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

[highpeakblade]

I don't need to go into it too long winded but in a nutshell. Team has more than fair share of possession, team bosses midfield, team creates plenty of chances yet the conversion rate is poor and we fizzle in the final third.

I just wondered what the tacticians on here would do really?

 

[Bladepicker]

As we are with Higdon/Mcnulty/New Stirker a top with bench options to go two up if needed.

Baxter and Scougall fight it at for the hole

 

[Woodwardfan]

Same formation which should be flexible as follows:

When the opposition have the ball - solid 4-5-1.

When we have the ball quickly move to 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-3-3. Need much more movement forward, the 1 up front should have loads of company when we are attacking.

In possession Murphy should have a free role, pushing up alongside the striker as a matter of course. When he moves forward the left back should push right up on the wing. I'd have Harris pushing up far more than he does.

I'd play Doyle deep, never with Basham though in central midfield.

In front and to the side of Doyle I'd play two out of Wallace, Baxter and Scougall. In my case always Baxter plus a.n.other.

The whole essence of our attacks should be crisp, fast forward progression up the pitch.

I'd play Flynn in tough matches and maybe Ryce in others.

I'd like to see a bench with Higdon, McNulty and Ryce on it. We need a new mobile stiker to be main man.

If Higdon is intended to be that main man, forget 4-5-1.

 

[Punk Blade]

I think 4-4-2 with the current personnel (ie. Baxter + Murphy/JCR/Scougall as a proper front two) would be more effective than sticking with 4-6-0.

I think the problem is that we've been recruiting players for a certain type of system (going back to Weir) leaving us with a bunch of players that don't really fit 4-4-2. The likes of Baxter, Murphy, JCR, Scougall aren't proper forwards and aside from Scougall don't have the desire/work rate to do enough defensive work in a midfield 4. So that's essentially our four most creative players struggling to find a place.

The flip side of that is if we played something like Murphy - Doyle - Scougall - JCR in midfield with, say, Baxter - Higdon as two strikers, would our lack of defensive strength in midfield matter if that lot had already put us 3-0 up? Worth trying it to find out I'd say.

 

[Blade56]

Same formation which should be flexible as follows:

When the opposition have the ball - solid 4-5-1.

When we have the ball quickly move to 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-3-3. Need much more movement forward, the 1 up front should have loads of company when we are attacking.

In possession Murphy should have a free role, pushing up alongside the striker as a matter of course. When he moves forward the left back should push right up on the wing. I'd have Harris pushing up far more than he does.

I'd play Doyle deep, never with Basham though in central midfield.

In front and to the side of Doyle I'd play two out of Wallace, Baxter and Scougall. In my case always Baxter plus a.n.other.

The whole essence of our attacks should be crisp, fast forward progression up the pitch.

I'd play Flynn in tough matches and maybe Ryce in others.

I'd like to see a bench with Higdon, McNulty and Ryce on it. We need a new mobile stiker to be main man.

If Higdon is intended to be that main man, forget 4-5-1.

I'd go roughly with that. As long as we stop playing 4-6-0

 

[Esablade]

Start with:

4-4-2 at home.
4-6-0 away.

= promotion!

UTB!

 

[Wards]

No, current formation allows our better players to play further forward with less defensive responsibility I.e. Murphy//JCR//Baxter. Plus we don't have two forwards to throw together.

 

[highpeakblade]

No, current formation allows our better players to play further forward with less defensive responsibility I.e. Murphy//JCR//Baxter. Plus we don't have two forwards to throw together.

Not knocking you buddy but we have four completely different strikers in Higdon, Porter, McNulty and Diego. I still think we need another just to throw something different into the mix but I don't know how we could possibly say that we don't have two to throw together from what we already have in the ranks. I think the issue is more at the hands of Clough who seems reluctant to throw throw players up there. He seems more content with not conceding goals in order to not lose games and making us harder to beat. It does appear that at the same time he wants to encourage players to get forward and he wants to play a certain degree of attacking football however hasn't set us out to do so.

