Lee Trundle
3:46 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
Alex V 3:34 Thu Sep 21
It would have been more of a surprise, and probably less work for you, had you held your hands up and said, "oh yeah, I forgot about Leicester City playing 4-4-2" rather than writing all that out.
I'd rather take the opinion of my own eyes, Ranieri himself, the Leicester City fans, and all the media who scrutinised their tactics during their Championship winning season who all reckoned they played 4-4-2.
|
Ironside
3:36 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
Hammers1993
Formation looks very good.
If we needed to play more defensively we could drop Arnautovic for a 3rd CB, bring in an extra DCM and play with wingbacks.
Something like:
--------------------Hart----------------------------
----------Fonte--Reid--Ogbonna--------------
--------------Obiang----Kouyate---------------
-Antonio-------------------------Cress/Arthur-
--------------------Lanzini-------------------------
--------------Sakho--Chicharito-----------------
|
Alex V
3:34 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
Well some formations and systems have more strengths and less weaknesses for any given set of players - that's the subject of the whole tactical side of the sport. You can't really judge any solution by 'what most people seem to think' on a forum thread.
On Leicester, they found an interesting solution in Okazaki. Although their formation was often noted as 4-4-2 (and maybe it suited them for it to be seen that way) in reality Vardy played up front on his own, and Okazaki played a defensive largely non-threatening role that actually Leicester have found it hard to replicate with other players (and I've no idea how Iheanacho fits in it for that matter!). Deeney at Watford and King at Bournemouth seem to have found some success in similar roles, and I think we'll see more forwards developed as midfielders in the future. But really it's 4-4-1-1, which again is just another very close derivative of 4-2-3-1 or 4-5-1.
We have tried to copy that Leicester system, as we did a few times last season with Ayew playing off a striker. But I don't see how it suits us anyway now, because you still have the problem that if Hernandez is the furthest forward, he still risks getting isolated and not being an out ball for us. So it doesn't really solve any of the attacking problems and exposes us defensively where we're weak.
|
ornchurch ammer
2:28 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
All formations and teams have weaknesses, that is why we have not had a team win every single game in a season and only Arsenal remaining undefeated.
The thread is about getting more of our best players in a starting line up, which most people seem to think is a 3-5-2, not debate the pros and cons of every tactical system.
|
Lee Trundle
1:23 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
"I suppose Burnley are the 4-4-2 model in the premiership"
Not Leicester City? It's not like they won the league playing that formation, is it?
|
ludo21
12:02 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
Lee Trundle 11:40 Thu Sep 21
Which is why I made the point about Declan Rice... I can see why we started with 3 CB & 2 DM against Bolton but as the game panned out, especially after the early goal there was scope to be more adventurous. Easy with hindsight I suppose.
|
Alex V
11:51 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
I suppose Burnley are the 4-4-2 model in the premiership. And their defensive organisation seems to be likely to keep them in the league this season. But should we aspire to that style - they are dour, they have less of the ball, they create little, and they're currently conceding more shots per match than any other team in the league (and they were second worst to Sunderland in that stat last season). And I notice they're going 4-5-1 in some of the matches now.
|
Alex V
11:41 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
Of course a 3-5-2 also has a weakness down the flanks, as does a midfield diamond. Two more rarely seen formation these days.
I don't think 4-4-2 can make a full comeback - it will always be exploitable. Though I watched a game from La Liga with two 4-4-2s, Alaves vs Villereal. Atletico Madrid are also playing a 4-4-2. But I don't know the Spanish meta well enough to know what the reasons are they think that can work there.
Ways you could try to make a 4-4-2 work? Have very hard-working forwards who track back and help out in midfield, but as this is likely to dull their attacking contribution it kind of nullifies the whole point of playing 4-4-2 in the first place. Another factor could be if you play very narrow midfielders who are basically midfielders - Hutchison and Bowyer were that type of player for us, but there aren't many of those around now, probably because they're ultimately not that effective and can't then supply the creativity to the two strikers. Another way is to have two central midfielders so exceptional that you can rely on them to dominate even when they're outnumbered - this is fairly optimistic, and probably very unreliable as a plan.
|
Lee Trundle
11:40 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
"did we really need two in DM (and 3 CBs) against a team that barely got out of their own half?"
Probably not. But I think the situation we're in it was probably the best thing to do.
We probably should have played this formation against the tougher teams that have beaten us this season, and maybe revert to a back 4 against the weaker teams, like Huddersfield.
We pretty much did the same thing last season, getting walloped by teams like Man Utd and Arsenal playing 4 at the back, then we changed to 3 at the back and beat Hull and Burnley 1-0.
|
BRANDED
11:19 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
If you have the ball the other team cant score. Not easily.
|
ornchurch ammer
11:15 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
A 4-4-2 leaves you one short in midfield, and likely to be overrun, against teams playing the current vogue of 4-5-1.
What most people here, including myself, is a 3-5-2.
It gets the two up front, retains the numbers in the middle, and most people acknowledge that we have looked better defensively with 3 centre backs. Should have played that formation on Tuesday.
|
ludo21
11:10 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
Also... a player like Declan Rice, who can play CB or DM, is invaluable.
He will allow us to switch formations effortlessly from 3 at the back to 4 with no need to change personel.
|
ludo21
10:53 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
Only half listening to talksport last night but Stewart Robson was on with Andy Goldstein and they seemed to think that there might be a re-visiting of the 442 formation.... all these things are cyclical and they seemed to think its time was going to come again.
Can't help but think that two of Carroll, Hernandez and Sakho together would be quite useful.... you would have thought that a cup game against Bolton would be the perfect time to experiment a bit, did we really need two in DM (and 3 CBs) against a team that barely got out of their own half?
|
Far Post
10:37 Thu Sep 21
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
I bet the likes of Rush & Dalglish, McAvennie & Cottee, Wright & Smith, Shearer & Ferdinand, York & Cole to name a few partnerships are glad they didn't play in a formation with only one up front.
|
Northern Sold
2:11 Wed Sep 20
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
What about a rush goalie?
|
Far Cough
2:09 Wed Sep 20
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
Also it's only ten players
|
Alex V
1:40 Wed Sep 20
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
You can't play a one-man midfield.
|
Mex Martillo
8:01 Tue Sep 19
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
I would like to see us try putting some defensive duties on the "wingers" and keep three at the back.
Hart
Font Reid Ogbonna
Obiang
Antonio Lanzini Arnoutovic
Chicharito Sakho
Not sure how the defense would stand up, but then we do not do well with 4 at the back. On the attacking front should be the business.
|
Keep dreaming
6:14 Tue Sep 19
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
That's correct comma. One of my first post about the team for wba was without Carroll just because of that fact.
The OP team look just rightfor most games.
But will it happen?
|
,
6:01 Tue Sep 19
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
Against WBA one up front might have been more enterprising from an attacking point of view if it had been Hernandez. Sadly it was Carroll and as we all predicted it played to a specific WBA strength.
|
ornchurch ammer
5:59 Tue Sep 19
Re: Accommodating Our Best Players Into a Starting Line Up
|
What I think is crazy is buying a 29 years old forward, with a 1 in 3 goal scoring record, with all of those goals coming from inside the penalty box, and then deciding to deploy him outside the box.
|
| 
