Champagneblade
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2010
- Messages
- 11,008
- Reaction score
- 27,914
I've not been in favour of changing the formation at all.
But the aim surely has to be to have your best XI on the field at any given time.
Without O'Connell definitely and quite possibly Ampadu, we're either reliant on Stevens out of position at centre back and Lowe playing LWB or Robinson at LCB and Stevens at LWB. At this point in time and this level I don't think either of those in the first team makes the defence good enough.
So I'd drop to a back 4 of Baldock, Basham, Egan and Stevens hopefully. If not, I'd even play Osborn LB.
Probably gives me a midfield three of Berge, Norwood and Fleck.
It would then give a chance to have McGoldrick in the hole behind McBurnie and Brewster. Still gives options to throw Sharp and Burke up top.
Once we get players back, I'm all for 3-4-1-2 or 3-5-2 but for now I'd prefer a team that contains Brewster over Lowe/Robinson.
But the aim surely has to be to have your best XI on the field at any given time.
Without O'Connell definitely and quite possibly Ampadu, we're either reliant on Stevens out of position at centre back and Lowe playing LWB or Robinson at LCB and Stevens at LWB. At this point in time and this level I don't think either of those in the first team makes the defence good enough.
So I'd drop to a back 4 of Baldock, Basham, Egan and Stevens hopefully. If not, I'd even play Osborn LB.
Probably gives me a midfield three of Berge, Norwood and Fleck.
It would then give a chance to have McGoldrick in the hole behind McBurnie and Brewster. Still gives options to throw Sharp and Burke up top.
Once we get players back, I'm all for 3-4-1-2 or 3-5-2 but for now I'd prefer a team that contains Brewster over Lowe/Robinson.