 

[shorehamview]

Everyone bar Nigel Clough would be the immediate answer, I reckon.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

God no. Not enough bodies in midfield, doesn't play to our strengths , not ensures our best players are on the pitch. 4-2-3-1 for me

 

[Liaminho9]

4-2-3-1

Chelsea are the prime example of how to play that System.

Yes I know we aren't Chelsea, but the concept of type of players needs to be correct.

Back 4:
Full backs need to be able to attack, but cross early, not from the byline.
Centre backs pretty much do what they always do, but need to be able to pass it to the midfield 2.

Midfield 2:
One grafter who breaks up the opposition play, and plays if off to the other midfielder.
The other needs to be a creative spark, key passer and dictator of play.

Midfield 3:
They really need to be interchangeable.
The wide players need to be able to take it to the byline and cross but also be able to cut inside and attack the box directly.
The middle player needs to be almost a second striker, but capable of tracking back also.

Striker:
Mobile, can hold up the ball and bring others into play, but must also be able to go it alone.

 

[Kenilworth]

Not knocking you buddy but we have four completely different strikers in Higdon, Porter, McNulty and Diego.

Aye - completely different to most people's definition of "strikers."

Only Higs and Nuts seem to have any claim to be a striker to my mind and since they cannot muster enough fitness or experience or make themselves available for selection on a regular basis we have a close approximation to fuck all strikers at the club.

Putting the number 9 on the back of Murphy doesn't make him a striker - nor does it strike fear into the heart of the opposition centre backs.

Consequently the only way we can be anything like an effective unit is to play defensively so we don't concede a goal and hope that we nick one at t'other end.

Mark my words - if we don't address this striker problem we will not be troubling the autos at the end of the season - and if we scrape into the play offs without more fire power, well we all know what that results in.

 

[FTPE]

Two up top for me, I know some people want to flood the midfield and feel we would be over run in there if we only played two in the middle but if we had a willing runner in front of them and a target man-then the ball wouldn't spend as much time in the centre of the park anyway, plus when it's wallace and basham running things in future I think we'll be fine in that position.
Just hope mcnulty can be that willing runner and higdon can be that target man

 

[Silent Blade]

Leave it to Clough and his assistants to decide on how we play. We have a good record under him so they know best

 

[highpeakblade]

4-2-3-1

"Chelsea are the prime example of how to play that System."

Yes I know we aren't Chelsea, but the concept of type of players needs to be correct.

Back 4:
Full backs need to be able to attack, but cross early, not from the byline.
Centre backs pretty much do what they always do, but need to be able to pass it to the midfield 2.

Midfield 2:
One grafter who breaks up the opposition play, and plays if off to the other midfielder.
The other needs to be a creative spark, key passer and dictator of play.

Midfield 3:
They really need to be interchangeable.
The wide players need to be able to take it to the byline and cross but also be able to cut inside and attack the box directly.
The middle player needs to be almost a second striker, but capable of tracking back also.

Striker:
Mobile, can hold up the ball and bring others into play, but must also be able to go it alone.

Chelsea have the quality of players at their disposal in order to play this sort of system. I remember recently reading an interview with Adam Le Fondre regarding Ole Gunnar's sacking from Cardiff and not in any way do I think Clough should be sacked because regardless he still gets results however a lot of what Alfie said rings true to our situation at the minute.

In a Nutshell Alfie (in my opinon) rightly Said:

“When Ole was in charge he probably tried to over-complicate things for the Championship, which is a basic league,” says Le Fondre.

“In this division there is a need to work hard, out-battle the other team and earn the right to play. We worked hard over our last two matches and against Ipswich came out firing in the second half, got our luck and came out winners.

“We have a top-quality squad and there isn’t any need to complicate things. It was the right move by our new manager for a return to basics. We each know our jobs and the player next to us knows exactly what they are doing. That is the right way forward.”

