|
433
Nov 7, 2011 16:55:16 GMT
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 7, 2011 16:55:16 GMT
Sorro wilko huth ryan higgy Palacios Delap Whitehead Pennant Ethers Walters Would love to see that for our next away game - give pennant and ethers freedom to attack, keep deano pushing on from midfield, palacios and delap sit deep, allows for one of higgy or wilko to push on from full back. Walters will run all day and hold the ball up well for our wingers and deano to get alongside.
|
|
|
433
Nov 7, 2011 17:05:58 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2011 17:05:58 GMT
Mmmm not much width there !! Everton would tear us a new one With that line up. No kenwyne?
|
|
|
433
Nov 7, 2011 17:08:45 GMT
Post by rosco on Nov 7, 2011 17:08:45 GMT
If we're gonna play 4-3-3 then it needs to be Crouch or Jones down the middle! I'd like to see 3-5-2 personally.
Sorro
Huth......Shawcross........Upson
Palacios..Delap
Pennant............................... Etherington
Walters
Crouch........Jones
|
|
|
433
Nov 7, 2011 21:08:24 GMT
Post by turtletom on Nov 7, 2011 21:08:24 GMT
4312 Sorro HIGGY HUTH SHAWCROSS WILKO ETHERS.....PALACIOS......PENNANT WALTERS JONES JEROME
|
|
Han Solo
Youth Player
Who's scruffy looking?
Posts: 341
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 0:21:39 GMT
Post by Han Solo on Nov 8, 2011 0:21:39 GMT
Awful suggestions. 442: Begovic Wilkinson Huth Shawcross Higginbotham Pennant Palacios Wilson Etherington Crouch Walters
Turtletom, why are your fullbacks and wingers on the wrong side of the pitch?
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 0:38:42 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2011 0:38:42 GMT
Pulis wouldn't let him play them where they should be ;D ;D ;D
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 1:20:46 GMT
Post by stokeyouth on Nov 8, 2011 1:20:46 GMT
42121 and 352, jesus christ, what have we become.
When was the last time a football team played 3 at the back? 1985?
Play any team in the league with 3 at the back and we'd get fucking demolished.
It'd work with wing backs, but Etherington/Pennant are too attacking for it and if we used Wilson/Higgy/Shotton/Wilko then we'dleave out our only creative players in Matty and Ethers.
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 2:04:02 GMT
Post by PotterLog on Nov 8, 2011 2:04:02 GMT
Sorro wilko huth ryan higgy Palacios Delap Whitehead Pennant Ethers Walters Would love to see that for our next away game - give pennant and ethers freedom to attack, keep deano pushing on from midfield, palacios and delap sit deep, allows for one of higgy or wilko to push on from full back. Walters will run all day and hold the ball up well for our wingers and deano to get alongside. Just what we need, a third holding midfielder.
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 2:04:04 GMT
Post by chrispk76 on Nov 8, 2011 2:04:04 GMT
42121 and 352, jesus christ, what have we become. When was the last time a football team played 3 at the back? 1985? Play any team in the league with 3 at the back and we'd get fucking demolished. It'd work with wing backs, but Etherington/Pennant are too attacking for it and if we used Wilson/Higgy/Shotton/Wilko then we'dleave out our only creative players in MATTY and ETHERSJust the 1 creative player then
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 8:01:46 GMT
Post by potterpaul on Nov 8, 2011 8:01:46 GMT
I believe our current system (4 4 1 1) as become outdated.
We have seen many combinations of the front pairing since making the PL but for me the most successful was the Fuller/Sidibe pairing. The reason I believed it worked for them was that with Mama as the withdrawn striker he never tried to do anything with the ball except spoil it. By spoil I mean change its direction or speed but he never tried to direct it to Ricky. Ricky just had a knack of latching on to them.
We still play that system but now we have a far more mobile and skilled Walters in the Mama role with either Crouch or KJ playing the leading striker. Can't make mind up about CJ role but for some reason I don't think he does yet. So with the change of personnel I don't believe it is working anywhere near as good as it use to. To me the whole set up was created with Mama in mind but now we need to change it slightly to suit our current players and I don't mean moving to tippy tappy crap either.
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 8:05:43 GMT
Post by greyman on Nov 8, 2011 8:05:43 GMT
Football Manager 2012 has a lot to answer for
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 8:44:33 GMT
Post by y_oh_y_delilah on Nov 8, 2011 8:44:33 GMT
Football Manager 2012 has a lot to answer for Are you saying that's where Pulis gets his ideas?
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 9:25:35 GMT
Post by oggyoggy on Nov 8, 2011 9:25:35 GMT
in my original post i did space out ethers and pennant to be wingers, some reason it kept them close together, but we would have plenty of width. this isn't football manager or anything like some have suggested. look how the majority of top clubs play and they have a similar system. mourinhos chelsea, man utd often play it in europe - a 451/433. basically iv taken out a striker for a centre mid, given one centre mid (deano) a licence to attack whenever possible and our wingers play higher up the pitch, pushing opposition full backs back.
We have to try something new away from home, and i don't like a wing backs system which is what 532/352 is as you get destroyed down the flanks by most decent sides.
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 9:32:48 GMT
Post by jimmygscfc1234 on Nov 8, 2011 9:32:48 GMT
I never realised that our whole system and our success was based around, and due, to a centre forward who occasionally got in the way of the ball so that it either bounced off a part of his body into an area of the pitch where we may or may not win the ball back or off the top of his head (Bristol City and Villa) to find its way into the net. You learn something every single day. That's why I love football.
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 9:37:41 GMT
Post by onlyonesirstan on Nov 8, 2011 9:37:41 GMT
Play any team in the league with 3 at the back and we'd get fucking demolished. You are right. We get demolished with 4 at the back, so god knows what score it would be with 3 at the back
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 9:54:12 GMT
Post by Olgrligm on Nov 8, 2011 9:54:12 GMT
I believe our current system (4 4 1 1) as become outdated. We have seen many combinations of the front pairing since making the PL but for me the most successful was the Fuller/Sidibe pairing. The reason I believed it worked for them was that with Mama as the withdrawn striker he never tried to do anything with the ball except spoil it. By spoil I mean change its direction or speed but he never tried to direct it to Ricky. Ricky just had a knack of latching on to them. We still play that system but now we have a far more mobile and skilled Walters in the Mama role with either Crouch or KJ playing the leading striker. Can't make mind up about CJ role but for some reason I don't think he does yet. So with the change of personnel I don't believe it is working anywhere near as good as it use to. To me the whole set up was created with Mama in mind but now we need to change it slightly to suit our current players and I don't mean moving to tippy tappy crap either. That's not quite right. In the old system, the target man played in a withdrawn role in order to do all the work when the opposition had the ball. Now the target man leads the line and does all of the traditional Mama role duties, except for the work on the opposition which is done by Walters.
|
|
|
433
Nov 8, 2011 11:56:10 GMT
Post by euanstokie123 on Nov 8, 2011 11:56:10 GMT
The way for us to go is 4-2-3-1. Pulls gets his two holding CMs and we would be better going forward. Not to much different to 4-4-2 either
Wilko. Huth. Shawcross. Higgy.
Whitehead. Palacios(when fit).
Pennant. Walters. Ethers
Crouch/jones
|
|