|
Post by PotterLog on Aug 14, 2019 14:49:43 GMT
What isn't what who meant? I don't know what you're on about really, I'm just saying "diamond" = midfield. I really don't know how it could mean anything else... Jones meant. We played a different formation last night and anyone saying we didn't is being mental. When Jones has gone about his diamond he's meant a 4-4-2 diamond. Last night when asked about changing his formation and dropping the diamond, he said they just played a 3-5-2 diamond. I really don't care what he wants to call it but he did change the formation which was the point. And no-one can possibly think when he was banging on about HIS "diamond" formation he was only ever referring to midfield. I don't know why people are even arguing about it. What he did last night better suits our players - it worked. The "new" diamond, the "modified" diamond...whatever you want to call it. I think I'm a bit lost... I totally agree with all that. If you have a diamond (midfield), the rest of the formation basically sorts itself out on its own (maybe this is what you mean by him referring to the rest of the formation when he talked about the diamond?). It is by definition 442. I suppose technically you could have a 541 but I think even that strays from what a diamond is. A "352 diamond", however, is a nonsense. It literally isn't geometrically possible.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 14, 2019 15:02:32 GMT
What isn't what who meant? I don't know what you're on about really, I'm just saying "diamond" = midfield. I really don't know how it could mean anything else... Jones meant. We played a different formation last night and anyone saying we didn't is being mental. When Jones has gone about his diamond he's meant a 4-4-2 diamond. Last night when asked about changing his formation and dropping the diamond, he said they just played a 3-5-2 diamond. I really don't care what he wants to call it but he did change the formation which was the point. And no-one can possibly think when he was banging on about HIS "diamond" formation he was only ever referring to midfield. I don't know why people are even arguing about it. What he did last night better suits our players - it worked. The "new" diamond, the "modified" diamond...whatever you want to call it. I'd say the diamond MK1 is 4D2 and the diamond MK2 is 5D1. The nice thing is that the pattern of play is virtually identical - play through the gaps and use the fullbacks as a fundamental part of the attacking side of the game - so it's relatively easy to swap between them on an as needed basis. MK2 just feels a bit less vulnerable (and a bit less attacking) while the squad get used to the shape.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2019 15:10:35 GMT
Jones meant. We played a different formation last night and anyone saying we didn't is being mental. When Jones has gone about his diamond he's meant a 4-4-2 diamond. Last night when asked about changing his formation and dropping the diamond, he said they just played a 3-5-2 diamond. I really don't care what he wants to call it but he did change the formation which was the point. And no-one can possibly think when he was banging on about HIS "diamond" formation he was only ever referring to midfield. I don't know why people are even arguing about it. What he did last night better suits our players - it worked. The "new" diamond, the "modified" diamond...whatever you want to call it. I'd say the diamond MK1 is 4D2 and the diamond MK2 is 5D1. The nice thing is that the pattern of play is virtually identical - play through the gaps and use the fullbacks as a fundamental part of the attacking side of the game - so it's relatively easy to swap between them on an as needed basis. MK2 just feels a bit less vulnerable (and a bit less attacking) while the squad get used to the shape. And our young defenders ease themselves in. It works well for Edwards and McClean as well. Whilst less attacking I think it is a great plan for us. Without his ideal fullbacks and whilst our midfield can be quite shaky it seems like a good compromise. We only need to score one more goal than the other team at the end of the day and whilst his 4D2 might have worked at Luton the 5D1 seems the way forward here. Shame for the three strikers who will miss out on a starting place. It's also harsh on the 3 creative midfielders (Powell, Duffy, Ince - and I suppose Verlinden as well if he seems him there) but if he must play with the diamond in midfield then it seems a better plan for the players we have.
|
|
|
Post by Somebody_Told_Me on Aug 14, 2019 15:21:44 GMT
The trouble with these diamonds is, their players keep running around then it all goes out of shape!
Basic formations as 3 at the back and 1 or 2 up front and who protects back defenders is all you need. Players win matches not fecking diamonds.
