Put the formation in the bin carrick

BobUpnDown said:
As he has said many times, it's not about formations it's about people taking responsibility & effecting play in areas of the pitch..

Formations are just for the media & pundits..
Click to expand...
Play 3 centre backs. Villa, Chelsea and Leicester it worked. Why revert to the 4-2-3-1 today when it doesn’t suit us, especially with no striker. Bizarre team and formation selection. We underestimated Plymouth and they played us off the park.
 
uncle_rico said:
Play 3 centre backs. Villa, Chelsea and Leicester it worked. Why revert to the 4-2-3-1 today when it doesn’t suit us? Bizarre team and formation selection. We underestimated Plymouth and they played us off the park.
Click to expand...
I don't get this argument that such a basic, standard system as 4-2-3-1 "doesn't suit us". I said it in another thread earlier but 4-2-3-1 suits basically any club in the world. You'd encounter the same problems we have playing this way that we would in any other formation.

The 3 at the back worked against Villa, Chelsea, and Leicester because they were games where we looked to get players behind the ball and try to catch them on the break from the get go because they're significantly stronger teams than us, and we got a bit of luck in two of those games, and one of them we got absolutely battered. We shouldn't be looking to sit back against most of the teams in this league, and if we played the same way as we do now in a different formation, again, you'd just run in to the same problems as you would any other formation.

We have no dynamism in the team without Jones, and even with him it's pretty lopsided in how dependent on him it is. As it is we're just laborious and plodding and slow. There's next to no pace or drive through the middle of the pitch between Barlaser, Howson, Hackney, and O'Brien, we have a right back whose legs have gone, and his backup is just as likely to have a nightmare as he is a blinder on any given day, we basically have no true left winger, and we have midfielders playing up front all the time. You're gonna encounter those same problems irrespective of what formation you play.
 
BobUpnDown said:
As he has said many times, it's not about formations it's about people taking responsibility & effecting play in areas of the pitch..

Formations are just for the media & pundits..
Click to expand...
Strange that he changed formation for teams he thought we were inferior to then isn't it?

It is about the players too though I agree. But part of the problem is we don't currently have the players to play the way he wants us to. He needs to help them out a bit.
 
The formation isn’t the issue. It’s the insistence on playing out from the back at a snail’s pace even when the opposition overload us and not being able to pick out a pass or retain the ball when we’re under pressure. We’re far too rigid. Even the “fluid” movements of the attacking players are fixed routines that teams can spend all week working on interrupting. We need more improvisation and better decision making in all areas of the pitch.
 
uncle_rico said:
Play 3 centre backs. Villa, Chelsea and Leicester it worked. Why revert to the 4-2-3-1 today when it doesn’t suit us, especially with no striker. Bizarre team and formation selection. We underestimated Plymouth and they played us off the park.
Click to expand...
Fcuking Plymouth
I mean Plymouth at our home ground who are utter fcuking garbage and Carrick makes them look like Real Madrid

But agree that badpasser and obrien cannot play in there again otherwise carrick needs to fcuk off back in Lancashire for good
 
SilentProf said:
The formation isn’t the issue. It’s the insistence on playing out from the back at a snail’s pace even when the opposition overload us and not being able to pick out a pass or retain the ball when we’re under pressure. We’re far too rigid. Even the “fluid” movements of the attacking players are fixed routines that teams can spend all week working on interrupting. We need more improvisation and better decision making in all areas of the pitch.
Click to expand...
I broadly agree actually. The tempo is all wrong. We had numerous chances to quickly get moving up pitch today but someone would turn back, look around, and then move again… by which time the opposition are all back into position, all the space blocked off and we end up knocking it side to side or back at the ‘keeper.

The team is so disjointed this season. There are so many new players and so many injuries, there is just no fluency or tempo to most of our play. It’s easy for the opposition to just sit in and frustrate, and then spring forward once we’ve played ourselves into trouble.
 
I don't think there's exactly an abundance of them around in the game. Even at Premier League level you're looking at someone like Palhinha, who is one of the best there is in that role, and it's mad that he's still at Fulham, worth his weight in gold. But beyond that a lot of "defensive midfielders" now are really just deep lying playmakers like Barlaser or Hackney, players who either can't or won't defend, but just like coming deep to collect the ball out of defence, dictate tempo, and ping passes about a bit. I don't think you really see all that many Roy Keane, Patrick Vieira, Gattuso, Makelele types these days. Proper b***ds who love putting a tackle in but still have enough ability and technique on the ball to get a move going after winning it.
 
dooderooni said:
More chance of getting a monorail.
It amazes me that we can't find one of these young lads who revel in breaking up play. They don't need to be ballers, just know how and when to cover and be mobile enough to get their and snuff out danger.
Click to expand...

I had hopes for Agyemang when we signed him. Thought he could of been 'that guy '
 
Jonathan said:
I don't get this argument that such a basic, standard system as 4-2-3-1 "doesn't suit us". I said it in another thread earlier but 4-2-3-1 suits basically any club in the world. You'd encounter the same problems we have playing this way that we would in any other formation.

The 3 at the back worked against Villa, Chelsea, and Leicester because they were games where we looked to get players behind the ball and try to catch them on the break from the get go because they're significantly stronger teams than us, and we got a bit of luck in two of those games, and one of them we got absolutely battered. We shouldn't be looking to sit back against most of the teams in this league, and if we played the same way as we do now in a different formation, again, you'd just run in to the same problems as you would any other formation.

We have no dynamism in the team without Jones, and even with him it's pretty lopsided in how dependent on him it is. As it is we're just laborious and plodding and slow. There's next to no pace or drive through the middle of the pitch between Barlaser, Howson, Hackney, and O'Brien, we have a right back whose legs have gone, and his backup is just as likely to have a nightmare as he is a blinder on any given day, we basically have no true left winger, and we have midfielders playing up front all the time. You're gonna encounter those same problems irrespective of what formation you play.
Click to expand...

A post of two halves ..
I completely agree with the 2nd half of this , but struggle with the first half of it .

Today was a doddle for their management
" Press them from the keeper + they don't hold possession up top very well, they're slow in transition and poor without the ball "
It was a bobby basic replica of Bristol 1st half .

I'm not convinced that 3 5 2 or 5 4 1 means always sitting back , or being defensive.
It might just mean using what we have.

It might make playing out from the back easier.
Might mean less susceptible to transitions.
Might reduce the frailties that are bob on in the 2nd half of your post.
 
dooderooni said:
More chance of getting a monorail.
It amazes me that we can't find one of these young lads who revel in breaking up play. They don't need to be ballers, just know how and when to cover and be mobile enough to get their and snuff out danger.
Click to expand...

Yep, it baffles me that we have Grant and Carrick in the setup, who both excelled in different ways at nullifying the opposition in front of the back four, but we play so open at times that it seems suicidal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top