Should we have gone 4-4-2 today

[kevkj]

I was very surprised we did not go 4-4-2 today we have struggled all season with the 4-2-3-1 all season against packed defences.
I would have gone Crouch or Walters with Diouf from the off against non league opponents.

[Sergeant Muttley]

In hindsight yes because in the 1st half today the defenders and midfielders had no out ball/focal point which Hughes said himsen after.

[wearestoke80]

Why we played 5 in midfield against a non-league team is beyond me

[Olgrligm]

Two defensive midfielders against Wrexham was excessive. Cameron played 90 minutes on Thursday, so I'd have rested him and probably started Ireland or Shenton.

Part of the problem was that Charlie Adam decided that he was going to be the Hollywood pass playing star today, so instead of playing as an advanced midfielder, he came deep to receive the ball. You therefore had three defensive midfielders and a great big hexagon in between the edge of their box and the edge of the centre circle that no Stoke player dared to step in - the place where Bojan or Ireland would normally operate.

Obviously, we looked better when we went 4-4-2, but it depends on how much you'd want to play Crouch and Walters, given that they both played a big part on Thursday.

[whatsashig]

They scored when we went 4:4:2 just saying like . I think a lot of today hinges on how they played first 15, typical approach, then sit back and wait for the frustration, I would like to think the coaching staff saw this and then went with sod 4:4:2 it is then, changed things, started to look like midfield did something not just up top

[dadofsam]

I would have pressed hard and high from the off

[2004]

Hughes didn't want Crouch and Walters playing any part today unless necessary and the only other sriker we have is Diouf so we started with one up front.