Surely now we can't go back to that system - even away from home. Shame that side didn't play against Colchester as I'm sure we would have an extra 3 points to our tally.
no looking back. 4-4-2 from now on. Personel may come and go but if we can play like that for the next 20 games or so Icant see why we cant pick up 12 wins and a few draws - another 40 points should see us alright.
I will be there on tuesday - although I cant now make the 4th round game but hopefully we will get to the 5th round and a decent cup run.
0
Comments
Personally I'd bite Keane's hand off if Sunderland made a half sensible offer for Reid.
Earlier this season, before Reid was injured, and before we had full backs with strong running capability, we needed to counter this with more bodies in midfield. With Reid as our play maker, we relied upon getting him in the game, often wide left and dropping balls in to Big Chris, with ZZ getting up to support when possible. This worked quite well, especially away from home when we could control games better and counter attack. Pards had little choice, in my view to keep going back to 4-5-1 because when he tried 4-4-2, like against QPR, it failed. WIth Reid injured/knackered/marked out of the game, we failed to be as penetrative and teams prevented Big Chris from being an effective target man. In the absence of Tody who could have made a difference, we ran out of options.
We are in a much better position now in that we can play either and have the players to do it. There may be occasions when we are away from home and need to bolster midfield, to switch to 4-5-1 during a game.
I would stick with 4-4-2 especially at home now because we have at last got pace down the flanks and in attack.
Sticking dogmatically to 4-4-2 is a silly as doing the same with 4-5-1.
I think Big Chris has and will continue to play an important role this season. How good was it to be able to bring on two strikers with 20 goals between them this season already?
Not sure about selling Reid unless the money can be spent to really improve the squad. What is good is that we are not totally reliant on a very good passing player who scores and creates but one who has a poor injury record and lacks real pace.
Whetther by luck or judegement we now have two full backs who give the team a whole different look. Youga in particular has impressed me. I still think Moo2 needs more games to settle in but it is frightening just how good he could be.
As for selling Reid i'd say it would have to be an unbelievable offer to tempt us. We're probably going to end up in the playoffs this year and Reid is exactly the type of player who could win us those crunch games, in fact even when he's having an off day his presence on the pitch and the obligatory tight marking gives a lot more space to our midfielders to exploit. Anyway i suppose it'll all be down to the state of our finances and our medical teams long term opinions of his fitness that swing it and they're something most of us can only speculate on.
S.
Ambrose,Mcleod,Varney,Sam
Youga,ZZ,Bougy,Holland,M002
McCarthy
That is an excellent point SC. Selling Reid would have to be for a huge price. At least though we have shown that we can play well without him.
There are so many factors that go into deciding a formation, but particularly where you strengths and weaknesses lie, and how they compare to how the oppositions strengths and weaknesses are. If the players are intelligent and flexible enough, you should be able to change the formation to suit the phase of the play that the game is currently in.
The side i manage, we sometimes maintain the same shape through the whole game, other times it will change 3 or 4 times to try and get that bit of edge and take advantage of an opposition weakness. Managers can dick around with formations as much or as little as they like, the most important thing is that the players fully understand where and how they should be playing in a set role, and more importantly, the reason for changing and be able to adapt quickly.
There are around a dozen different formational systems that can played on the pitch, and if we're smart we'll be using most of them throughout a season. A set rigid formation will only work for a short span unless you are far better than everyone else, but other teams will study and learn how to nullify you.
Its why teams sometimes see a sharp change of form with a change in formation, but very rarely will this lead to a lastable change.
I don't think Pards will find any problems fitting Reid into a 4-4-2.
Now that we've got young fast & energetic fullbacks bombing up field on the overlaps, and Holland & ZZ pulling strings in the middle, the only position to play Reidy is where he's played nearly all his matches: left side midfield.
Sure, he won't give much cover to Youga (but then neither would Ambrose or JT) - he'll just play the role that Ambrose played against Blackpool. He won't have electric pace but Youga, if he has cover from others, can do the overlapping on that side, while Reidy provides that bit of flair & guile linking up with the front runners.
So no real reason why we need to play 4-5-1 just to accomodate Reidy.
These 2 young fullbacks with Varney & Izzy (or Dickson), have injected pace in the side that means we can play Reidy in a 4-4-2.
For example, if you are playing 4-4-2 and your full backs are supporting the attack when you've got the ball, what is your formation 2-6-2, 3-5-2, 2-4-4? The link up play is most important when you are attacking.
On the other hand when they've got the ball, its a different story, lining up with two banks of four defensively in a 4-4-2, or with the extra defensive man in the holding role, sweeping in front of the back four in a 4-5-1.
West Brom will probably let us play tomorrow night.
Watford & Stoke will be big & physical.....but they may very well bypass the midfield area anyway with their long ball tactics. Up at their place this season, Stoke couldn't contain Moo2 until they clogged him out of the game - which suggests they won't like us running at them with pace.
Does this count as that rare item - a positive golfie statement?
Still, as your posts go I suppose this ranks up there as the most positive one I've read, so whilst you still have some work to do IMO, I applaud you for bothering to post for once after a victory.
Long may this continue and long may your glass continue to fill up
I remember him making a few tackles and linking up the play quite nicely. Holland was a big disappointment for me for his first couple of years with the club but I do wonder if he's still paying for that now, I think he had a good game on Saturday and has been a consistently good performer since coming back into the team. I was pleased his name was sung as he clapped the covered end after the game (what was left of it at least!) as I think he's been underestimated over the past 12 months or so...
I cant accept that.... This passage of play optimises the bloke..........
Toward the end of the 2nd half, Holland had a good shot from 20 yards saved by their keeper. The ball broke to a Blackpool player who lofted it up to their strikers, McCarthy headed clear from just outside our D and who was there, having covered 40 odd yards to pick up the loose ball?.........Matt Holland.
I'm not a fan if Holland, however credit where it's due, thought he had a good game on saturday.
My problem with Holland has always been that when we come under sustained pressure he drifts out the game, runs about a lot without actually doing anything.
Against better teams or away from home, he would leave the defence exposed and so I agree with AG, I think that Semedo is a better option if we want to play 4-4-2.
at Watford on Saturday, I'd be more than happy to see us go 4-5-1
But please keep the same 11 players.
I think that he has been like that, especially in the Prem. The way he has played recently is what I expected him to be like when Curbs signed him. Maybe injuries and the sheer physical power of some of the players he was up against affected him, however his play in recent games, especially on Saturday has been exemplary.
good points actually. totally throws my idea out of thr window!
who would you play on the right then?
exactly !!!!!, just pull Varney out wide right when we are defending !
Well, ross, I'll probably get howls of derision .......I like the idea of Moo2 playing right side midfield with another defender (maybe Magic?) behind him.
Not that Sam necessarily needs replacing, it's his first decent run in the side after all ...... but I like the speed, directness and crossing ability of Moo2. He would give good cover to the full back behind him and yet not be liable to be exposed & vulnerable at the back himself.