Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Post-match thread: Shrewsbury Town vs Charlton Athletic: Saturday 30th September 2023 | KO 3:00pm

123578

Comments

  • edited October 2023
    LouisMend said:
    This from the man who puts Leaburn on the wing.

    Appleton is showing why he is just like Holden, Garner, Adkins.....etc etc.

    No idea how to set us up & then moans at the players when they dont deliver his stupid tactics. 

    I wasn't there or watch a stream but by the sounds of it we didnt play that well. A defeat could have put us 17th & only because of teams carrying points deductions could have been even lower. 

    I dont see drawing 0-0 away from home as an achievement as some people do. Yes we didnt lose but that's 2 draws out of 3 and this season is slowly becoming just like last year. No hope of getting close to the top 6 & game after game goes by where we play insipid uninspiring football that leads nowhere. 

    Another wasted season. 


    The real issue is that it’s glaringly obvious Leaburn needs to play as does May…

    however, it’s how you fit May, leaburn, dobson, CBT & Watson/Fraser/camara into a team elbowing you want them there as they’re the top players - it just doesn’t work! 


                  Leaburn   May

    CBT     Dobson   Fraser/ Camara  Campbell 

    Edun/Thomas  Jones  Hector  Asimwe


    4-4-fucking 2.

    Use you BEST players in THEIR best positions. Fit the system to the players & not the other way round.

    Might actually win a game that way.


    Exactly this. Would love to see 442 on Tues.

    Only changes I would make to the above is Tennai Watson at right back (& possibly Chem Campbell right wing - thought he looked v.gd under Holden).
  • edited October 2023
    supaclive said:
    We have FIVE centre forwards/forwards capable of playing in a two up front and two wingers who could play in a 4-3-3 

    Yet we insist on playing 4-3-3 or just one up front.  

    Alfie May
    Leaburn 
    Chuks

    Are arguably with Dobbo, our best 3 players.

    Has to be 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 and CBT plays wide as wing back or wide left. 

    We shouldn't play a formation that is in vogue if we don't have the players to play it.  We are 15th in Division 3.   We just struggled to a point away at Shrewsbury.


    4-3-3 wasn't the issue when we beat Wycombe a week ago, Leaburn was one of out better players when played out wide that particular game.

    What happens when we play 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 and we struggle to get a point against Exeter or whoever we play it against

    Do we change formation again, because it didn't work once?

    Why would 3-5-2 have worked yesterday?

    Shrewsbury had a narrow pitch so playing it wide was always doomed to failure - 4-2-2-2 was the one that ultimately seemed to work in the end, it was a combination of failing to make a breakthrough, and running out of time that stopped it being a success. 
  • I’d love to see a 433 with 3 actual midfielders rather than TC playing a role he isn’t natural in. Obviously I’d love to see him playing most games but imagine him coming off the bench to replace CBT when the fullback is already knackered. A midfield 3 of Dobson, Watson/Taylor and Camara/Fraser would have a nice blend and would be a handful in this league 
  • I see Derby drew 0-0 against Cambridge. At home.
  • A point away at struggling Shrewsbury. Still living that dream.
  • NabySarr said:
    Across the Premier League, Championship and League One yesterday, four teams (6.66%) played in 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 formations.

    - Everton (4-4-1-1) lost 1-2 at home to Luton. They’ve lost 5 out of 7 games so far this season.

    - Cheltenham (4-4-2) lost 2-0 at Lincoln. They haven’t scored all season and are rock bottom of the league.

    - Reading (4-4-2) and Burton (4-4-2) played out a nil nil draw against each other. Burton are 20th in the league, Reading are 21st.



    There’s a reason teams at our level don’t play it anymore… it doesn’t win games of football.
    Our best run of the season last year came playing 4-4-2. Also Norwich have been playing it most of the season and doing well, Villa have been playing it too and doing well, and beat Brighton who played it yesterday too. 

    It would probably mean sacrificing control of the game and playing more direct, which I think would suit us. But that’s not appletons style so it won’t happen. 

    We need to play 3-4-1-2, that’s what this squad was built for. It is really strange that we recruited a manager to play a different system to Holden. Appleton needs to be pragmatic and get the best out of the squad he has, not trying to fit the squad into how he plays 

                          Isted 
            Jones   Hector  Thomas 
    Watson  Watson   Dobson   CBT
                       C.Campbell (Fraser when fit)
                    Leaburn May 

    We showed on the opening day that if CBT has Thomas behind him we can almost convert to a back 4 and mean that he won’t have to defend much. That is still our best performance of the season but it seems Holden and now Appleton don’t realise this 
    I might be wrong because I only went off a scan of formations in my scores app but I have both Aston Villa and Brighton playing 4-2-3-1 yesterday. Moussa Diaby and Danny Welbeck setting up as central attacking midfielders. Norwich similarly in past weeks with Ashley Barnes playing off of Adam Idah.

    I think there is a wider conversation to be had about the fluidity of formations and how ultimately they don’t really matter a great deal in the attacking phase as ideally when you’re attacking, 4-3-3 easily becomes a 4-2-3-1 which becomes a 4-4-1-1 which becomes a 4-4-2 which becomes a 4-3-3 etc etc. but I’ve tried approaching that topic before and got shut down so here we are.
    The apps often have these things wrong. And it is often that teams have different shapes in and out of possession or things are more fluid as you say. Villa is a bit of hybrid but Diaby is playing more as a striker than he is anything else, Emery has often favoured 4-4-2 at both Villa and Villarreal, especially when they don’t have the ball. This screenshot below looks very 4-4-2 vs 4-4-2 but Villa were also 3-4-1-2 at times 



    I tend to look at average positions, rather than what the apps have said the formation is. If you look at Norwich games when Barnes was fit, he was playing alongside Idah, and Diaby is often alongside Watkins for Villa. 

