Stretch
A member of average proportions
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2013
- Messages
- 16,211
- Reaction score
- 45,464
There has been a lot of discussion about how adaptable our players might or might not be to a change in formation. We have been hugely successful from the innovative 3-5-2 (and variants) that we have employed in recent years, and whilst I am not advocating consigning it to the history books, I do wonder if we should at least try something different.
Many seem to think that we would struggle with a back 4, especially with JOC out. Presumably this is because Bash couldn't cope as a lone RCB, and because Egan isn't versatile enough to play at LCB. Whilst there may be an argument to made here, personally I think that is disingenuous to both of those players. But taking those concerns on board, how could we fashion a system that is versatile enough to support a back 4 when needed, but also give us some more oomph going forward?
For me, 2 players jump out as being key to helping this transition. Firstly Amapadu, due to his ability to play in both defense and midfield and secondly Burke, due to his versatility to play down the whole right flank of the field, and as a supporting striker.
Then thinking about some of our other players, I turn to Berge. The more I see of him, the more I think he is better going forward than he is sitting. He is very hard to knock off the ball and is deceptively silky when on it. Whilst he can put in a tackle, I think his strength is driving forward , pulling players out of position and trying to create chances.
Norwood, for me he has to play. I recognise some of his defensive frailties, but he is still the best player in the squad at long range passing and from dead ball situations. I just think he gives us an element of control that no one else does in his position.
McG is still one of the most skillful players we have, but I don't see him as a striker. He is a CAM or No.10 who can work between the lines, out trick a player here and there and track back to defend when needed.
So with all that in mind, how do we fit the above players in and find a more versatile formation?
Here is a suggestion, it can be 4-5-1, or 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3, depending on what we need to do.
---------------------------Rammers----------------------------
Baldock-----------Basham-------Egan--------------Stevens
-------------------Norwood-------Ampadu-------------------
-----------------------------Berge------------------------------
----------Burke-------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------McG---------------
---------------------------Brewster----------------------------
Burke would player in deepish RAM position, bombing forward with Berge in support when possible, but he has the legs and energy to drop back and help plug the gaps that Norwood can't fill.
Ampadu has a lot on his plate here. He needs to look after Norwood, and try to prevent any 2 on 1s, as well as dropping back to make a back 3 when defending crosses or sitting off. Again, he has the energy, and I think the intelligence to handle this.
Brewster has to work as a lone striker, but he will have McG linking with him, Burke stretching the lines and Burge getting up to support as much as possible. The formation probably means less attacking from our full backs, but on current form it's probably not a bad thing.
Many seem to think that we would struggle with a back 4, especially with JOC out. Presumably this is because Bash couldn't cope as a lone RCB, and because Egan isn't versatile enough to play at LCB. Whilst there may be an argument to made here, personally I think that is disingenuous to both of those players. But taking those concerns on board, how could we fashion a system that is versatile enough to support a back 4 when needed, but also give us some more oomph going forward?
For me, 2 players jump out as being key to helping this transition. Firstly Amapadu, due to his ability to play in both defense and midfield and secondly Burke, due to his versatility to play down the whole right flank of the field, and as a supporting striker.
Then thinking about some of our other players, I turn to Berge. The more I see of him, the more I think he is better going forward than he is sitting. He is very hard to knock off the ball and is deceptively silky when on it. Whilst he can put in a tackle, I think his strength is driving forward , pulling players out of position and trying to create chances.
Norwood, for me he has to play. I recognise some of his defensive frailties, but he is still the best player in the squad at long range passing and from dead ball situations. I just think he gives us an element of control that no one else does in his position.
McG is still one of the most skillful players we have, but I don't see him as a striker. He is a CAM or No.10 who can work between the lines, out trick a player here and there and track back to defend when needed.
So with all that in mind, how do we fit the above players in and find a more versatile formation?
Here is a suggestion, it can be 4-5-1, or 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3, depending on what we need to do.
---------------------------Rammers----------------------------
Baldock-----------Basham-------Egan--------------Stevens
-------------------Norwood-------Ampadu-------------------
-----------------------------Berge------------------------------
----------Burke-------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------McG---------------
---------------------------Brewster----------------------------
Burke would player in deepish RAM position, bombing forward with Berge in support when possible, but he has the legs and energy to drop back and help plug the gaps that Norwood can't fill.
Ampadu has a lot on his plate here. He needs to look after Norwood, and try to prevent any 2 on 1s, as well as dropping back to make a back 3 when defending crosses or sitting off. Again, he has the energy, and I think the intelligence to handle this.
Brewster has to work as a lone striker, but he will have McG linking with him, Burke stretching the lines and Burge getting up to support as much as possible. The formation probably means less attacking from our full backs, but on current form it's probably not a bad thing.
Last edited:
