How many would revert back to a basic 4-4-2?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Would you change it to a basic tried and tested 4-4-2?

  • Total voters
    93
  • Poll closed .
Key thing to all this is with the players available is to play Baxter behind a striker my first choice would be a fully fit Higdon but Mcnulty will do.
Got to pair up Reed with Doyle, Reed offers another dimension great vision makes telling passes, Doyle for all his critics always puts a shift in.
Especially at home start with two wide men JCR and Murphy let's get at em early.
Scoogs with a free role in the middle.
Basham back at CH and tell Mcarthy not to buy his train ticket this week(or ever again)
Flynn in for JCR away and when we are cruising at home.
That's what we are left with lads cause nobody's coming in on loan.
 

We simply would not suit a standard 4-4-2. For me the players we have at our disposal suit the current formation or a slight alternative one like the 4-2-3-1. It just needs a slight change in personnel upfront
 
Bergen Blade said:
I don't think any team in the top 8 normally plays 4-4-2.
Click to expand...
yeah because they're playing other teams in the top 8.. so it's all relative
on sunday i was watching Sturm Graz getting totally mullered by Red Bull Salzburg. the coach went for it and went 4 4 2 for the last 20 minutes and Sturm were unlucky not to snatch a draw.. like someone posted earlier. if you have two strikers you don't need to ponce around in midfield because the other team are further back.. these other teams just have bodies in midfield.. it's not like we are playing the likes of Eden Hazard every week is it??

edit: a football thread. how bl**dy marvellous :D
 
To get 2 in midfield you would have to sacrifice our wingers for playmaker types, much like we used to do with Quinny and Williamson. They play narrower and help fill the space left by losing a midfielder.

To do this we'd also need raiding full backs like we had in LJF and Lowton, and would also probably have to sacrifice our main threat in Murphy, and also JCR and Flynn. Scougall, Reed and Baxter would all be struggling as well if we had a fully sit squad.

The players we have don't currently fit a 4-4-2, so we're limited to the 1 up top. If we could get the right 1 though, we'd storm the league IMO.
 
Deej said:
To get 2 in midfield you would have to sacrifice our wingers for playmaker types, much like we used to do with Quinny and Williamson. They play narrower and help fill the space left by losing a midfielder.
Click to expand...
This is a bit like how Oldham played against us on Saturday,don't you think?
 
I know this gives people the shivers and harks back to the start of last season and Weir, but 4-1-4-1 would be the system that I believe Clough would like to play. There are a few reasons why he hasn't, Wallace being injured, Higdon injured/unfit and centre-back problems, but it may well be the one that happens eventually.
Basham as the holding player,Wallace just in front which gives the flexibility to become more of a 4-2-3-1 when needed. Full-backs are a big factor in it working, Harris could potentially do it on the left, not sure about the right side. The front player has to have a degree of mobility and be able to play well with his back to goal (which is why COG was the one he wanted). Murphy on the left and either Flynn on the right or a box to box player similar to Coady (I think Adams may be earmarked for this role) making it more like a diamond midfield. It makes you narrower playing like this, especially if the full-backs cannot get forward.

Bergen Blade has advocated a similar system before and I'll leave him to ponder more on the for and against for us playing this system, But I think Clough wants this formation and always intended a Basham/Wallace midfield axis.
 
Is there such a thing as a 'basic 4-4-2' anymore?
I think Clough likes to set us up like how he played at Forest...two wingers, skillful 'smaller' player, (Clough) sat off target man.

Clough knows the players and with Higdon out and Porter missing, we don't have that 'target man'...Baxter is far better facing defenders and going at them than with his back to goal and we simply don't get players in the box fast enough for the crosses( if they materialise)

We grinding out results with a lot of the ball and good play in our half but any team with a bit of knowledge seems to know how to combat this now...so what to do?
 
wizadry said:
Because what you're saying is lets not discuss it and leave it to Clough,which i don't think would be good for forum purposes,that's all mate!
Click to expand...
I was just saying that I prefer to leave everything to Clough and his staff because they know the game a lot more than any of the forum members also they have analysed players strengths, weaknesses and they know which players regularly play to instructions and those who dont etc. Yes, there is nothing to stop forum members seeing themselves more knowledgeable about football than Clough and his staff
 

Deej said:
To get 2 in midfield you would have to sacrifice our wingers for playmaker types, much like we used to do with Quinny and Williamson. They play narrower and help fill the space left by losing a midfielder.

To do this we'd also need raiding full backs like we had in LJF and Lowton, and would also probably have to sacrifice our main threat in Murphy, and also JCR and Flynn. Scougall, Reed and Baxter would all be struggling as well if we had a fully sit squad.

The players we have don't currently fit a 4-4-2, so we're limited to the 1 up top. If we could get the right 1 though, we'd storm the league IMO.
Click to expand...






The current crop of players would be ideal for 3-5-2 though. Still played a lot all over the world and is Van Gaal's favourite formation. We have plenty of candidates for the three "out and out defenders" who would be relieved at not having to push forward.
 
