Could we?

[Berlin Blade]

This is a weird one, but I’ve just got in and I’m quite pissed so I don’t care if I get slated for it. Just thinking about uremovic today, I really like the way he plays as a no nonsense centre half, don’t think he offers an awful lot in our overlapping centre half formation, I think it would work if we went to four at the back with him as the right centre half and Egan as the left centre half. Egan plays it for Ireland and it works. You’re not losing anything as Davis doesn’t really get forward, and neither does Uremovic. Baldock is the right back and is better as a RB than a RWB and Stevens probably does better defensively than going forward.

I know everyone is gonna scream it’s sacrilege to bin the 5 at the back now after our run, after seeing the 4 at the back fail under Slav, but if you think about the reasons it failed under Slav, it was because we were wank, we didn’t have two decent centre halves, we were trying to play Bogle as a right back and we were trying to play berge as a deep lying midfielder. Things are so different now I do think it could work.

It might be worth trying it, you’re not telling me it’s going to make us weak as piss and get run through if we went to that system, and if you think about the possibilities that having an extra man further forward would give us, especially as our next four games are against teams that are gonna be sat back in a low block. You play to your player’s strengths surely. You could have:

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck
Norwood - hourihane
Berge - MGW
Sharp

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck - norwood
Berge - MGW - Ndiaye
Sharp

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck - norwood
Berge - MGW
Sharp - Mcburnie

These potential lineups do excite me more than watching the back 5 which is clearly not particularly suited to any of the players in those roles. If basham was fit I’d not even suggest this but he isn’t is he.

Anyone have an opinion?

 

[finlaytheblade]

This is a weird one, but I’ve just got in and I’m quite pissed so I don’t care if I get slated for it. Just thinking about uremovic today, I really like the way he plays as a no nonsense centre half, don’t think he offers an awful lot in our overlapping centre half formation, I think it would work if we went to four at the back with him as the right centre half and Egan as the left centre half. Egan plays it for Ireland and it works. You’re not losing anything as Davis doesn’t really get forward, and neither does Uremovic. Baldock is the right back and is better as a RB than a RWB and Stevens probably does better defensively than going forward.

I know everyone is gonna scream it’s sacrilege to bin the 5 at the back now after our run, after seeing the 4 at the back fail under Slav, but if you think about the reasons it failed under Slav, it was because we were wank, we didn’t have two decent centre halves, we were trying to play Bogle as a right back and we were trying to play berge as a deep lying midfielder. Things are so different now I do think it could work.

It might be worth trying it, you’re not telling me it’s going to make us weak as piss and get run through if we went to that system, and if you think about the possibilities that having an extra man further forward would give us, especially as our next four games are against teams that are gonna be sat back in a low block. You play to your player’s strengths surely. You could have:

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck
Norwood - hourihane
Berge - MGW
Sharp

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck - norwood
Berge - MGW - Ndiaye
Sharp

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck - norwood
Berge - MGW
Sharp - Mcburnie

These potential lineups do excite me more than watching the back 5 which is clearly not particularly suited to any of the players in those roles. If basham was fit I’d not even suggest this but he isn’t is he.

Anyone have an opinion?

It would be a gamble changing shape at this stage.W'ere not conceding goals and that obviously is half the job done OK! We need to score more I don't beleave a drastic change will work at this stage.
We were robbed yesterday and did create enough to win it,all games will be tight from now on and our shape and organisation will be vital.
Hopefully with Billy back more goals will come.
Not necessary to gamble at this stage.
In my opinion of course.

 

[Chezzy Blades]

I can see the logic now we have 2 good defensive centre halves but I think it would be too much a gamble with 5 games left when we’ve got to where we are by not conceding goals.

What I would do however is start playing Berge higher up alongside MGW rather than the 532/352 we’ve switched to since Sharp got injured.

We don’t have the fast box to box midfielders (think Reading 05/06) needed to support so it often leaves the front two looking isolated, as it often did when we played a flat 3 of Fleck, Norwood and Lundstram.

I think Hecky has decided without Sharp we need to try and win games 1-0, but solidifying with a flat 3 has taken too much away from our attacking game.

 

[brownblade]

Interesting idea. But as you kind of said yourself, it'd be madness to change now.

We're also still missing a proper defensive midfielder.

Overall not conceding many is what's getting us by.

 

[jono_t2000]

It would be a gamble changing shape at this stage.W'ere not conceding goals and that obviously is half the job done OK! We need to score more I don't beleave a drastic change will work at this stage.
We were robbed yesterday and did create enough to win it,all games will be tight from now on and our shape and organisation will be vital.
Hopefully with Billy back more goals will come.
Not necessary to gamble at this stage.
In my opinion of course.

Pretty much agree with this. No way you change shape at this point of the season.

Leave that for next preseason (of course Uremovic will likely no longer be with us at that stage)

For what it's worth I still think going to a bank for is the answer for us eventually as gives us an extra player in midfield.