|
|
|
Post by Billybigbollox on Aug 14, 2019 15:24:04 GMT
Let's hope we beat the Living Daylights out of Derby on Saturday. Trevor says if we beat Derby he will give a Ram (Derby fan ) the Goldfinger at the end of the game. I think i know what he means. As long as he doesn't get his Goldfinger mixed up with his Goldmember Colin.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2019 15:40:15 GMT
The 1's are Woods and Duffy. The two central midfielders were Cousins and Clucas. They played very much in a diamond, I saw it with my own eyes. Why can't you have a "modified diamond", they're just words? I'm not arsed what it's called as long as we keep winning..... Well they are just words, yes, but they have to have some actual meaning don't they? If you've got wingers and two CMs, that's not a diamond, it's a flat midfield four. Of course you can still draw a diamond shape somewhere on the pitch but that is in no way what a "diamond midfield" is. The very definition of the idea is that width is *sacrificed* in favour of a compact and dynamic central midfield four. You can't just chuck in a couple of extra wingers and still claim it as a diamond, it's just.. not what it is. Incidentally I couldn't really give a monkeys what he calls it either, but if we're going to analyse our tactics at all then it does matter what we call it, especially if people start saying things like "oh well the diamond worked at Wigan" when we actually used a totally different formation. Well of course words have meaning, for example diamond means "a figure with four straight sides of equal length forming two opposite acute angles and two opposite obtuse angles" Which incidentally is the shape Woods, Clucas, Cousins and Duffy were making. No more, no less......
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2019 15:46:59 GMT
Well they are just words, yes, but they have to have some actual meaning don't they? If you've got wingers and two CMs, that's not a diamond, it's a flat midfield four. Of course you can still draw a diamond shape somewhere on the pitch but that is in no way what a "diamond midfield" is. The very definition of the idea is that width is *sacrificed* in favour of a compact and dynamic central midfield four. You can't just chuck in a couple of extra wingers and still claim it as a diamond, it's just.. not what it is. Incidentally I couldn't really give a monkeys what he calls it either, but if we're going to analyse our tactics at all then it does matter what we call it, especially if people start saying things like "oh well the diamond worked at Wigan" when we actually used a totally different formation. Well of course words have meaning, for example diamond means "a figure with four straight sides of equal length forming two opposite acute angles and two opposite obtuse angles" Which incidentally is the shape Woods, Clucas, Cousins and Duffy were making. No more, no less...... If you add everyone in, I think we form more of a Kite... the circle is Joe Allen running around...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2019 15:48:55 GMT
Well of course words have meaning, for example diamond means "a figure with four straight sides of equal length forming two opposite acute angles and two opposite obtuse angles" Which incidentally is the shape Woods, Clucas, Cousins and Duffy were making. No more, no less...... If you add everyone in. I think we form more of a Kite... The circle is Joe Allen running around... View AttachmentI'm happy to refer to to it as the kite. Sounds revolutionary.......
|
|
|
Post by PotterLog on Aug 14, 2019 15:49:26 GMT
The KITE formation, like it. We'll be flying....
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2019 15:50:34 GMT
The KITE formation, like it. We'll be flying.... Perfect for a windy day at the Bet365.........
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 14, 2019 16:17:20 GMT
The trouble with these diamonds is, their players keep running around then it all goes out of shape! Basic formations as 3 at the back and 1 or 2 up front and who protects back defenders is all you need. Players win matches not fecking diamonds. I'm relieved we've got a manager that recognises the importance of teamwork and structure and getting the players to work to a (quite sophisticated) plan rather than just lob 11 technically gifted players on the pitch and hope for the best. Which is where we got to under Hughes and which morphed into "give the ball to Shaqiri" under Lambert.
|
|
|
Post by Dutchpeter on Aug 14, 2019 16:24:53 GMT
Double Diamond work wonders (ahem).
|
|
|
Post by Billybigbollox on Aug 14, 2019 16:29:02 GMT
Double Diamond work wonders (ahem). Showing your age now Dutchy
|
|
|
Post by Waggy on Aug 14, 2019 17:55:24 GMT
Trevor says if we beat Derby he will give a Ram (Derby fan ) the Goldfinger at the end of the game. I think i know what he means. As long as he doesn't get his Goldfinger mixed up with his Goldmember Colin. Well, i’m sure the Derby fans will be a bit worried. Trevs a big guy
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2019 18:21:50 GMT
The KITE formation, like it. We'll be flying.... Perfect for a windy day at the Bet365......... New song alert I think it will really catch on 😉
|
|
|
Post by robstokie on Aug 14, 2019 18:36:13 GMT
Although we won playing it tonight I still don’t want us to play 3-5-2 in the long run. Give the diamond a while longer I think the problem with the diamond are as follows 1 - you need quick centre-halves who can deal with people running at them and ideally need to be good ball players too. We don't have that. 2 - you need quick, energetic wing backs who can bomb up and down, and are equally comfortable coming forward and defending. We don't have them either. 3 - you need a big bruising clogger at the base who will tackle anything that moves and will protect the centre-halves. Ideally, he will be a good ball player too, but the main thing is the donkey work. We don't have anyone who can impose themselves like that. 4 - you need centre-mids who have the ability to run at people, use the ball well, get it forward quickly and do a share of the donkey work as well as cover the space when the wing back down their side gets forward. We've got Etebo who offers that directness and quality on the front foot, but no one else. It's mad that midfield was neglected again this summer when we've been crying out for at least 2 in. The diamond is a nice idea, but considering what we have bought in and what we have got, it's not going to work. I mean, a bang average QPR side just ran straight through us, as did a bang average Charlton side - all 5 goals were awful goals to concede. With what we have got, we should stick to the back 3 with wing-backs pack the middle to at least make us harder to play through, play percentages and utilise the Quality Duffy had yesterday from set pieces to nick something at the other end. It might be a step backwards, but until we have the right players to utilise a diamond, we should shelf it.