Silent Blade said:
I was just saying that I prefer to leave everything to Clough and his staff because they know the game a lot more than any of the forum members also they have analysed players strengths, weaknesses and they know which players regularly play to instructions and those who dont etc. Yes, there is nothing to stop forum members seeing themselves more knowledgeable about football than Clough and his staff
Click to expand...
Can you please tell me what forums' are for then if we're not allowed to discuss what Cloughy should or should not do? Cloughy is human just like the rest of us and CAN get things wrong,he isn't a robotic messiah!
 
Silent Blade said:
I was just saying that I prefer to leave everything to Clough and his staff because they know the game a lot more than any of the forum members also they have analysed players strengths, weaknesses and they know which players regularly play to instructions and those who dont etc. Yes, there is nothing to stop forum members seeing themselves more knowledgeable about football than Clough and his staff
Click to expand...

Replace the word "Clough" with "Weir" in that paragraph and it becomes really scary...
 
;)
wizadry said:
Can you please tell me what forums' are for then if we're not allowed to discuss what Cloughy should or should not do? Cloughy is human just like the rest of us and CAN get things wrong,he isn't a robotic messiah!
Click to expand...
I added a wink in my last reply to you but it was in the wrong place and I tried to put it in the right place but I then gave up! I shouldnt have given up

Now you see that the wink I added in this post is in the wrong place!
 
Silent Blade said:
;)
I added a wink in my last reply to you but it was in the wrong place and I tried to put it in the right place but I then gave up! I shouldnt have given up

Now you see that the wink I added in this post is in the wrong place!
Click to expand...
Don't worry about it;):cool::D
 
Silent Blade said:
;)
I added a wink in my last reply to you but it was in the wrong place and I tried to put it in the right place but I then gave up! I shouldnt have given up
Now you see that the wink I added in this post is in the wrong place!
Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry about it, Silent
There are plenty of other useless winkers on here ;)
 
We should play a 4-2-1-2-1 formation as it allows us to control the midfield, much like we have done in the majority of games so far this season, and have someone up top to bang in the goals. This system will allow us to accommodate both Baxter and Wallace, who I believe should be nailed on starters when fit as they are most technically gifted players, and a striker e.g. McNulty/Higdon/A non-existent loan. If I were to use this formation I would play:
Howard
Alcock, Basham, McEverley, Harris
Doyle, Wallace
Baxter,
Flynn, Murphy,
Higdon
 
curtisblades said:
We should play a 4-2-1-2-1 formation as it allows us to control the midfield, much like we have done in the majority of games so far this season, and have someone up top to bang in the goals. This system will allow us to accommodate both Baxter and Wallace, who I believe should be nailed on starters when fit as they are most technically gifted players, and a striker e.g. McNulty/Higdon/A non-existent loan. If I were to use this formation I would play:
Howard
Alcock, Basham, McEverley, Harris
Doyle, Reed

JCR, Murphy,
Baxter
Higdon
Click to expand...

Better
 
Esablade said:
Is there such a thing as a 'basic 4-4-2' anymore?
I think Clough likes to set us up like how he played at Forest...two wingers, skillful 'smaller' player, (Clough) sat off target man.

Clough knows the players and with Higdon out and Porter missing, we don't have that 'target man'...Baxter is far better facing defenders and going at them than with his back to goal and we simply don't get players in the box fast enough for the crosses( if they materialise)

We grinding out results with a lot of the ball and good play in our half but any team with a bit of knowledge seems to know how to combat this now...so what to do?
Click to expand...

It hasn't worked with the target man though really has it fella? Higdon or Porter up here and the defenders are all over them like a rash. To be honest I hate the term target man mainly due to our inability to ever play it correctly, in order to correctly play that sort of football you need to have readily available midfielders to support the man who is tasked with winning every ball up front. I find with United that we find ourselves with clearly visible gap between the lone striker and the midfield and due to this we become very one dimensional, lose possession and end up having to absorb unnecessary pressure.
 
super_pig said:
yeah because they're playing other teams in the top 8.. so it's all relative
on sunday i was watching Sturm Graz getting totally mullered by Red Bull Salzburg. the coach went for it and went 4 4 2 for the last 20 minutes and Sturm were unlucky not to snatch a draw.. like someone posted earlier. if you have two strikers you don't need to ponce around in midfield because the other team are further back.. these other teams just have bodies in midfield.. it's not like we are playing the likes of Eden Hazard every week is it??
Click to expand...

That's an act of desperation, where they have nothing to lose. It can quite easily go wrong and there are probably plenty of examples where it does too.
 

Bumping this.

Anymore for two up top?

It seems to me that teams have sussed us out at home.
They know we're set up to counter attack down the wings and keep players behind the ball with one up top.
Clearly, unless there is a 'piece of magic' from a player ( ie Murphy skinning s few and crossing/shooting) we are not much of a goal threat.

It does work against better opposition, where a draw is a decent result, because they'll have ambitions to attack of their own..

IMO we are making it easy for away teams from the start by the cautious/slow approach...and then it's hard to raise the tempo and win..especially when a goal behind.

So is anyone still advocating anything other than 4-4-2 at home?

I'd rather win 4-3 than keep on drawing/losing to in truth, average L1 sides.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom