Time to change formation

[Balham]

Another insipid display and increasing levels of mutiny in the crowd. Is it time to ditch the three/five at the back?

We've been outplayed by Boro and Blackburn's 4-2-3-1 while struggling to beat Watford and Reading playing a similar system. Football is a funny old game in that formations and systems come and go as managers figure out how to beat the formation du jour. 3-5-2 was the radical change, it's now being combatted successfully by the renaissance of the 4-2-3-1.

We have the players to play a 4-2-3-1. It would involve some big calls but, for me, it's time to leave the Wilderball 5-3-2 behind.

Back four: Baldock - Ahmedhodzic - Clark/Egan - Robinson
Deep lying two: Doyle - Norwood
Attacking trident: Berge - Ndiaye - McAtee
Front man: McBurnie

The back four's natural defensive inclination allows the front four to have a bit more freedom. Having Doyle next to Norwood reduces the burden on Norwood and gives the opposition double the work to close down the playmakers. Up front we revert to the three behind the front man which was successful at the end of last season, freeing up Berge and McAtee to attack

Something has to change. If we line up with the same busted players in the same busted formation for the next 10 games we'll lose more than we win.

 

[Klaatu Barada Nikto]

Another insipid display and increasing levels of mutiny in the crowd. Is it time to ditch the three/five at the back?

We've been outplayed by Boro and Blackburn's 4-2-3-1 while struggling to beat Watford and Reading playing a similar system. Football is a funny old game in that formations and systems come and go as managers figure out how to beat the formation du jour. 3-5-2 was the radical change, it's now being combatted successfully by the renaissance of the 4-2-3-1.

We have the players to play a 4-2-3-1. It would involve some big calls but, for me, it's time to leave the Wilderball 5-3-2 behind.

Back four: Baldock - Ahmedhodzic - Clark/Egan - Robinson
Deep lying two: Doyle - Norwood
Attacking trident: Berge - Ndiaye - McAtee
Front man: McBurnie

The back four's natural defensive inclination allows the front four to have a bit more freedom. Having Doyle next to Norwood reduces the burden on Norwood and gives the opposition double the work to close down the playmakers. Up front we revert to the three behind the front man which was successful at the end of last season, freeing up Berge and McAtee to attack

Something has to change. If we line up with the same busted players in the same busted formation for the next 10 games we'll lose more than we win.

The exactly the team I'd pick as well, but it's not going to happen.

 

[AdamSufc1997]

Always get told we don't have the players for a 4 back formation apperantly...

 

[Blade21]

Won't happy under heckinbottle

 

[Bladesman]

Wes
Baldock - Anel - Egan - Clark - Lowe (Ideally another left back, could play Robbo there but I'd not risk it)
Berge - Doyle - McAtee
Ndiaye - McBurnie

 

[Big.Dane.w]

Berge still gets in everyone’s lineups

 

[Karaoke Blade]

Wes
Baldock - Anel - Egan - Clark - Lowe (Ideally another left back, could play Robbo there but I'd not risk it)
Berge - Doyle - McAtee
Ndiaye - McBurnie

TBH, I'd risk me in place of Lowe at the moment. And I'm right footed. And 63. With arthritis.
Get Clark in and push JLT out left. He has played a major part of his career at left back BTW.

 

[Bladesman]

TBH, I'd risk me in place of Lowe at the moment. And I'm right footed. And 63. With arthritis.
Get Clark in and push JLT out left. He has played a major part of his career at left back BTW.

I know but my worry is JLT doesn't really have the pace to get up and down that left side as well as beat his man.

 

[Black Cloud]

TBH, I'd risk me in place of Lowe at the moment. And I'm right footed. And 63. With arthritis.
Get Clark in and push JLT out left. He has played a major part of his career at left back BTW.

Lowe , with the exception of less than half a dozen games, has been awfull since arriving. Anel should play with Egan in the centre with George and Robbo either side
A midfield four of Bogle, Doyle, Olly & Sander/Mcatee with Mc B and Illyman up top…

 

[Nightsweats]

Why do people bang on about formations when the person who does all that is a clueless coach with absolutelly no idea how to manage?

