3-5-2

Dave2l

Should we stick with it? It was 1-1 at half time when Wilson was on the pitch.

I say if we have the players to play their positions, we should see it through. A system like that can take getting used to, and we looked a little vulnerable at times (Only mentioning the 1st half), but 4-4-2 is possibly too flat and 4-5-1 at home is too negative.

I can also understand that it didn't work and we just looked a mess.

twiggyaddick

4-5-1 is not negative if we get positive results from it

Dave2l

twiggyaddick said:

4-5-1 is not negative if we get positive results from it

It certainly works away. Against league leaders Cardiff it is probably the safer option.

nth_london_addick

In times of trouble the greatest mgr we ever had used to go

451 home and away always worked would work again

Garrymanilow

I'm a big proponent of playing the best formation for your team, not altering your system to counter the opposition's strengths or outside factors. Powell tried it against Stevenage away last season and we all know what happened there. The way our team is, with a weak central midfield and a calm, well-marshalled defence, we need to pack our midfield to maintain some amount of control. Home or away, I don't care. I don't care if we're 'negative' or if the fans get grumpy because we set up with one striker at home as if it's some kind of war crime, with our current available line-up the 4-5-1 with a holding midfielder is our best bet for getting results and we should use it.

Tutt-Tutt

When the opposition has the ball it's 5-3-2 but switches to 3-5-2 when in possession. This is a totally different way of playing to how we are set up at present. It requires a sweeper or free defender between man-markers, a holding midfielder in the playmaker role and two wing backs. Juventus & Napoli use it effectively in Serie A. Man City tried switching to 3-5-2 against Ajax with disastrous consequences. With both full backs pushing on, there is always space along the flanks for the opposition to counter-attack into. You need quick mobile centre-backs to cope with that, not orthodox centre halves like Cort, Morrison or Taylor.

I don't think it's possible to switch to a different way of playing, wave a magic wand and it works instantly. You have to work at it. CP used 4-1-4-1 at Leeds & Wolves, with Dervite as a defensive screen in front of the centre backs, mainly to bolster a failing central midfield, a tactic which worked effectively. Well done to him on that. He changed to 4-4-2 to go for the three points yesterday, but came unstuck. Perhaps he should have stuck with 4-1-4-1, bored everyone to death, but gained another point. The bottom line is whatever combination he has picked in a Central Midfield partnership has not worked and we have been out-played in that area of the pitch in most games. The club should have cashed in on Stephens and allowed CP to bolster the midfield areas with two combatitive midfielders who are comfortable at this level. We are muddling through with league one players playing at their limits, who aren't capable of dominating their direct opponents.

The problem is individual ability, not the system. If the players were good enough it would be a straight 4-4-2 with no need to change.

BigRedEvil

Garrymanilow said:

I'm a big proponent of playing the best formation for your team, not altering your system to counter the opposition's strengths or outside factors. Powell tried it against Stevenage away last season and we all know what happened there. The way our team is, with a weak central midfield and a calm, well-marshalled defence, we need to pack our midfield to maintain some amount of control. Home or away, I don't care. I don't care if we're 'negative' or if the fans get grumpy because we set up with one striker at home as if it's some kind of war crime, with our current available line-up the 4-5-1 with a holding midfielder is our best bet for getting results and we should use it.

Agree 4-5-1 home and away for me. Let's stick to being hard to beat and build from there

RedPanda

Having a think of teams that play or have played 3-5-2 well, they have very capable wingbacks. A much as I love Solly he is/would be better left at right back; Wiggins I think could carry it well but is obviously a no go.

seriously_red

How many more times will people call the squad "league 1 players"? They were league 1 champions which makes them Championship with rumours that one or two might have been in the Premier League during the last window... but that all seems forgotten!

With all the injuries CP simply has to play best players available - if Kerkar and Solly can make up the ground as wing backs then I say go for it but 4-1-3-2 or 4-1-4-1 looks more likely

Bexley Dan

On the basis that we don't have any real playmakers in the side (although i agree with Henry's suggestion that we should give Kerker a go in the middle) I think we need to ensure that we have the physicality in midfield to compete. We had that with Dervitte, Pritchard and Wilson in the first half but we then lost our grip on things with Jackson and Stephens in the middle. Kerker was unfairly exposed on the wing - neither centre mids offered him anything when he had the ball on the wing, neither did Dervitte or BWP - Hulse was in the box, where he should be but there was critcally, no attempt by the centre mids to give and go and get involved with the attacks. Midfield, as it always is, is the key area so lets just compete and the try and win it on the break with Haynes and Cook late on at home (a la Pringle). We have to get smarter and wiser.

tangoflash

The worrying fact for me is the lack of options we have to change it around. To play a 5 man midfield efficiently, the three main elements you need are a good solid holding midfielder to sit in front of the defence, an advanced play-making creative type, and finally you need width & penetration out wide to push and support the lone striker.

Not seen enough of Devite to decide if he can play the defensive 'Anchor-man' role and can't think of anyone else in the squad who could play it,

We definately don't have an attacking play-maker, and as for out on the flanks, not convinced there either. Haynes could well be an answer if he was ever able to get a decent run in the team, 'Worzel' Green, but only if he has his football head on, Wilson, one of the few positives to come out of midfield so far this season. Jackson certainly doesn't fit into this category as a wide player and if the lottery numbers were half as predictable as Kerkar, I'd have more money than Chelsea & Man city combined.

Not enough options in the squad to mix it up................

killerandflash

We played quite well with 4-4-2 in the 1st half, the problems came with moving Pritchard to RM in the second half, as we lost the energy he provided and got swamped. To play 4-4-2, we need more energy than the likes of Stephens, Hollands and Jackson can provide.

Dave2l

Cardiff are top of the league, I think like people have suggested we should just do the 4-1-4-1/4-5-1 and just make ourselves incredibly hard to beat/hit them on the break etc. We are very much expected to loose.... Needs to be treated like a fa cup tie vs arsenal away or something.

daveaddick

Forget all this bloody 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 chatter why not play the players available in their best positions?

tangoflash

daveaddick said:

Forget all this bloody 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 chatter why not play the players available in their best positions?

So that'll be 2 keepers, 2 RB's, 2 CB's, no LB.
;-)

daveaddick

Not quite Tango what I was alluding to was not playing either Pritchard of JJ wide. Mind you I like the 2 goalkeeper idea!

killerandflash

tangoflash said:

daveaddick said:

Forget all this bloody 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 chatter why not play the players available in their best positions?

So that'll be 2 keepers, 2 RB's, 2 CB's, no LB.
;-)

Actually we have 3 1st team keepers, but I don't think that sort of back 3 is allowed!