Two tens - formation tweak

[Steve Mackan]

In the pre-match interview with RS, Wilder alludes two playing two numbers tens out of Duffy, Brooks and Holmes. I've been hoping we'd try this for quite some time. Particularly exciting in regards to the return of Brooks, as he's not disciplined enough to play in-behind on his own and he's often absent up-front.

Reckon this will be the first big formation change since starting the 3-5-2 or will we just lose a striker?

*Note - Ched Evans cannot play the number 10 role.

 

[Ldn_Rd_Blades]

I'd guess we'd lose a striker 3 4 2 1

 

[Esablade]

You’d think this would be an away formation but I’ve a sneaking feeling we might see it against Villa...

 

[BushBlade]

I'd guess we'd lose a striker 3 4 2 1

Which would make signing Wilson a bit strange.

 

[Ricky]

Brooks and Holmes would be our best 'two tens' combination.

 

[Fanny magnet]

Brooks and Holmes would be our best 'two tens' combination.

Would it be more a 3-5-3 ?

I think we have some real options now don't we to change the shape during games

 

[UnitedBlade]

Would it be more a 3-5-3 ?

I think we have some real options now don't we to change the shape during games

If we can get away with 3 5 3, we should definitely go for that.

 

[metty]

We could always try and slip another couple on while the officials weren't looking

 

[Fanny magnet]

If we can get away with 3 5 3, we should definitely go for that.

Oops

 

[Lowen]

Wilder has at times played this like against Millwall with Brooks and Duffy and I believe we did it with Jay O'Shea and Duffy aswell last season. Spurs have also had some success with this with Eriksen and Alli as the two behind Kane. This could definitely get the best out of Brooks.

 

[Finn Keane o' Balmaqueen]

Anyone else witness Craig Levein's 4-6-0 dream tactics whilst managing Scotland v Czech Republic?

No?

Good, it'll have scarred you for life.

 

[Tom Bott]

*Note - Ched Evans cannot play the number 10 role.

And there I was, just about to start a thread - Will Ched Evans be our next Prime Minister.

 

[Tunstall Fred]

And there I was, just about to start a thread - Will Ched Evans be our next Prime Minister.

Not Prime Minister,but I reckon Home Secretary

 

[JohnDenver]

Reckon this will be the first big formation change since starting the 3-5-2 or will we just lose a striker?

The biggest interdimensional cross rip since the Tunguska blast of 1909.

 

[robbiez666]

Can Wilson play on his own upfront?

 

[Blade56]

Just giving Preston something to think about. They might play the pigs formation 1-10-0-0..... Ops sorry 1-9-0-0

 

[BushBlade]

Can Wilson play on his own upfront?

Even if he can, what about Donaldo and Clarke, who we've just given a new contract to? And Sharp?

 

[Alfreton14Blade]

Two tens?

 

[Ldn_Rd_Blades]

Which would make signing Wilson a bit strange.

Wilson will play when we play our normal formation

 

[Pinchy]

Can Wilson play on his own upfront?

No. He’d be hopelessly outnumbered by opposition players all over the pitch...

 

[Bladezz]

We played something similar last year at Northampton away with Duffy and Carruthers. We are flexible and now we have the players to do it.

Once Brooks is back I can see us playing this way too.

 

[robbiez666]

Even if he can, what about Donaldo and Clarke, who we've just given a new contract to? And Sharp?

I would be shocked if we've been allowed to loan Wilson without the understanding that he'll start the majority of games.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

Two no 10's?

What has been apparent even last season and this season is that we need clever players in the final third to break teams down that park the bus.

Formation to me, isn't really a problem as clever players will resolve the problem regardless of formation.

We will have to wait and see if the playerrs CW has brought in can do the job - the signs look good though and there is still Holmes to come in and Brooks to start again.

UTB

 

[LoughboroBlade]

The key dynamic of our magnificent system is the wingback/overlapping-centreback aspect. We’ve already seen minor tweaks to this as situations have warranted – inverting the midfield trio to swap the Duffy role for a deep-lying role being the obvious example so far. Two 10s would be another minor tweak where we simply take out one of the strikers (but should still provide an attacking formation). So long as we keep the key dynamic, which is a delight to watch, I’m happy with minor tweaks in the middle.

 

[Steve Mackan]

Two no 10's?

What has been apparent even last season and this season is that we need clever players in the final third to break teams down that park the bus.

Formation to me, isn't really a problem as clever players will resolve the problem regardless of formation.

UTB

I think formation can be a problem, or rather a solution. The more unpredictable runs of a Brooks from deeper, and the danger of Holmes shooting from outside the box is definitely likely to pull defences about a bit more.