 

[bakeblade]

Another insipid display and increasing levels of mutiny in the crowd. Is it time to ditch the three/five at the back?

We've been outplayed by Boro and Blackburn's 4-2-3-1 while struggling to beat Watford and Reading playing a similar system. Football is a funny old game in that formations and systems come and go as managers figure out how to beat the formation du jour. 3-5-2 was the radical change, it's now being combatted successfully by the renaissance of the 4-2-3-1.

We have the players to play a 4-2-3-1. It would involve some big calls but, for me, it's time to leave the Wilderball 5-3-2 behind.

Back four: Baldock - Ahmedhodzic - Clark/Egan - Robinson
Deep lying two: Doyle - Norwood
Attacking trident: Berge - Ndiaye - McAtee
Front man: McBurnie

The back four's natural defensive inclination allows the front four to have a bit more freedom. Having Doyle next to Norwood reduces the burden on Norwood and gives the opposition double the work to close down the playmakers. Up front we revert to the three behind the front man which was successful at the end of last season, freeing up Berge and McAtee to attack

Something has to change. If we line up with the same busted players in the same busted formation for the next 10 games we'll lose more than we win.

I've been saying the same for weeks, all premier league teams and most championship teams play 4 at the back.

 

[bakeblade]

Another insipid display and increasing levels of mutiny in the crowd. Is it time to ditch the three/five at the back?

We've been outplayed by Boro and Blackburn's 4-2-3-1 while struggling to beat Watford and Reading playing a similar system. Football is a funny old game in that formations and systems come and go as managers figure out how to beat the formation du jour. 3-5-2 was the radical change, it's now being combatted successfully by the renaissance of the 4-2-3-1.

We have the players to play a 4-2-3-1. It would involve some big calls but, for me, it's time to leave the Wilderball 5-3-2 behind.

Back four: Baldock - Ahmedhodzic - Clark/Egan - Robinson
Deep lying two: Doyle - Norwood
Attacking trident: Berge - Ndiaye - McAtee
Front man: McBurnie

The back four's natural defensive inclination allows the front four to have a bit more freedom. Having Doyle next to Norwood reduces the burden on Norwood and gives the opposition double the work to close down the playmakers. Up front we revert to the three behind the front man which was successful at the end of last season, freeing up Berge and McAtee to attack

Something has to change. If we line up with the same busted players in the same busted formation for the next 10 games we'll lose more than we win.

I've been saying the same for weeks, all premier league teams and most championship teams play 4 at the back.

 

[Millhousesblade1889]

Another insipid display and increasing levels of mutiny in the crowd. Is it time to ditch the three/five at the back?

We've been outplayed by Boro and Blackburn's 4-2-3-1 while struggling to beat Watford and Reading playing a similar system. Football is a funny old game in that formations and systems come and go as managers figure out how to beat the formation du jour. 3-5-2 was the radical change, it's now being combatted successfully by the renaissance of the 4-2-3-1.

We have the players to play a 4-2-3-1. It would involve some big calls but, for me, it's time to leave the Wilderball 5-3-2 behind.

Back four: Baldock - Ahmedhodzic - Clark/Egan - Robinson
Deep lying two: Doyle - Norwood
Attacking trident: Berge - Ndiaye - McAtee
Front man: McBurnie

The back four's natural defensive inclination allows the front four to have a bit more freedom. Having Doyle next to Norwood reduces the burden on Norwood and gives the opposition double the work to close down the playmakers. Up front we revert to the three behind the front man which was successful at the end of last season, freeing up Berge and McAtee to attack

Something has to change. If we line up with the same busted players in the same busted formation for the next 10 games we'll lose more than we win.

I’d agree with a large chuck of this but switch NDiaye on the wing. He was incredible for Senegal in the WC on the right.

Robinson offers nothing going forward so playing him LB resolves nothing, think Swansea (a) last season. You’re better off sticking with Lowe until Osborn is back even though he’s having a tough time.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Good suggestion but won’t happen

 

[Karaoke Blade]

I've been saying the same for weeks, all premier league teams and most championship teams play 4 at the back.

