4-2-3-1 isn't the way to go...

[Reedy1889]

just now...

I feel sorry for Weir, his vision of how he wants us to play is great, i would like us to play that very way also but we simply don't have the players or the budget to buy the right type of players required to play a such formation that needs 'off the ball' movement & creativity. heck we barely have the players required to play a basic 4-4-2 like how Bradford set up today that's how poor our whole squad is right now! Lyle Taylor is not good enough to play up top on his own, and i believe nobody in our squad is capable of playing the No. 10 role consistently good enough and that role is vital to this system!

But having said that short term and with a couple new faces i think that's the way we need to go (4-4-2) until Weir has gotten rid of the sh*te we currently have on our books and brings in the right type of players for the 4-2-3-1 formation. I would suggest we should go from here on with a simple 4-4-2, we need to have two wingers out wide as much as possible with the instructions to be as 'direct' as possible, just running at the full backs their up against and get as many crosses in as possible personally out of the players we have these two would be Brandy & McFadzean then i'd have the d-line pushed up fairly high but to play that way either Collins or McGuire would have to be dropped, we would need to recruit a center back who possesses enough pace to cover any balls through or over the top of our back line, we would need all the midfield and front two pushing on attempting to win possession back as soon as we haven't got it. for this Coady or McGinn are fine for me to play in the middle but either one would need somebody different next to them so that being said Doyle would need to be dropped he simply isn't the required personnel to fulfill this duty and we'd need him replaced with a Shaun Derry or like today's opposition a Gary Jones type player somebody who would harass the oppo's midfield putting them under pressure. and lastly our front two would be exactly like Bradford's a 'target man' and 'poacher', Lyle Taylor for me needs to be given the chance to play the latter role for us to determine whether he's good enough to be the one to score the goals we crave. atm i don't think we have anybody good enough to be the bullish target man we'd need, so that would be one position we would need to add to also.

There's some players i haven't even mentioned, sadly for me Jamie Murphy just isn't good enough he needs to moving on if possible aswell as the likes of Williams & Higgo.

Maybe this sounds all abit 'football manager'ish' but it's what i would do if i was in Weir's shoes right now..

anyhow thoughts??

 

[Deleted member 875]

First thing I would do if I was in Weir's shoes is have Jamie Murphy by the throat and tell him to pull his finger out or else I'd rip his fucking head out.

 

[Foxy]

When we set up the way we did first half we need Murphy to seize his opportunity and take the game by the scruff of the neck. If he plays like he did today, neutralising us is simple... just put a couple of men on Brandy and give him a bit of a kicking.

Today, at half time I'd have brought Porter on for Murphy stuck McFadzean left, Brandy right and told them to get playing down the wings/occasionally (not all the bloody time) swapping wings and cutting inside.

 

[true99blade]

Next week we have to start with a 4-4-2, none of this 4-2-3-1 bullshit.​

Play Taylor with Porter upfront with a midfield of Doyle, Coady, McFadzean and Flynn. I can't imagine Brandy will play as he went off injured and Murphy I probably can't stand to watch play another game. I find it daft that many fans seem to not rate Taylor, I feel sorry for the lad as he's not the sort of player that can play on his own upfront.​

​

Also, why isn't McGinn playing? Overall his performance against Notts County was better than Coady's performances again Burton and Colchester.​

 

[SwissBlade]

When we set up the way we did first half we need Murphy to seize his opportunity and take the game by the scruff of the neck. If he plays like he did today, neutralising us is simple... just put a couple of men on Brandy and give him a bit of a kicking.

Today, at half time I'd have brought Porter on for Murphy stuck McFadzean left, Brandy right and told them to get playing down the wings/occasionally (not all the bloody time) swapping wings and cutting inside.

I thought that Murphy was ok first half, he got in behind the defence, but came over all 'Jamie Ward' in a one-on-one situation.

I also thought that the way to break Bradford down was to get the ball in behind them rather than going out to the wings and trying to put crosses in onto the heads of our strikers, it seemed destined to fail as Bradford cleaned up almost everytime

 

[Reedy1889]

Bradford seemed to play a high d line using slow defenders had we had a player capable of seeing a pass we could have been in many more times than we did

 

[SwissBlade]

Bradford seemed to play a high d line using slow defenders had we had a player capable of seeing a pass we could have been in many more times than we did

They were really high up the pitch and it seemed very risky to me, we saw the passes first half, but second we chose to "use the experience of Flynn" (weirs own words) and stuck the ball out wide to get crosses in. To me this was strange as whilst Bradford were slow, they were decent in the air.. Unlike Taylor, Ironside and Porter

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

If we are trying to graduate to 4-2-3-1 but the players we have aren't good enough for that or 4-4-2, why not just keep on down the 4-2-3-1 route?

It's what we all want in terms of style of football, so why not carry on?

Blimey - I don't care how bad it is; we have to choose a route, grit our teeth and just get on with it.

