accommodate the player you have dropped.
Why he chose Carroll over Sakho I don't know anyway. Surely Bilic can see we do not play as well with Carroll in the side as he slows us down.
And, with Carroll in the side we then didn't even play to his strengths with very little in the way of crosses coming in.
All in all a total balls up.
|
pdbis
1:30 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
Need to get the bloke out of the club in January.BFS will be in for him no doubt.He is limited and starting him yesterday handed the game to Spurs before the match had kicked off.Zarate should never of been dropped from the starting lineup after his goal against Chelsea as he likes to shoot from outside the box and is a far better all round player than lump of lard.
|
Alex V
1:03 Mon Nov 23
Re: Why have we abandoned a successful formation and tactic to accommodate Carroll?
|
DJH 1:19 Mon Nov 23
Good post.
I think I'm right that our first two set-pieces were taken short - with Carroll in the team that is just not playing to his strengths. There are no early balls coming into the box so there's no chance for him to win them. The concession to Carroll's strength in the air at the moment is straight balls played forward at head height, which I would argue are the least useful tactic - even if he manages to flick on a header to a team-mate, you're still a way from the goal with plenty to do.
What I would say to Carroll is that coming short isn't really helping us - he can hold up the ball well generally but it's slow possession that doesn't help a counter-attacking side who want to spring on the break. Lead the line, make sure you're in the box, play more as a poacher.
It is nonsense to say that we can't play well with Carroll imo. It just needs adaptation, which shouldn't be beyond the team.
|
| 