As the old guard come off contract and new players are added to the first team hopefully we will get back to a back for at some point in the future.

 

[mancunianblade]

The 4 at the back failed because teams were walking through out midfield. We haven’t addressed that via recruitment so it still wouldn’t work.

Unless Uremovic of Basham played DM

 

[blade67]

This is a weird one, but I’ve just got in and I’m quite pissed so I don’t care if I get slated for it. Just thinking about uremovic today, I really like the way he plays as a no nonsense centre half, don’t think he offers an awful lot in our overlapping centre half formation, I think it would work if we went to four at the back with him as the right centre half and Egan as the left centre half. Egan plays it for Ireland and it works. You’re not losing anything as Davis doesn’t really get forward, and neither does Uremovic. Baldock is the right back and is better as a RB than a RWB and Stevens probably does better defensively than going forward.

I know everyone is gonna scream it’s sacrilege to bin the 5 at the back now after our run, after seeing the 4 at the back fail under Slav, but if you think about the reasons it failed under Slav, it was because we were wank, we didn’t have two decent centre halves, we were trying to play Bogle as a right back and we were trying to play berge as a deep lying midfielder. Things are so different now I do think it could work.

It might be worth trying it, you’re not telling me it’s going to make us weak as piss and get run through if we went to that system, and if you think about the possibilities that having an extra man further forward would give us, especially as our next four games are against teams that are gonna be sat back in a low block. You play to your player’s strengths surely. You could have:

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck
Norwood - hourihane
Berge - MGW
Sharp

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck - norwood
Berge - MGW - Ndiaye
Sharp

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck - norwood
Berge - MGW
Sharp - Mcburnie

These potential lineups do excite me more than watching the back 5 which is clearly not particularly suited to any of the players in those roles. If basham was fit I’d not even suggest this but he isn’t is he.

Anyone have an opinion?

It's a no from me. You are right that our 3 at the back has become a defensive ploy, rather than an attacking one but yesterday again demonstrated how successful it is. Wes didn't have a save to amke against the 2nd best attack in the league. We'll stick with this approach until the end of the season now

 

[SouthStandGBlock]

I wouldn't change the formation off the back of one game, but despite being pissed, you make a good point, and it might be something for the future. I think if we don't get promoted, Egan will be off in the summer, so it might all change anyway.

 

[Carlton Blade]

Lads played about 150 minutes

 

[Caseh]

Stick to the formation we know works with the overall squad. You know, like everyone was screaming at Jokanovic to do?

 

[brownblade]

I wouldn't change the formation off the back of one game, but despite being pissed, you make a good point, and it might be something for the future. I think if we don't get promoted, Egan will be off in the summer, so it might all change anyway.

Possibly true RE Egan and next season. But then again Bash should get a new contract and he's still one of our best players playing the attacking Right CB role.

We could easily see Bash NEW PLAYER J.Robinson as our regular back 3 next season in Championship. Suits the budget (which is fair enough).

 

[ATL Recs]

This is a weird one, but I’ve just got in and I’m quite pissed so I don’t care if I get slated for it. Just thinking about uremovic today, I really like the way he plays as a no nonsense centre half, don’t think he offers an awful lot in our overlapping centre half formation, I think it would work if we went to four at the back with him as the right centre half and Egan as the left centre half. Egan plays it for Ireland and it works. You’re not losing anything as Davis doesn’t really get forward, and neither does Uremovic. Baldock is the right back and is better as a RB than a RWB and Stevens probably does better defensively than going forward.

I know everyone is gonna scream it’s sacrilege to bin the 5 at the back now after our run, after seeing the 4 at the back fail under Slav, but if you think about the reasons it failed under Slav, it was because we were wank, we didn’t have two decent centre halves, we were trying to play Bogle as a right back and we were trying to play berge as a deep lying midfielder. Things are so different now I do think it could work.

It might be worth trying it, you’re not telling me it’s going to make us weak as piss and get run through if we went to that system, and if you think about the possibilities that having an extra man further forward would give us, especially as our next four games are against teams that are gonna be sat back in a low block. You play to your player’s strengths surely. You could have:

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck
Norwood - hourihane
Berge - MGW
Sharp

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck - norwood
Berge - MGW - Ndiaye
Sharp

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck - norwood
Berge - MGW
Sharp - Mcburnie

These potential lineups do excite me more than watching the back 5 which is clearly not particularly suited to any of the players in those roles. If basham was fit I’d not even suggest this but he isn’t is he.

Anyone have an opinion?

Sharp won’t be fit for at least three of those games

 

[CarlMcBlade]

Nothing wrong with the formation at all. We are reasonably tight at the back and are still managing to create the big game winning chances. But our obvious lack of composure in front of goal, is going cost us dearly

 

[Rufus Smalls]

Nothing wrong with the formation at all. We are reasonably tight at the back and are still managing to create the big game winning chances. But our obvious lack of composure in front of goal, is going cost us dearly

Totally agree Carl. Defence has been pretty solid, the problem is up front where we aren’t sticking chances away. We maybe don’t realise how much we are now missing Brewster when he was starting to blossom.