Weir has chosen 4-2-3-1 so let's leave the man to develop it for gawd's sake

 

[Foxy]

They were really high up the pitch and it seemed very risky to me, we saw the passes first half, but second we chose to "use the experience of Flynn" (weirs own words) and stuck the ball out wide to get crosses in. To me this was strange as whilst Bradford were slow, they were decent in the air.. Unlike Taylor, Ironside and Porter

Flynn was more often trying to get on the end of crosses rather than crossing, if fact it was his header to Ironside that created our best chance. I thought we actually began to look slightly more "dangerous" (not really, but you know what I mean) when we got the ball in.

 

[SwissBlade]

If we are trying to graduate to 4-2-3-1 but the players we have aren't good enough for that or 4-4-2, why not just keep on down the 4-2-3-1 route?

It's what we all want in terms of style of football, so why not carry on?

Blimey - I don't care how bad it is; we have to choose a route, grit our teeth and just get on with it.

Weir has chosen 4-2-3-1 so let's leave the man to develop it for gawd's sake

I kind of see your point, but it means then that he can't play Taylor as the one because he doesn't seem to be a player that plays with his back to goal. We need Shipperly for that...

We took McGinty off in the second half and went 3-4-3, reasonably bold move in modern British football formations, but not uncommon on the continent when teams are on the back foot defending. We need more pace at the back if we were to play this again in anger, but to me it showed that Weir isn't afraid to try something different

 

[SwissBlade]

Flynn was more often trying to get on the end of crosses rather than crossing, if fact it was his header to Ironside that created our best chance. I thought we actually began to look slightly more "dangerous" (not really, but you know what I mean) when we got the ball in.

I think he was trying to get out wide although, yes he was also coming into the box to support.

We seemed to put more into the box but I wouldn't say it was more effective. It played to Bradford's strengths and if my memory is right, their second came from a ball going into their box and the bald lad for Bradford breaking at pace when we were exposed

 

[Silent Blade]

If we are trying to graduate to 4-2-3-1 but the players we have aren't good enough for that or 4-4-2, why not just keep on down the 4-2-3-1 route?

It's what we all want in terms of style of football, so why not carry on?

Blimey - I don't care how bad it is; we have to choose a route, grit our teeth and just get on with it.

Weir has chosen 4-2-3-1 so let's leave the man to develop it for gawd's sake

To make 4-2-3-1 work we need a striker who is good on his own (must be strong in the air AND on the ground). Taylor isnt good in the air and Porter isnt hot on the ground. We need a playmaker with the experience and craft (like McDonald) to play behind the lone striker and we do not have one in the present squad. 442 (See Foxy's suggestion above- play both Porter and Taylor up front with McFazdean and Brandy on the wings) would have given us better cutting edge

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

To make 4-2-3-1 work we need a striker who is good on his own (must be strong in the air AND on the ground). Taylor isnt good in the air and Porter isnt hot on the ground. We need a playmaker with the experience and craft (like McDonald) to play behind the lone striker and we do not have one in the present squad. 442 (See Foxy's suggestion above- play both Porter and Taylor up front with McFazdean and Brandy on the wings) would have given us better cutting edge

Taylor would have to in the hole presumably unless you mean them as a flat front 2.

Can McFadzean and Brandy both deliver as wingers though?

 

[DazBlade88]

It's not the formation that's the problem.

If we play 4-4-2, we'll be in the exact same boat as we have been for a while. Who is going to get forward from midfield? Doyle, Coady and McGinn all prefer to sit so we'll be getting the exact same amount of bodies forward but Brandy and McFadzean will be even deeper than they are now.

We need a 'number 10' and we need a striker who has an ounce of composure before the transfer window shuts. If we get that, we'll get in the top 6 in my opinion.

 

[Bladesway]

post: 519318, member: 875"]First thing I would do if I was in Weir's shoes is have Jamie Murphy by the throat and tell him to pull his finger out or else I'd rip his fucking head out.

You haven't done a deal of managing have you Brownie

That said you have a point.

For me there is far too much made of formations and what they do/don't give. If the players aren't good enough you don't get the quality. However, I believe Weir has to stick with it if he believes the players will improve and work to his system.

I would stop taking about formations and start looking for what we can have before the window shuts. I expect nothing. I also think we look a better side with Porter in it (cue pelters on high). Whether you like him or not, he is better than Taylor right now, but both of them require some service. It isn't like they are missing hatfuls (Notts County apart) so you have to look at the supply line. Be it out wide or through the middle it isn't coming.

Doesn't matter if its 4-4-2, 4-5-1 or anything else, if the supply to your forward(s) is poor you don't score.

 

[Silent Blade]

Taylor would have to in the hole presumably unless you mean them as a flat front 2.

Can McFadzean and Brandy both deliver as wingers though?

