First obviously there are far bigger problems than just the team selection and formation. Had a few thoughts that might make an interesting discussion. Seen a few people suggesting 4-5-1 in other threads, more I think about it, it might be the way to go.
Parky favours a 4-4-2, but with the players we had yesterday it was far too predictable and easy to defend. Benson and Abbott don't like to drop deep, but neither can get in behind defences. So they just try to control the ball and lay it off out wide and get in the box. Up front perhaps we haven't got anyone ideal to play on their own, but not sure we have an ideal partnership either. We have a decent number of options out wide, Anyinsah included. Could we not play more of a 4-3-3 than a 4-4-1-1 as we have done in the past. Push the wingers much higher up, and get them supporting the striker. In Parky's 4-5-1/4-4-1-1 it's been the player in the hole that has done that. The wide players have played as wide midfielders in a midfield and if they get the ball around half way, they've got a lot to do to get into a position to offer a threat.
Since Parker left, something we've never done consistently is win the battle in central midfield. We didn't have a chance of winning it yesterday against Brighton's formation, with Semedo and Racon in a 2 man CM. I don't see which partnership we can play which would ever win a battle against a decent 3 or a very good 2. I'd like to see 3 play in there, Semedo in front of the back four, he can do a similar job to Kishishev, and then two from Racon, McCormack and Jackson.
It's not just good international sides and better Prem teams playing a 4-3-3, Blackpool did it last season, Bolton used it under Allardyce (different styles of football, but some similar ideas). Teams often come to The Valley playing 3 in CM, so we have to play well and/or take any chances we create and defend well to get something out of it. As often said, we've not played well for an entire game very often, if at all, in the last few years. Part of that is down to losing the battle in central midfield.
Just think Parky or any future replacement needs to try something different than a flat 4-4-2. As said in other threads, our only method of attacking was to get down the wings and swing plenty of crosses in. Teams are surely going to look at what Brighton did and try similar ideas to stop us. Outnumber our central midfield and make it hard for the wingers by crowding them out when possible. If we do manage to get crosses in, get numbers back in the box which then outnumbers the players we manage to get in there. Going forward we need to offer something through the middle and out wide.
If more teams start playing 3 CMs against our 4-4-2,I think we could struggle most games. What we mustn't do is play a flat 4-5-1 and hoof it up to Abbott/whoever and hope for the best. Last season away to Southampton we tried a 4-5-1 but because it was 5 straight across the middle Forster had no support and players had very few passing options other than go long or sideways and backwards.
Not claiming it would solve all our problems, but given time for players to know their roles, it's got to at the very least be more exciting to watch than a flat 4-4-2 in which we are predictable and just try to swing crosses in.
0
Comments
The problem we've got now is Reid may be out. So perhaps Anyinsah with Wagstaff? Or McCormack with Racon and Semedo in a 3 with Martin, Benson and Wagstaff playing as a front 3.
At times yesterday Brighton appeared to have no central defenders ... just two full backs who spent long periods of the game playing the ball between themselves, the goalkeeper and the defensive midfielder.
At home, and especially against the poorer sides who will limit their own attacking options, I'd play three at the back (eg Dailly, Fortune and Fry) and you can pack your central midfield with three players ... PROVIDED ... each of the three has distinct main roles. Semedo is the obvious defensive midfielder, take your pick between Racon and McCormack as the link man (filling the gaps, defensive and attacking as necessary) and Martin as the main attacking midfield option (running at opposition defences, playing the little through balls into the box etc). I'd think about Jackson as the wide player on the left, especially if Reid is out for a long spell now.
With the squad we have, that set-up looks like the most promising to me, but formations go out of the window when players and management don't deal with unusual opposition set-ups such as yesterday. How comfortable would the Brighton defenders have been if we had not stood off them as much as we did? Martin and Reid should have pushed up on their full backs when Brighton were in possession, with Benson or Abbott cutting out the ball to the 'keeper. I can't believe that problem wasn't rectified during the half-time team talk (or earlier).
4 - Speaks for itself
2 - Holding players that sit infront of the defence, break up play, sweep up loose balls (Semedo, Racon)
3 - Attacking minded midfielders, support the attack but also have defensive responsabilities (Waggy, Jacko/Mac, Reid)
1 - Forward that dosen't stop chasing, closing down the defenders, holds up the ball well and can link the play (Don't think we have that player, would be tempted to Anyinsah up there as he is quick and chases everything but i don't think he has the physical presence)
Either way I don't think we'll get close to controlling games with a 4-4-2.
This year we simply do not have the anywhere near enough tactically aware player to play it consistently. Only Abbott can link attack and defence as Burton did, and is not offering a goal threat in the champ as yet. Wagstaff is a metronome, but his tactical acuteness is developing though not acute enough. Martin is clueless in the moment, about linking between players unless serendipity hits him with a lightning bolt. Racon is about as offensive as Pardew's rapacious market meat store.
I am not saying in some matches, as in Brighton away we should not play a flat five across midfield to shut out midfield and stop being outnumbered. I am saying our players are in the main tactically un-gifted, and it ain't needed in league one for the majority of games. However as I have said all along is you need two reliable midfielders. If that is Semedo and McCormack, or Semedo and Jackson then great but it ain't Racon with anyone; though in a flat 5 Racon's erratic runs make him an almost must for the loose cm. Semedo is not able to make consistent offensive decisions, that is why I advocate Jackson playing in the middle. Parky make the obvious changes.
Problem being bfr, it worked amazingly well away. One loss at Coclhester and Parky virtually never used it away again. Not saying it was a formation that should have been always used, but Parky was not creative in introducing it for specific away matches when our 4-4-2 would be over-run.
Parky seems to be much better at critically analysing the needs and then effecting the makeup of the squad. Just doesn't seem to be unable to critically analyse in the moment, or just before a game. Yay! Great we were great in the second half at Plymout, but he barely mentioned why we were reactive and on the back foot in the first half. We were playing Plymouth, who weren't better than us in 2008-2009 when we were the worst team I've ever seen. They ain't improved much in the last few seasons, in fact they've got worse. We have got better but still they dominated the first half against us. You just need a cm that'll have us playing ten yards further up the pitch. Whether that is through more intelligent offensive play a la Jackson, or more physical dynamism a la McCormack, who cares? But it's one of those two.