 

[Russtheblade]

This is a weird one, but I’ve just got in and I’m quite pissed so I don’t care if I get slated for it. Just thinking about uremovic today, I really like the way he plays as a no nonsense centre half, don’t think he offers an awful lot in our overlapping centre half formation, I think it would work if we went to four at the back with him as the right centre half and Egan as the left centre half. Egan plays it for Ireland and it works. You’re not losing anything as Davis doesn’t really get forward, and neither does Uremovic. Baldock is the right back and is better as a RB than a RWB and Stevens probably does better defensively than going forward.

I know everyone is gonna scream it’s sacrilege to bin the 5 at the back now after our run, after seeing the 4 at the back fail under Slav, but if you think about the reasons it failed under Slav, it was because we were wank, we didn’t have two decent centre halves, we were trying to play Bogle as a right back and we were trying to play berge as a deep lying midfielder. Things are so different now I do think it could work.

It might be worth trying it, you’re not telling me it’s going to make us weak as piss and get run through if we went to that system, and if you think about the possibilities that having an extra man further forward would give us, especially as our next four games are against teams that are gonna be sat back in a low block. You play to your player’s strengths surely. You could have:

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck
Norwood - hourihane
Berge - MGW
Sharp

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck - norwood
Berge - MGW - Ndiaye
Sharp

Stevens - Egan - captain Croatia - baldock
Fleck - norwood
Berge - MGW
Sharp - Mcburnie

These potential lineups do excite me more than watching the back 5 which is clearly not particularly suited to any of the players in those roles. If basham was fit I’d not even suggest this but he isn’t is he.

Anyone have an opinion?

Your back line is the wrong way round in all 3 lineups! Also we lose out on a lot of attacking threat down the left if Stevens isnt getting forward, have a lie in & sleep it off

 

[Revolution]

Someone tried to use 4 at the back earlier this season. The defence was markedly worse when we used it and the players didn’t like it.

In a word: no.

 

[Sheffsteel]

Egan isn't the defender our fans think he is.
He poor to average in a back 4.

However put 2 centre backs either side of him....and he's really good playing centrally in a 3.
Think we should always try to play to our players strengths.

 

[Snowflake]

I can see the logic now we have 2 good defensive centre halves but I think it would be too much a gamble with 5 games left when we’ve got to where we are by not conceding goals.

What I would do however is start playing Berge higher up alongside MGW rather than the 532/352 we’ve switched to since Sharp got injured.

We don’t have the fast box to box midfielders (think Reading 05/06) needed to support so it often leaves the front two looking isolated, as it often did when we played a flat 3 of Fleck, Norwood and Lundstram.

I think Hecky has decided without Sharp we need to try and win games 1-0, but solidifying with a flat 3 has taken too much away from our attacking game.

I understand the point, but yesterday we had 4 really good chances to score, possibly 5, as well as a penalty turned down.
If we can create that many against a top Championship side then I don’t see anything wrong with our line up.

 

[Swannyblade]

The biggest change since Slav left is how solid the defence has become - would be crazy to change it now.
However, if we find ourselves behind in a playoff game it’s a nice option to have if we’re in need of a goal or two.

 

[raimond]

I think Uremovic and Davies were having to hold yesterday and not venture forward on purpose- Bournemouth were dangerous on the counter, particularly wide.

We played a little bit different and when they were in possession (especially first half) Uremovic wasn't really the right sided centre half, he was man marking Solanke, following him all over (or if he wasn't meant to be then he was caught out of position a hell of a lot!! Had to be under orders).

I think we'll see him get forward a lot more in other matches.

 

[Captain2]

Egan isn't the defender our fans think he is.
He poor to average in a back 4.

However put 2 centre backs either side of him....and he's really good playing centrally in a 3.
Think we should always try to play to our players strengths.

Captain of his Country and first name on the team sheet he’s good in a 4 but we do suit a back 3.
The blokes a legend in my eyes and will be sorry to see him depart if we don’t get promoted.Premiership class along with MGW

 

[Berlin Blade]

Just logged on and discovered this post. I was as surprised to read it as the rest of you it seems!

Posted at 6am! I can see my logic but even I wouldn’t change it now with 5 games to go and tend to agree with the replies. At least it was something to talk about I guess.

 

[Blend-it-like-Harris]

Unless we have 2 pretty mobile beefcakes standing at 6 foot 4" (at least) my inclination is to say "Forget it!!"

 

[Stevo]

Interesting idea. But as you kind of said yourself, it'd be madness to change now.

We're also still missing a proper defensive midfielder.

Overall not conceding many is what's getting us by.

I'd.only be comfortable with us playing 4 at the back of we signed n'golo kante