McFadzean has always played on the left flank either as LB or LM in academy matches. In his 1st team appearances he has often been playing in RM because bloody Murphy plays at LM despite being right footed (Danny Wilson liked to have right footers at LM and left footers at RM). dont know what position Brandy played when he was at Walsall but he does look as nippy as wingers tend to be. I do not know much about Taylor to be honest but it was quite easy to notice he isnt good in the air. Were you suggesting 4-4-1-1 when you said Taylor could play behind the striker? I think 442 is more dynamic. Yes we have to many CMs who prefer to sit. In 442 formations the two CMs often take turns in staying behind to hold the midfield and the other CM (like Lampard) make late runs into the box

 

[Silent Blade]

I would stop taking about formations

This would upset Bergen Blade!

 

[shorehamview]

If we're not going to attack much then why don't we play 6-4-0?

 

[Guesty]

You can't lose if you don't concede.

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

McFadzean has always played on the left flank either as LB or LM in academy matches. In his 1st team appearances he has often been playing in RM because bloody Murphy plays at LM despite being right footed (Danny Wilson liked to have right footers at LM and left footers at RM). dont know what position Brandy played when he was at Walsall but he does look as nippy as wingers tend to be. I do not know much about Taylor to be honest but it was quite easy to notice he isnt good in the air. Were you suggesting 4-4-1-1 when you said Taylor could play behind the striker? I think 442 is more dynamic. Yes we have to many CMs who prefer to sit. In 442 formations the two CMs often take turns in staying behind to hold the midfield and the other CM (like Lampard) make late runs into the box

So, basically, mate, we're stuffed!

 

[moDtheGod]

If we're not going to attack much then why don't we play 6-4-0?

Fair point. Everyone thinks that the Spanish are incredible and they don't have a striker. And they're also boring to watch. You might have cracked it.

 

[Deadbat]

The formation is not working but sadly I think it is a bit of an excuse to hide behind that. too much is carped on about systems and shapes and styles. The formation and way we are playing is not working not leading to results but and a big but.....

The main reason we look rubbish is the players are rubbish. It is that simple.

4-2-3-1; 4-4-2; 5-3-2; 3-4-2-1. Whatever they play this side will struggle as it is not good enough. The players are a sorry set of no marks.

However we may create a few chances and at least look dangerous if we play with some strikers (at least 2 up top). That is undeniable really.

 

[Bergen Blade]

This would upset Bergen Blade!

I agree we're struggling to play 4-2-3-1 without McDonald, and without a real replacement I think we'll abandon it sooner or later. 4-4-2 may give some improvement, but I can't see us being good enough for promotion without strengthenings and further tweaks in terms of team selection and tactics.

 

[Blade59]

I think we would get more out of the current squad with a 4 4 2. We actually have options in the wide positions with Brandy, Mcfadzean, Murphy and Flynn. Porter and Taylor are both more suited to playing 2 up front rather than as a loan striker. There would still be a lack of creativity in centre midfield which would need to be addressed and whatever system we play we still need to bring in at least one more striker. To play the current system we lack all the key ingredients, loan striker who can link play, number 10 role player and attacking fullbacks who can also defend reasonably competently.

 

[DronnieBlade]

Been saying it for years.

3:5:2

But need to get a couple of quality wide players in first

 

[super_pig]

Fair point. Everyone thinks that the Spanish are incredible and they don't have a striker. And they're also boring to watch. You might have cracked it.

i don't and neither do the Germans

 

[super_pig]

Been saying it for years.

3:5:2

But need to get a couple of quality wide players in first

we need quality everything

 

[moDtheGod]

i don't and neither do the Germans

Neither do I. You should have been able to tell that from the bit about them being boring to watch.

 

[shorehamview]

Fair point. Everyone thinks that the Spanish are incredible and they don't have a striker. And they're also boring to watch. You might have cracked it.

I was thinking more along the lines of Craig Levein's Scotland's strikerless side than the Spanish model. The one that was shit and never looked like scoring, rather than the one where goals could be scored by anyone except for Puyol and Casillas (and I wouldn't put it past either of those sneaky foreigners to score).

 

[sheffielder]

It's not the formation that's the problem.

If we play 4-4-2, we'll be in the exact same boat as we have been for a while. Who is going to get forward from midfield? Doyle, Coady and McGinn all prefer to sit so we'll be getting the exact same amount of bodies forward but Brandy and McFadzean will be even deeper than they are now.

We need a 'number 10' and we need a striker who has an ounce of composure before the transfer window shuts. If we get that, we'll get in the top 6 in my opinion.

This is almost nail on the head and through the wood stuff.

Our problem is not formations, I would love to see a midfield of Coady and McGinn, players who will look forward rather than sideways, back or looking at getting off the turf when missing yet another tackle in Doyle. We don't get the ball forward anywhere near as quickly enough so when our attacking 4 get the ball they are usually smothered. Fuck formations, just play with intent to get the ball forward quickly and at pace (and yes you can still keep it on the floor Pinchy)

We have 3 players McFadzean, Brandy and Murphy who should be looking to find pockets of space or running into it. Taylor should be running the channels.

I think we are still suffering from the negativity of last year and some of the players can't get through it. Sorry to say, one of them is our captain and the other is Murphy