I think you could draw a few similarities from this. Rather than trying to over complicate things you need to play to your strengths. I personally think that our squad is more than good enough to gain an automatic spot in this league. It is all about doing the basics correctly.

 

[DazBlade88]

As I've said countless times, the 4-5-1/4-2-3-1 is the way to go in the modern game.

4-4-2 is too limited and allows you to get overrun in midfield easily.

The key is playing the right striker who will stay in the middle. Higdon can do this and score goals but because he's a big lad and looks lazy he's abused. The striker should be chasing down the centre halves and the defensive midfielder occassionally. Leave the full backs to the wingers. McNulty could do the job aswell, but we could do with a third striker who has more pace to add a different dimension.

Once we have that, it's about getting attacking midfielders/wingers in the box to support. That formation gets as many in the box as 4-4-2 but is much more flexible and solid without the ball.

 

[Kenilworth]

Leave it to Clough and his assistants to decide on how we play. We have a good record under him so they know best

Agree but I believe that they also know we need more fire power otherwise we will be struggling to make an impact in the shake up.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Two up top for me, I know some people want to flood the midfield and feel we would be over run in there if we only played two in the middle but if we had a willing runner in front of them and a target man-then the ball wouldn't spend as much time in the centre of the park anyway, plus when it's wallace and basham running things in future I think we'll be fine in that position.
Just hope mcnulty can be that willing runner and higdon can be that target man

3-5-2 is a very good system if you have the players. Midfield is never outnumbered and who needs more than 3 at the back for our home games in particular. This is league 1.

Last Saturday I really do think 3 at the back would have sorted those two Oldham strikers much better than 4. The problem was nobody knew who was picking up what because they were so mobile and flexible, popping up here there and everywhere. 3 know their responsibilities much clearer than 4, believe it or not. 3 know they are there to defend, the full backs in a 4 have other duties. In the first half I reckon we wasted 2 men, one at the back and the other lost between Basham and Doyle somewhere.Basham was in Doyle's areas most of the game. At every stoppage Doyle was telling him to move forward.

As for the Doyle or Basham debate. In the last 20 minutes Doyle was helping out the defence in the box, supporting every player in possession, he was the one there for the player boxed in the defensive corners, the one plugging gaps when the opposition were on the break. Basham, sorry he's got maybe 300 games less experience in midfield than Doyle. Clough talks about experience in key positions, Basham has only just over a hundred games under his belt and the majority of those were in defence where he looks a player.

 

[Bladesman]

 

[FTPE]

3-5-2 is a very good system if you have the players. Midfield is never outnumbered and who needs more than 3 at the back for our home games in particular. This is league 1.

Last Saturday I really do think 3 at the back would have sorted those two Oldham strikers much better than 4. The problem was nobody knew who was picking up what because they were so mobile and flexible, popping up here there and everywhere. 3 know their responsibilities much clearer than 4, believe it or not. 3 know they are there to defend, the full backs in a 4 have other duties. In the first half I reckon we wasted 2 men, one at the back and the other lost between Basham and Doyle somewhere.Basham was in Doyle's areas most of the game. At every stoppage Doyle was telling him to move forward.

As for the Doyle or Basham debate. In the last 20 minutes Doyle was helping out the defence in the box, supporting every player in possession, he was the one there for the player boxed in the defensive corners, the one plugging gaps when the opposition were on the break. Basham, sorry he's got maybe 300 games less experience in midfield than Doyle. Clough talks about experience in key positions, Basham has only just over a hundred games under his belt and the majority of those were in defence where he looks a player.

BUT
when basham first came, Doyle was dropped.
When Wallace is fit, Doyle usually gets dropped.
I know Doyle is good at what he does but so was Monty, and I don't think we need a player like him in this league either.
Defensively basham is shit hot- hence him being my first choice center half, but he's a goal threat too- hence cloughie pushing him forward Saturday. You don't want a poor mans Claude Makélélé
in this league you want a poor mans veira.... If you get me?

