|
4:4:2
Nov 29, 2017 23:33:04 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2017 23:33:04 GMT
I thought we switched to 4:4:2 about halfway through the first half and as if by magic, the team looked more coherent - players knew their postions, knew their jobs and the whole thing looked a whole lot more solid.
as it transpired luck was defintiily not on our side and a 3:0 result I thought was pretty harsh
but, if we drop Pieters For Ramadan and go with exactly the same 4:4:2 on Saturday with Crouch and Diouf up front - we've enough to stay up
as for the manager - thanks, but no thanks - you are the weakest link ---- bye bye
|
|
|
Post by Pugsley on Nov 29, 2017 23:34:15 GMT
I thought we switched to 4:4:2 about halfway through the first half and as if by magic, the team looked more coherent - players knew their postions, knew their jobs and the whole thing looked a whole lot more solid. as it transpired luck was defintiily not on our side and a 3:0 result I thought was pretty harsh but, if we drop Pieters For Ramadan and go with exactly the same 4:4:2 on Saturday with Crouch and Diouf up front - we've enough to stay up as for the manager - thanks, but no thanks - you are the weakest link ---- bye bye Ramadan left back? Another mentalist.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Nov 29, 2017 23:34:39 GMT
I thought we switched to 4:4:2 about halfway through the first half and as if by magic, the team looked more coherent - players knew their postions, knew their jobs and the whole thing looked a whole lot more solid. as it transpired luck was defintiily not on our side and a 3:0 result I thought was pretty harsh but, if we drop Pieters For Ramadan and go with exactly the same 4:4:2 on Saturday with Crouch and Diouf up front - we've enough to stay up as for the manager - thanks, but no thanks - you are the weakest link ---- bye bye You’re playing Ramadan left back Tone?
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 29, 2017 23:41:31 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2017 23:41:31 GMT
or Tymon
Eric is just not good enough a football player
|
|
|
Post by professorplump on Nov 29, 2017 23:52:45 GMT
I like the three at the back formation in theory but we haven't got the players for it so I agree that we should bin it and go for a 4-2-3-1 with Zouma at RB, BMI and Shawcross in the middle and Diouf up front with Shaq at No.10.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2017 23:58:41 GMT
Personally I think the league is too quick for him to be effective long term during a game. I find him to be effective in bursts and I'm not sure we have the structure around him to carry that off, certainly not out wide. Sure, he's created goals and scored goals but at what cost to the overall team? The better test to your theory will be him in a 4 base system as the 3 base system doesn't suit Shawcross, Pieters, Indi, Wimmer and arguably Zouma. They all look lost and the pressure on the midfield two is crazy as a result. How Allen has held it together I don't know. The problem in shifting back to a 1 up front with 1 behind is who plays up front? It's like 2014 all over again, only with more broken parts than before. I could understand the ‘at what cost the team’ argument if he wasn’t carrying the team’s attacking threat squarely on his shoulders. Who else comes close to creating what he does? Take him out and who’s going to do anything? We have a problem with who plays up front whichever system we’re playing. In the current system nobody because the system is built for him. He'll naturally carry the can because it's all about him finding space, with little to no defensive requirements, getting on the ball and creating. Even Choupo on the other side has to tuck in and do a bit off the ball and act as a second striker when we have it. The manager has been quite open about it going right back to last season when he first tried it and it first failed. A different system will change the whole dynamics and bring others in. It's a pity that we can't choose any system currently that doesn't have holes in it. Quite shocking really.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Nov 30, 2017 0:03:58 GMT
I could understand the ‘at what cost the team’ argument if he wasn’t carrying the team’s attacking threat squarely on his shoulders. Who else comes close to creating what he does? Take him out and who’s going to do anything? We have a problem with who plays up front whichever system we’re playing. In the current system nobody because the system is built for him. He'll naturally carry the can because it's all about him finding space, with little to no defensive requirements, getting on the ball and creating. Even Choupo on the other side has to tuck in and do a bit off the ball and act as a second striker when we have it. The manager has been quite open about it going right back to last season when he first tried it and it first failed. A different system will change the whole dynamics and bring others in. It's a pity that we can't choose any system currently that doesn't have holes in it. Quite shocking really. That’s the point though - we don’t brilliantly have the players for any system so at least trying to get the best out of our best player seems sensible. I’d bin off the back three but persevere with trying to find a system that gives Shaqiri some freedom, because who else is going to produce what he does, even if it’s sporadic?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 0:11:25 GMT
In the current system nobody because the system is built for him. He'll naturally carry the can because it's all about him finding space, with little to no defensive requirements, getting on the ball and creating. Even Choupo on the other side has to tuck in and do a bit off the ball and act as a second striker when we have it. The manager has been quite open about it going right back to last season when he first tried it and it first failed. A different system will change the whole dynamics and bring others in. It's a pity that we can't choose any system currently that doesn't have holes in it. Quite shocking really. That’s the point though - we don’t brilliantly have the players for any system so at least trying to get the best out of our best player seems sensible. I’d bin off the back three but persevere with trying to find a system that gives Shaqiri some freedom, because who else is going to produce what he does, even if it’s sporadic? Number 10 in a 3 behind it is then, or bust. Literally.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 1:55:01 GMT
4231:
Butland Edwards Zouma Shawcross Pieters Fletcher Allen Shaqiri Jese Choupo Berahino.