|
|
|
Post by Billybigbollox on Aug 14, 2019 19:12:51 GMT
As long as he doesn't get his Goldfinger mixed up with his Goldmember Colin. Well, i’m sure the Derby fans will be a bit worried. Trevs a big guy Maybe that’s why Domingo walks like John Wayne.
|
|
|
Post by Waggy on Aug 14, 2019 19:26:57 GMT
Well, i’m sure the Derby fans will be a bit worried. Trevs a big guy Maybe that’s why Domingo walks like John Wayne. Domingo has ( apparently , i have not seen) piles like a pound of grapes, god knows how they got that bad but yes he has a odd walk and gets even worse on holidays, must be the heat.
|
|
|
Post by Somebody_Told_Me on Aug 14, 2019 20:38:17 GMT
The trouble with these diamonds is, their players keep running around then it all goes out of shape! Basic formations as 3 at the back and 1 or 2 up front and who protects back defenders is all you need. Players win matches not fecking diamonds. I'm relieved we've got a manager that recognises the importance of teamwork and structure and getting the players to work to a (quite sophisticated) plan rather than just lob 11 technically gifted players on the pitch and hope for the best. Which is where we got to under Hughes and which morphed into "give the ball to Shaqiri" under Lambert. Faia enough, but I prefer giving players individual tactics, to suit how game is going (which I obviously he does) rather than stick to a diamond or whatever, that's an ideal. Players run all over the pitch. Spaces open up to exploit. What I'm saying is, there's too much emphasis on shape and not tactics for me. Then on sturday he changed shape (when he didn't need to) trying be clever and it fucked us up.
|
|
|
Post by Billybigbollox on Aug 14, 2019 21:59:04 GMT
Maybe that’s why Domingo walks like John Wayne. Domingo has ( apparently , i have not seen) piles like a pound of grapes, god knows how they got that bad but yes he has a odd walk and gets even worse on holidays, must be the heat. I don’t doubt it. My ex mate Steve/Steph had the same problem. It was always worse when he/she was hanging around the docks in Ibiza. Must’ve been heat stroke. Did you and the lads do Benidorm this summer?
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Aug 14, 2019 22:11:11 GMT
Well of course words have meaning, for example diamond means "a figure with four straight sides of equal length forming two opposite acute angles and two opposite obtuse angles" Which incidentally is the shape Woods, Clucas, Cousins and Duffy were making. No more, no less...... If you add everyone in, I think we form more of a Kite... the circle is Joe Allen running around... Is the circle the cage? If so could you make it an octagon instead.
|
|
|
Post by thisisouryear on Aug 14, 2019 22:15:09 GMT
Double Diamond work wonders (ahem). Wasn't the Diamond used against Wigan a carbon copy of the others?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2019 23:04:15 GMT
If you add everyone in, I think we form more of a Kite... the circle is Joe Allen running around... Is the circle the cage? If so could you make it an octagon instead. No Joe Allen is the circle and therefore it is not a cage. Imagine the cage as being surrounded by a pack of vicious Rottweilers, this is more of a round up by a very excitable border collie trying to herd some sheep...
|
|
|
Post by madnellie on Aug 15, 2019 4:26:04 GMT
Well of course words have meaning, for example diamond means "a figure with four straight sides of equal length forming two opposite acute angles and two opposite obtuse angles" Which incidentally is the shape Woods, Clucas, Cousins and Duffy were making. No more, no less...... If you add everyone in, I think we form more of a Kite... the circle is Joe Allen running around... View AttachmentAnd it has a giant cross in the middle. Nathan is sure to approve!