You can say that again.

 

[A Storm of Blades]

Another insipid display and increasing levels of mutiny in the crowd. Is it time to ditch the three/five at the back?

We've been outplayed by Boro and Blackburn's 4-2-3-1 while struggling to beat Watford and Reading playing a similar system. Football is a funny old game in that formations and systems come and go as managers figure out how to beat the formation du jour. 3-5-2 was the radical change, it's now being combatted successfully by the renaissance of the 4-2-3-1.

We have the players to play a 4-2-3-1. It would involve some big calls but, for me, it's time to leave the Wilderball 5-3-2 behind.

Back four: Baldock - Ahmedhodzic - Clark/Egan - Robinson
Deep lying two: Doyle - Norwood
Attacking trident: Berge - Ndiaye - McAtee
Front man: McBurnie

The back four's natural defensive inclination allows the front four to have a bit more freedom. Having Doyle next to Norwood reduces the burden on Norwood and gives the opposition double the work to close down the playmakers. Up front we revert to the three behind the front man which was successful at the end of last season, freeing up Berge and McAtee to attack

Something has to change. If we line up with the same busted players in the same busted formation for the next 10 games we'll lose more than we win.

Fuck me, it’s Prem 2nd season deja vu.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Another insipid display and increasing levels of mutiny in the crowd. Is it time to ditch the three/five at the back?

We've been outplayed by Boro and Blackburn's 4-2-3-1 while struggling to beat Watford and Reading playing a similar system. Football is a funny old game in that formations and systems come and go as managers figure out how to beat the formation du jour. 3-5-2 was the radical change, it's now being combatted successfully by the renaissance of the 4-2-3-1.

We have the players to play a 4-2-3-1. It would involve some big calls but, for me, it's time to leave the Wilderball 5-3-2 behind.

Back four: Baldock - Ahmedhodzic - Clark/Egan - Robinson
Deep lying two: Doyle - Norwood
Attacking trident: Berge - Ndiaye - McAtee
Front man: McBurnie

The back four's natural defensive inclination allows the front four to have a bit more freedom. Having Doyle next to Norwood reduces the burden on Norwood and gives the opposition double the work to close down the playmakers. Up front we revert to the three behind the front man which was successful at the end of last season, freeing up Berge and McAtee to attack

Something has to change. If we line up with the same busted players in the same busted formation for the next 10 games we'll lose more than we win.

Not a bad suggestion, though not sure if it's too late in the season to try something so new. At the moment though, Hecky may be falling into the trap of leaning on "experience" aka ageing players who used to be decent.

In your team I think Ismaila Coulibaly would have complimented Doyle, and as we're experimenting I'd look to try Bogle in one of those attacking roles.

 

[Balham]

Not a bad suggestion, though not sure if it's too late in the season to try something so new. At the moment though, Hecky may be falling into the trap of leaning on "experience" aka ageing players who used to be decent.

In your team I think Ismaila Coulibaly would have complimented Doyle, and as we're experimenting I'd look to try Bogle in one of those attacking roles.

I didn't get as far as the subs. We need options on the bench, not more of the same which seems to the trap Heckingbottom is falling into.

Our options on the bench should include the option of attacking fullbacks, pacy strikers and athletic midfielders even if that does come with a lessening of control.

 

[Isaw Joeshaw]

Another insipid display and increasing levels of mutiny in the crowd. Is it time to ditch the three/five at the back?

We've been outplayed by Boro and Blackburn's 4-2-3-1 while struggling to beat Watford and Reading playing a similar system. Football is a funny old game in that formations and systems come and go as managers figure out how to beat the formation du jour. 3-5-2 was the radical change, it's now being combatted successfully by the renaissance of the 4-2-3-1.

We have the players to play a 4-2-3-1. It would involve some big calls but, for me, it's time to leave the Wilderball 5-3-2 behind.