 

[Woodwardfan]

BUT
when basham first came, Doyle was dropped.
When Wallace is fit, Doyle usually gets dropped.
I know Doyle is good at what he does but so was Monty, and I don't think we need a player like him in this league either.
Defensively basham is shit hot- hence him being my first choice center half, but he's a goal threat too- hence cloughie pushing him forward Saturday. You don't want a poor mans Claude Makélélé
in this league you want a poor mans veira.... If you get me?

Doyle does what Doyle does, week in week out. If he doesn't get picked that's when you miss him and appreciate him the most. Can Basham step in his shoes? Maybe but do realise Basham is a defender cum midfielder. He's played 170 games or so, the majority in defence. He doesn't score goals in either role. Up to now he has not played defensive midfield for us, time will tell because it is going to happen. Our season may depend on his success more than any striker we might recruit.

 

[highpeakblade]

Just look how many teams have secured promotion from this league playing 4-4-2 tactics and doing the basics correctly. Football is moving on and teams are trying to play clever football however a large percentage of football in this league is still very much about winning the physical battle and putting chances away. It is all good and well attempting to play modern systems and flashy football but a good bit of this relies on your opponents allowing you to do so and our opponents this season have parked the bus and have simply gone out to win every ball and stop us playing football.

 

[bartman]

I don't think our midfield is good enough for a 4-4-2 formation. A midfield of Murphy,JCR, Scougill and Doyle would be far too lightweight. You would two athletes in central midfield e.g. a fit Wallace(yeah right) and Basham along with pacy but strong wide midfielders and full backs. Murphy is not strong enough to do this however I could see him playing down the middle with another striker.

 

[highpeakblade]

I don't think our midfield is good enough for a 4-4-2 formation. A midfield of Murphy,JCR, Scougill and Doyle would be far too lightweight. You would two athletes in central midfield e.g. a fit Wallace(yeah right) and Basham along with pacy but strong wide midfielders and full backs. Murphy is not strong enough to do this however I could see him playing down the middle with another striker.

What about Reedy? He's been a stand out player and a breath of fresh air for me, him and Doyle have both been quite composed and have won quite a bit on the middle of the park.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

I'd like to see Wallace and Reed develop as the two. Just as I'd like to see Basham and McGahey play together as the long term centre half solution.
The three behind a striker is a pick 'em, but would get the best out of several of our players plus you'd get the width from the full backs, again offerer protection from the numbers in midfield. I'd still like to see Flynn at full back in that formation, not convinced it would work but would like to see it tried.

 

[bartman]

What about Reedy? He's been a stand out player and a breath of fresh air for me, him and Doyle have both been quite composed and have won quite a bit on the middle of the park.

I think Reed will end up replacing Doyle but at the moment we are playing 3 in central midfield. Would Doyle and Reed as a central two be strong enough ? I certainly wouldn't want Baxter or Scougill in there. It mat work as a 4-4-1-1 with Baxter behind but still not two up front.

I would love us to go 4-4-2 but I don't think we have the players to do it

 

[Woodwardfan]

The manager has bought umpteen players in the past year. He could well have chosen players for the system which evolved last season. The consensus on here is probably right, that we don't have the players for 4-4-2. Have we the players for 4-5-1 though? Have we got the "1" yet? Are the "4" sorted? The "5" seem to be covered at least, yet not settled in anybody's mind.

We need to get a settled side soon for this campaign.

 

[jt64]

Leaves you way too lightweight in midfield does 442. No for me

 

[Bergen Blade]

I don't think any team in the top 8 normally plays 4-4-2.

 

[Bergen Blade]

I don't think we're far away from finding the right balance within the current formation, but Baxter up front is not working at home, so we have to make a change there. I'm hoping we'll find an extra option this week, someone who can add mobility AND physical presence.

I think it's difficult to set up a strong and well balanced team in a 4-4-2 formation at the moment.