Not sure about this one? Over a month since we had that winning feeling? Oxford will be tough but our defensive approach probably will yield no more than a draw, 1-1.
Alright then 1- 4. I know it was a bit optimistic for them to score twice.
I honestly don't think you appreciate the hard work that Slade has put in. No limit to what this team can achieve. We've been magnificent in the last 3 games, grinding out a draw at Fleetwood, running AFC Wimbledon close and keeping a clean sheet at Scunthotpe.
Was the last league game against them the 2-1 win at the manor ground in 98, the play off winning season 1-0 down and 2 late goals from Mendonca and Chappell??
Does our season rest on wolf boy being the driving force in midfield? The defence should be sound with the BFG back, there are goals up front if the service can be provided. It's the midfield that's the issue.
Does our season rest on wolf boy being the driving force in midfield? The defence should be sound with the BFG back, there are goals up front if the service can be provided. It's the midfield that's the issue.
I'd like to see how we get on playing 4-5-1/4-3-3 with Lookman and Holmes either side of Magennis. That would give them more freedom and Crofts or Foley could have a purely defensive role. The extra midfielder would also suit Jackson and make it easier passing out from the back.
We won the title playing 4-4-2 but this squad has different strengths and weaknesses to that one. Ajose isn't offering enough if he's not scoring, we have much more threat out wide in Lookman, Holmes and Botaka. Magennis is no Yann but has pace as well as strength, could make him ideal for that role up front. We don't have Wiggins attacking threat from full back but the wide players we have can make up for that.
Would it work in reality? If we end up just knocking long balls up to Magennis we're probably better off just sticking to 4-4-2 to give him closer support.
Does our season rest on wolf boy being the driving force in midfield? The defence should be sound with the BFG back, there are goals up front if the service can be provided. It's the midfield that's the issue.
I'd like to see how we get on playing 4-5-1/4-3-3 with Lookman and Holmes either side of Magennis. That would give them more freedom and Crofts or Foley could have a purely defensive role. The extra midfielder would also suit Jackson and make it easier passing out from the back.
We won the title playing 4-4-2 but this squad has different strengths and weaknesses to that one. Ajose isn't offering enough if he's not scoring, we have much more threat out wide in Lookman, Holmes and Botaka. Magennis is no Yann but has pace as well as strength, could make him ideal for that role up front. We don't have Wiggins attacking threat from full back but the wide players we have can make up for that.
Would it work in reality? If we end up just knocking long balls up to Magennis we're probably better off just sticking to 4-4-2 to give him closer support.
Agree with all of this. Going on the sounds of things Foley was very tidy on Tuesday night, so dropping him might be harsh, but Crofts seems to be the first name on the teamsheat regardless of how he did in the previous match.
I think we have the players to play a fluid formation, a 4-5-1/4-3-3 that can even become a 4-4-2 with Lookman moving forward. The problem is, it's one thing to be ABLE to be fluid, it's another thing to make it work to your advantage within a game to alter the shape to fit the need. It's also worth remember that, for all I talk about tactics, they are just numbers and how they're executed is what really matters.
Comments
If i am improperly dressed at Oxford it ain't my fault.
See you tomorrow Stevie
However, despite being clueless, I'll go for 2-0 the Addicks.
Please inbox if able to come up with the goodies.
We won the title playing 4-4-2 but this squad has different strengths and weaknesses to that one. Ajose isn't offering enough if he's not scoring, we have much more threat out wide in Lookman, Holmes and Botaka. Magennis is no Yann but has pace as well as strength, could make him ideal for that role up front. We don't have Wiggins attacking threat from full back but the wide players we have can make up for that.
Would it work in reality? If we end up just knocking long balls up to Magennis we're probably better off just sticking to 4-4-2 to give him closer support.
Rudd
Solly Bauer Pearce Fox
Holmes Crofts Ulvestad Jackson Lookman
Magennis
If not... sub in Botaka for Holmes.
Play a 4-5-1 to 4-4-2 formation.
I think we have the players to play a fluid formation, a 4-5-1/4-3-3 that can even become a 4-4-2 with Lookman moving forward. The problem is, it's one thing to be ABLE to be fluid, it's another thing to make it work to your advantage within a game to alter the shape to fit the need. It's also worth remember that, for all I talk about tactics, they are just numbers and how they're executed is what really matters.