Back four: Baldock - Ahmedhodzic - Clark/Egan - Robinson
Deep lying two: Doyle - Norwood
Attacking trident: Berge - Ndiaye - McAtee
Front man: McBurnie

The back four's natural defensive inclination allows the front four to have a bit more freedom. Having Doyle next to Norwood reduces the burden on Norwood and gives the opposition double the work to close down the playmakers. Up front we revert to the three behind the front man which was successful at the end of last season, freeing up Berge and McAtee to attack

Something has to change. If we line up with the same busted players in the same busted formation for the next 10 games we'll lose more than we win.

For a number of years , a few of us on here have been saying that we need to develop a system using a back four , if only at least as an alternative to a three with wingbacks .

As has been mentioned before , the success of the latter depends almost entirely on having two players with the technical ability , determination and stamina to be highly effective in two different roles , those of being both fullbacks and wingers in the same match .

For a golden period under Wilder we had those players in prime George Baldock and Enda Stevens , who consistently produced outstanding and sometimes astonishing performances , leading to many excellent results .

It is blindingly obvious and has been for some time , that this is no longer the case and that the present incumbents fall well short of the standards required in order to be successful in those roles . Bogle is a talented though sometimes frustrating attacking player but defensively weak , whilst Lowe is at best absolutely mediocre in both respects .

With regard to this , I have some sympathy with Hecky and co. in losing the one player on our books who is thoroughly competent in this role , I.e. RND , who I am convinced would have had us 4 or 5 points better off had he been playing over the last 3 months or so .

I am a great believer in the old adage - “If it ain’t broke , don’t fix it “ but our system clearly is broke and has been for some time , and if we are to have any chance of promotion needs an urgent overhaul .

I have been highly supportive of Hecky and co. and appreciate what they have achieved so far , but believe that the time has now come for them to adopt a different approach if we are to have any chance of being promoted .

The good news is that it doesn’t need to be radical or groundbreaking , but merely to follow the system employed by not only the most successful teams in this country but across the football world , that of 4-2-3-1 or some variation thereof .

Using that formation with the players currently available , my choice would look something like -

Wes

Baldock. Anel . Egan . Robinson

Doyle . Norwood

Bogle . Ndiaye. McAtee


McBurnie / Sharp

I’m pretty sure that such a line up would be far less vulnerable to sudden breakaways whilst at the same time offering a far greater attacking threat than our current turgid and largely ineffective approach .

 

[DeanLearner'sCat]

I don't think it's really about formations as much as intent and style of play. It doesn't matter how many are at the back if our whole approach is to play for set pieces or hope for some individual brilliance. I don't think that's a sustainable way to win games. Hecky didn't like it when people would say we weren't playing well, even though we were winning, but we weren't. Now the results are matching the performances.

 

[Klaatu Barada Nikto]

Another insipid display and increasing levels of mutiny in the crowd. Is it time to ditch the three/five at the back?

We've been outplayed by Boro and Blackburn's 4-2-3-1 while struggling to beat Watford and Reading playing a similar system. Football is a funny old game in that formations and systems come and go as managers figure out how to beat the formation du jour. 3-5-2 was the radical change, it's now being combatted successfully by the renaissance of the 4-2-3-1.

We have the players to play a 4-2-3-1. It would involve some big calls but, for me, it's time to leave the Wilderball 5-3-2 behind.

Back four: Baldock - Ahmedhodzic - Clark/Egan - Robinson
Deep lying two: Doyle - Norwood
Attacking trident: Berge - Ndiaye - McAtee
Front man: McBurnie

The back four's natural defensive inclination allows the front four to have a bit more freedom. Having Doyle next to Norwood reduces the burden on Norwood and gives the opposition double the work to close down the playmakers. Up front we revert to the three behind the front man which was successful at the end of last season, freeing up Berge and McAtee to attack

Something has to change. If we line up with the same busted players in the same busted formation for the next 10 games we'll lose more than we win.

For a number of years , a few of us on here have been saying that we need to develop a system using a back four , if only at least as an alternative to a three with wingbacks .