|
|
|
Post by Waggy on Aug 15, 2019 6:36:17 GMT
Domingo has ( apparently , i have not seen) piles like a pound of grapes, god knows how they got that bad but yes he has a odd walk and gets even worse on holidays, must be the heat. I don’t doubt it. My ex mate Steve/Steph had the same problem. It was always worse when he/she was hanging around the docks in Ibiza. Must’ve been heat stroke. Did you and the lads do Benidorm this summer? We ended up in Gran Canaria this year as Trevor and Domingo have gone big into watersports . Never personally saw them in the sea ,apparently they loved it. I will choose next years holiday, not much for Gran Canaria think may look at Greece.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2019 7:29:00 GMT
Not so much a diamond as a Swarovski crystal
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 15, 2019 9:14:14 GMT
I'm relieved we've got a manager that recognises the importance of teamwork and structure and getting the players to work to a (quite sophisticated) plan rather than just lob 11 technically gifted players on the pitch and hope for the best. Which is where we got to under Hughes and which morphed into "give the ball to Shaqiri" under Lambert. Faia enough, but I prefer giving players individual tactics, to suit how game is going (which I obviously he does) rather than stick to a diamond or whatever, that's an ideal. Players run all over the pitch. Spaces open up to exploit. What I'm saying is, there's too much emphasis on shape and not tactics for me. Then on sturday he changed shape (when he didn't need to) trying be clever and it fucked us up. He screwed it up by replacing Woods with a more adventurous player in Duffy - so he abandoned his structure for the more anarchic approach you are saying he should play. It went went wrong because he did what you want him to do - his preferred tactics were working just fine. To be fair on Jones he admitted he got it wrong - if anything the experience will probably make him more likely to stick to his tactics and introduce the likes of Duffy when they've learned the way he wants the team to play.
|
|
|
Post by berahinosgoals on Aug 15, 2019 9:30:13 GMT
Faia enough, but I prefer giving players individual tactics, to suit how game is going (which I obviously he does) rather than stick to a diamond or whatever, that's an ideal. Players run all over the pitch. Spaces open up to exploit. What I'm saying is, there's too much emphasis on shape and not tactics for me. Then on sturday he changed shape (when he didn't need to) trying be clever and it fucked us up. He screwed it up by replacing Woods with a more adventurous player in Duffy - so he abandoned his structure for the more anarchic approach you are saying he should play. It went went wrong because he did what you want him to do - his preferred tactics were working just fine. To be fair on Jones he admitted he got it wrong - if anything the experience will probably make him more likely to stick to his tactics and introduce the likes of Duffy when they've learned the way he wants the team to play. I got the impression it was as much to do with giving players minutes, it will settle down soon and favourites will emerge for each position, we get a more regular team, once that happens we are in a better place because the team can start to gel,it's up to them to keep the shirt on performances and the rest to get the shirt. Compitition starts ...and then everybody lived happily ever after
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Aug 16, 2019 13:55:58 GMT
He screwed it up by replacing Woods with a more adventurous player in Duffy - so he abandoned his structure for the more anarchic approach you are saying he should play. It went went wrong because he did what you want him to do - his preferred tactics were working just fine. To be fair on Jones he admitted he got it wrong - if anything the experience will probably make him more likely to stick to his tactics and introduce the likes of Duffy when they've learned the way he wants the team to play. I got the impression it was as much to do with giving players minutes, it will settle down soon and favourites will emerge for each position, we get a more regular team, once that happens we are in a better place because the team can start to gel,it's up to them to keep the shirt on performances and the rest to get the shirt. Compitition starts ...and then everybody lived happily ever after I know what you mean but I wouldn't use the phrase "favourites". If Jones does what he says he wants to do there will be no "favourites" just players in form and best suited tactically for the opposition. I think Jones - like the rest of us (except those who base their opinion on internet reviews, politics and/or hairstyle) - is still working out the strength and weaknesses of his squad and probably hasn't worked out the best combinations as yet. I suspect we'll have up and downs - and more mistakes - at least until Xmas when hopefully things will have started to slot into place. At least there are some good signs of a team with a game plan starting to emerge.
|
|
|
Post by Somebody_Told_Me on Aug 19, 2019 11:17:29 GMT
Faia enough, but I prefer giving players individual tactics, to suit how game is going (which I obviously he does) rather than stick to a diamond or whatever, that's an ideal. Players run all over the pitch. Spaces open up to exploit. What I'm saying is, there's too much emphasis on shape and not tactics for me. Then on sturday he changed shape (when he didn't need to) trying be clever and it fucked us up. He screwed it up by replacing Woods with a more adventurous player in Duffy - so he abandoned his structure for the more anarchic approach you are saying he should play. It went went wrong because he did what you want him to do - his preferred tactics were working just fine. To be fair on Jones he admitted he got it wrong - if anything the experience will probably make him more likely to stick to his tactics and introduce the likes of Duffy when they've learned the way he wants the team to play. I've never said play a more 'anarchic approach'? I've never said how or what style he should play? It went wrong becuse he got clever, the system wa working. Why change? If there was ever a man for man subs game Charlton was it. Again shape ruined it. I said there's to much empasis on shape. He can play 11 behind the ball if that's the correct approach for that game. I don't want a more attacking style. I want a winning brand hopefully eye catching if possible. I'm not expecting miracles either, this will take ages sort out.
|
|