The 3 behind saido switch around and interchange, similar to how it was in 2016, but with a striker this time to stop our attacking threat going missing against smaller teams and give us a focal point.
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 2:07:51 GMT
via mobile
Post by trickydicky73 on Nov 30, 2017 2:07:51 GMT
4231: Butland Edwards Zouma Shawcross Pieters Fletcher Allen Shaqiri Jese Choupo Berahino. The 3 behind saido switch around and interchange, similar to how it was in 2016, but with a striker this time to stop our attacking threat going missing against smaller teams and give us a focal point. Ideally, I would like Shaqiri where you have Jese, and a speedster where you have Shaqiri. Shaq could pull the strings and we would have something to worry sides on the break.
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 4:10:41 GMT
Post by kustokie on Nov 30, 2017 4:10:41 GMT
4231: Butland Edwards Zouma Shawcross Pieters Fletcher Allen Shaqiri Jese Choupo Berahino. The 3 behind saido switch around and interchange, similar to how it was in 2016, but with a striker this time to stop our attacking threat going missing against smaller teams and give us a focal point. Ideally, I would like Shaqiri where you have Jese, and a speedster where you have Shaqiri. Shaq could pull the strings and we would have something to worry sides on the break. What speedster?
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 4:14:01 GMT
via mobile
Post by trickydicky73 on Nov 30, 2017 4:14:01 GMT
Ideally, I would like Shaqiri where you have Jese, and a speedster where you have Shaqiri. Shaq could pull the strings and we would have something to worry sides on the break. What speedster? In the January window, I meant.
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 4:51:55 GMT
via mobile
Post by hanibal7 on Nov 30, 2017 4:51:55 GMT
After changing my panties due to the comment of 4_4_2, and have Sobhi at lb. We played 4-4-2 for most of the match and conceded two goals, one was world class, the other pieters fault.
|
|
|
Post by Trouserdog on Nov 30, 2017 6:59:10 GMT
We need to build the system around Shaqiri as much as possible.
3-4-3 does this but it's clearly too porous at the back to continue with as a Plan A. 4-4-2 will marginalise our best player AND leave us short of numbers in central midfield.
The obvious move is to go 4-2-3-1 with Shaq in the No.10 role. It's so obvious it actually causes me physical pain to even type this message out!
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 7:13:07 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 7:13:07 GMT
Or we could play him as a false nine, and have Chopper and Afellay support him- Or we could play 4-3-1-2, with Shaq in free role to supply Berahino and Diouf. Shaq is our best player, Crouch our second best. But there's not really a system that can fit both, unless we keep the system but with better players after a major overhaul in the transfer window.
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 7:15:13 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 7:15:13 GMT
Im worried we’ll see more of the opposition putting 4 past us playing 442
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 8:39:51 GMT
In the current system nobody because the system is built for him. He'll naturally carry the can because it's all about him finding space, with little to no defensive requirements, getting on the ball and creating. Even Choupo on the other side has to tuck in and do a bit off the ball and act as a second striker when we have it. The manager has been quite open about it going right back to last season when he first tried it and it first failed. A different system will change the whole dynamics and bring others in. It's a pity that we can't choose any system currently that doesn't have holes in it. Quite shocking really. That’s the point though - we don’t brilliantly have the players for any system so at least trying to get the best out of our best player seems sensible. I’d bin off the back three but persevere with trying to find a system that gives Shaqiri some freedom, because who else is going to produce what he does, even if it’s sporadic? It just has to be 4231 or 433 to get the best out of Shaq tbh (which we absolutely need as our only attacking quality player). Diouf should be up front. There was definitely more of a shape to our game as 442, but it is just too limiting and we pretty much take Shaq out of the game. Choupo is no winger (no more than he's a central striker), and you have to play Sobhi wide left if you're going 442. I'm not convinced that we have a central midfield pairing or good enough players to play full-backs in a 442 either. IF I were manager (and thank fuck I'm not ), it would be 4231: Butland Edwards - Ryan - BMI - Pieters Zouma - Allen Shaq - Choupo/Jesé - Sobhi Diouf
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 8:48:40 GMT
Post by shrewspotter on Nov 30, 2017 8:48:40 GMT
I would like to see us play 4-3-3 as we have the attacking players to do so. the sooner this 3 at the back tiung is fucked off for good the better. Controversial but I would go with Zouma and Martins-Indi as my 2 centre half's. I would bring Edwards and Tymon in at full backs to bring a bit of energy. I would recall Afellay to compliment Fletch and Allen and bring in Jese who I think deserves a start.