As has been mentioned before , the success of the latter depends almost entirely on having two players with the technical ability , determination and stamina to be highly effective in two different roles , those of being both fullbacks and wingers in the same match .

For a golden period under Wilder we had those players in prime George Baldock and Enda Stevens , who consistently produced outstanding and sometimes astonishing performances , leading to many excellent results .

It is blindingly obvious and has been for some time , that this is no longer the case and that the present incumbents fall well short of the standards required in order to be successful in those roles . Bogle is a talented though sometimes frustrating attacking player but defensively weak , whilst Lowe is at best absolutely mediocre in both respects .

With regard to this , I have some sympathy with Hecky and co. in losing the one player on our books who is thoroughly competent in this role , I.e. RND , who I am convinced would have had us 4 or 5 points better off had he been playing over the last 3 months or so .

I am a great believer in the old adage - “If it ain’t broke , don’t fix it “ but our system clearly is broke and has been for some time , and if we are to have any chance of promotion needs an urgent overhaul .

I have been highly supportive of Hecky and co. and appreciate what they have achieved so far , but believe that the time has now come for them to adopt a different approach if we are to have any chance of being promoted .

The good news is that it doesn’t need to be radical or groundbreaking , but merely to follow the system employed by not only the most successful teams in this country but across the football world , that of 4-2-3-1 or some variation thereof .

Using that formation with the players currently available , my choice would look something like -

Wes

Baldock. Anel . Egan . Robinson

Doyle . Norwood

Bogle . Ndiaye. McAtee


McBurnie / Sharp

I’m pretty sure that such a line up would be far less vulnerable to sudden breakaways whilst at the same time offering a far greater attacking threat than our current turgid and largely ineffective approach .

If you replaced Doyle with Osborn, you could swap between 3-5-2 and 4-2-3-1 in a game with no personnel changes.

 

[CyloCybin]

Back four: Baldock - Ahmedhodzic - Clark/Egan - Robinson
Deep lying two: Doyle - Norwood
Attacking trident: Berge - Ndiaye - McAtee
Front man: McBurnie

Damn I'd love to see this

 

[Smirth]

Nice idea but never going to happen. For as long as Heckingbottom is in charge we are wedded to this system regardless of whether the players fit it. You just need to look at what he did with Khadra for that, only ever played him as a striker or a wing back, neither of which were his positions.

 

[CoatesyBlade]

I put basically the same team down on another thread.
Hecky did say post match that changes to personal and formation may be required. So it’s gonna be interesting to see the team selection come Wednesday evening.
We need to get after the opposition and play to OUR strengths.
Now that the dust has settled on yesterday I’m a bit more rational this morning.
I’m confident a positive change in formation will change the mentality of the players. We have the players to do this.

 

[Balham]

If you replaced Doyle with Osborn, you could swap between 3-5-2 and 4-2-3-1 in a game with no personnel changes.

The issue with that is that Osborn isn't as good as Doyle.

 

[SwissBlade]

Berge still gets in everyone’s lineups

I was thinking the same

 

[Klaatu Barada Nikto]

The issue with that is that Osborn isn't as good as Doyle.

He's better at some things, such as tackling.

 

[robbiez666]

Not a bad suggestion, though not sure if it's too late in the season to try something so new. At the moment though, Hecky may be falling into the trap of leaning on "experience" aka ageing players who used to be decent.

In your team I think Ismaila Coulibaly would have complimented Doyle, and as we're experimenting I'd look to try Bogle in one of those attacking roles.

I highlighted the issue with trying to change formation. We hardly train when we're playing weekend - widweek - weekend, Not enough time to train a new formation. tweaks, maybe.

 

[Proper Blade]

I agree that a change in formation is badly needed and long overdue.

We were so good in the Wilder days because every player was playing in their best position. We were getting the best out of every single player because they were in a position and a system that was tailor made for them. The overlapping centre backs were a perfect example of this.

The issue now is that we're sticking rigidly to that system, but no longer have the players to play it. Four or five players do not look comfortable in this system, and we're not changing anything.