I would therefore be dropping Choupo, Ryan and Erik..............
Grant
Edwards Zouma Indi Tymon
Allen Afellay Fletch
Shaq Diouf or Bera Jese
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 8:55:52 GMT
Regardless of what plan A he goes with, there are holes in the starting lineup, either in terms of genuine Premier League quality and experience and/or naturally suited players to position.
Just let that sink in for 5 minutes. Think about the hundreds of millions of TV money we've raked in over the last 10 years.
We're now in a situation where we either have a striker at wingback or a centre half at right back. He won't play Edwards even if he was ready.
How has it got to this?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 30, 2017 8:59:58 GMT
Hughes seemed to confirm he'd be starting 4-4-2 on Saturday in his post-match interview with Nige Indeed. I think it has taken until now for Hughes to realise that the abomination that is three at the back (with this squad) is finally over.
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 9:05:18 GMT
via mobile
jeycov likes this
Post by Paul Spencer on Nov 30, 2017 9:05:18 GMT
Regardless of what plan A he goes with, there are holes in the starting lineup, either in terms of genuine Premier League quality and experience and/or naturally suited players to position. Just let that sink in for 5 minutes. Think about the hundreds of millions of TV money we've raked in over the last 10 years. We're now in a situation where we either have a striker at wingback or a centre half at right back. He won't play Edwards even if he was ready. How has it got to this? You are absolutely right. And I think you know the answer already ... it has got to this, due to a manager collecting random players simply because they're available, who he then attempts to work out what to do with AFTER he's signed them, rather than starting out with a discernible plan and recruiting accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Nov 30, 2017 9:05:20 GMT
Regardless of what plan A he goes with, there are holes in the starting lineup, either in terms of genuine Premier League quality and experience and/or naturally suited players to position. Just let that sink in for 5 minutes. Think about the hundreds of millions of TV money we've raked in over the last 10 years. We're now in a situation where we either have a striker at wingback or a centre half at right back. He won't play Edwards even if he was ready. How has it got to this? The lack of genuine quality we have in most areas is absolutely terrifying and completely damning.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 9:13:59 GMT
It's this that irks me more than anything. Any club outside the top 7 or 8 can have a bad season and get relegated. Nobody is too good to go.
If we end up going this year how frustrating will it be knowing we've played over a third of the season with a striker at wing back and a defensive full back on the other side?
There are clubs in leagues all over the world with a tenth of our budget that at the very least, can put out a system (whatever it may be) with players that suit it and have natural fits all over the park.
They might not be good enough granted, but at least then you can see where your genuine areas of weakness are.
It's just nonsense. Complete nonsense.
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 9:15:44 GMT
via mobile
Post by burge2u on Nov 30, 2017 9:15:44 GMT
Not exactly rocket science is it. It isn't even rocket science !
|
|
|
Post by milky on Nov 30, 2017 9:21:56 GMT
It's this that irks me more than anything. Any club outside the top 7 or 8 can have a bad season and get relegated. Nobody is too good to go. If we end up going this year how frustrating will it be knowing we've played over a third of the season with a striker at wing back and a defensive full back on the other side? There are clubs in leagues all over the world with a tenth of our budget that at the very least, can put out a system (whatever it may be) with players that suit it and have natural fits all over the park. They might not be good enough granted, but at least then you can see where your genuine areas of weakness are. It's just nonsense. Complete nonsense. Bang on the money and a damning indictment of Hughes crackerjack transfer policy since the day Nzonzi left the building. Basically we don't have the squad to suit any system and the one that gets the best out of our most (only ) creative player involves about 5 payers in roles they aren't suitable for.
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 11:15:59 GMT
via mobile
Post by StokeTudoGuy on Nov 30, 2017 11:15:59 GMT
Im more convinced than ever that we need to play with 4 at the back and 3 CM's for now until we get proper WB's.
To my mind until Cameron is back that means playing one of Pieters or Indi as a Left Fullback and the other as a left sided defensive CM with Allen and Fletcher.
This would free up Allen to get forward and find space as much as possible (while still being effectively a B2B player) and still leave us two more defensive CM's to cover the space he leaves.
All considered Pieters is defensively good and Bruno is on balance a better passer so perhaps play Pieters as the FB and Bruno as a DM until Cameron is back.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 14:25:58 GMT
Im more convinced than ever that we need to play with 4 at the back and 3 CM's for now until we get proper WB's. To my mind until Cameron is back that means playing one of Pieters or Indi as a Left Fullback and the other as a left sided defensive CM with Allen and Fletcher. This would free up Allen to get forward and find space as much as possible (while still being effectively a B2B player) and still leave us two more defensive CM's to cover the space he leaves. All considered Pieters is defensively good and Bruno is on balance a better passer so perhaps play Pieters as the FB and Bruno as a DM until Cameron is back. We did that last year with poor results. It puts too much pressure on our wingers (now Arnie is gone that'll be even more evident) because we have nothing from the middle of midfield going forward. It sort of assures our defence, but to be honest i think our best chance of that is with Cameron and Allen as defensive midfielders and a number 10 in front. Otherwise we just end up passing it back to them and inviting pressure. Zouma might be a shout for defensive mid, but I'm just thinking of anything to get rid of fletcher's lack of pace and his phantom defensive work. We need a Cameron-type defensive midfielder who can pass in january. Like we did in July, and January 2017, and July 2016, and January 2016, repeat ad nauseam.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2017 14:30:13 GMT
4231: Butland Edwards Zouma Shawcross Pieters Fletcher Allen Shaqiri Jese Choupo Berahino. The 3 behind saido switch around and interchange, similar to how it was in 2016, but with a striker this time to stop our attacking threat going missing against smaller teams and give us a focal point. Ideally, I would like Shaqiri where you have Jese, and a speedster where you have Shaqiri. Shaq could pull the strings and we would have something to worry sides on the break. I think Jese deserves a run, but a speedster would be good. Like i say, let those 3 interchange because they all have enough quality, and it gives them all the chance to naturally drift to their best positions in game when needed.
|
|
|
4:4:2
Nov 30, 2017 14:55:55 GMT
via mobile
Post by RedandWhite90 on Nov 30, 2017 14:55:55 GMT
I thought we switched to 4:4:2 about halfway through the first half and as if by magic, the team looked more coherent - players knew their postions, knew their jobs and the whole thing looked a whole lot more solid. as it transpired luck was defintiily not on our side and a 3:0 result I thought was pretty harsh but, if we drop Pieters For Ramadan and go with exactly the same 4:4:2 on Saturday with Crouch and Diouf up front - we've enough to stay up as for the manager - thanks, but no thanks - you are the weakest link ---- bye bye You’re playing Ramadan left back Tone? I'd also like to see Ramadan given a good go at left back and long term I think this will be his best position. He seems to play much better when he's given a specific task to do (the job he did on Antonio away at West Ham always sticks out) Yes offered nothing going forward from either LWB or this inside forward position but looks strong enough and responsive to listen and learn to a role the actually might not be the alien to him. We definitely need to tighten up at the back and I would love to 433 with that back 4 remaining as a flat back 4 and not marauding forwards leaving us wide open either side. I'd also make sure that 3 in midfield are also there to protect and almost go man for man to what will be another 3 man midfield on Saturday. Leave the other 3 up top and tell them to stay high to stop Swansea from launching men forward from the back. All in all its very uninspiring and can almost be school yard football but we should have enough to earn some form of win and look to build on it. Grant Zouma Shawcross BMI Ramadan Affely/Cameron Fletcher Allen Shaqiri Diouf Choupo
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Nov 30, 2017 15:10:17 GMT
You’re playing Ramadan left back Tone? I'd also like to see Ramadan given a good go at left back and long term I think this will be his best position. He seems to play much better when he's given a specific task to do (the job he did on Antonio away at West Ham always sticks out) Yes offered nothing going forward from either LWB or this inside forward position but looks strong enough and responsive to listen and learn to a role the actually might not be the alien to him. We definitely need to tighten up at the back and I would love to 433 with that back 4 remaining as a flat back 4 and not marauding forwards leaving us wide open either side. I'd also make sure that 3 in midfield are also there to protect and almost go man for man to what will be another 3 man midfield on Saturday. Leave the other 3 up top and tell them to stay high to stop Swansea from launching men forward from the back. All in all its very uninspiring and can almost be school yard football but we should have enough to earn some form of win and look to build on it. Grant Zouma Shawcross BMI Ramadan Affely/Cameron Fletcher Allen Shaqiri Diouf Choupo You make a very eloquent case for it. I’d rather we just bought a left back.
|
|