    I think the learnings from this is probably you can’t play an old fashioned 4-4-2 but you can still play it with maybe a hybrid element. For us I think that could be playing the right winger as a bit of a hybrid CM/RM maybe something that Camara, C. Campbell or Anderson could do, and then you have Tenai Watson bombing on and making it a 3-5-2 going forward. With Thomas at LCB/LB it should be quite easy for us to set up in this way

    Or alternatively you could have Edun or Assimwe (probably better than Watson at this type of role) inverting into midfield so that we still have 3 in there, and again end up with a 3-5-2 shape when we have the ball and then 4-4-2 (or 4-4-1-1) without. This one is probably less good as an option and maybe a bit complex for league 1 
  • edited October 2023
    At least the Charlton critics who said they had never seen Isted make a save for Cafc, have seen half a dozen now.

    A sorry state of affairs when the positives are we have kept a clean sheet against a low scoring team BUT boys and girls that is where we are and how ever massive you think we were/are it's going to be a real grind to be a contender but if we can be tighter at the back then in many games scoring 1 or 2 goals can see 3 points. Achieving that on a regular basis is the hard bit !

    We kept a clean sheet with Watson, Hector, Jones and Thomas all being half decent as a defensive unit with Isted. The catch 22 is Thomas will help the left sided defence but you loose the attacking aspect of a Left back. 

    Only 4 games unbeaten but winning at home and drawing away is a big improvement but missed opportunity yesterday and the 1st half shows that as a team we are still trying to identify our best 11 or 16 to influence a positive result. 

    Two home games coming up and the performance over 100 minutes must be improved.

    I hope we can get a positive 60 minutes out of Fraser which will assist May and Leaburn who need to play closer together to feed off each other.
  • supaclive said:
    We have FIVE centre forwards/forwards capable of playing in a two up front and two wingers who could play in a 4-3-3 

    Yet we insist on playing 4-3-3 or just one up front.  

    Alfie May
    Leaburn 
    Chuks

    Are arguably with Dobbo, our best 3 players.

    Has to be 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 and CBT plays wide as wing back or wide left. 

    We shouldn't play a formation that is in vogue if we don't have the players to play it.  We are 15th in Division 3.   We just struggled to a point away at Shrewsbury.


    4-3-3 wasn't the issue when we beat Wycombe a week ago, Leaburn was one of out better players when played out wide that particular game.

    What happens when we play 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 and we struggle to get a point against Exeter or whoever we play it against

    Do we change formation again, because it didn't work once?

    Why would 3-5-2 have worked yesterday?

    Shrewsbury had a narrow pitch so playing it wide was always doomed to failure - 4-2-2-2 was the one that ultimately seemed to work in the end, it was a combination of failing to make a breakthrough, and running out of time that stopped it being a success. 
    We changed from 4-3-3 against Wycombe in the second half.....
  • Sponsored links:


  • supaclive said:
    supaclive said:
    We have FIVE centre forwards/forwards capable of playing in a two up front and two wingers who could play in a 4-3-3 

    Yet we insist on playing 4-3-3 or just one up front.  

    Alfie May
    Leaburn 
    Chuks

    Are arguably with Dobbo, our best 3 players.

    Has to be 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 and CBT plays wide as wing back or wide left. 

    We shouldn't play a formation that is in vogue if we don't have the players to play it.  We are 15th in Division 3.   We just struggled to a point away at Shrewsbury.


    4-3-3 wasn't the issue when we beat Wycombe a week ago, Leaburn was one of out better players when played out wide that particular game.

    What happens when we play 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 and we struggle to get a point against Exeter or whoever we play it against

    Do we change formation again, because it didn't work once?

    Why would 3-5-2 have worked yesterday?

    Shrewsbury had a narrow pitch so playing it wide was always doomed to failure - 4-2-2-2 was the one that ultimately seemed to work in the end, it was a combination of failing to make a breakthrough, and running out of time that stopped it being a success. 
    We changed from 4-3-3 against Wycombe in the second half.....
    Explains why we conceded then... 😏
  • edited October 2023
    I'm still a bit puzzled why Appleton prefers TC to Chem in that central 10 role, when Chem is more natural there and a bit more experienced.
    I assume its TC's pace/acceleration that Appleton wants to use if possible, but I do agree Chem would seem the more logical choice.
  • thenewbie said:
    I'm still a bit puzzled why Appleton prefers TC to Chem in that central 10 role, when Chem is more natural there and a bit more experienced.
    I assume its TC's pace/acceleration that Appleton wants to use if possible, but I do agree Chem would seem the more logical choice.
    Yes its stick or twist
  • Went to the game.
    First half was soul destroying on every level, from the car park to the half time whistle.

    Impressed again with the management of this game. 


    Feel we would have lost this without the new gaffer.

  • Cafc43v3r said:
    Across the Premier League, Championship and League One yesterday, four teams (6.66%) played in 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 formations.

    - Everton (4-4-1-1) lost 1-2 at home to Luton. They’ve lost 5 out of 7 games so far this season.

    - Cheltenham (4-4-2) lost 2-0 at Lincoln. They haven’t scored all season and are rock bottom of the league.

    - Reading (4-4-2) and Burton (4-4-2) played out a nil nil draw against each other. Burton are 20th in the league, Reading are 21st.



    There’s a reason teams at our level don’t play it anymore… it doesn’t win games of football.
    Ok so we’ll do the same despite being utter garbage at 4 3 3 for the last 3 seasons let’s not try to change it up just stick with what others do. 
    The question is more why are we utter garbage despite having a totally different set of players.  Most of whom will never had played 442 in their professional careers.  

    One of the reasons we have been out played, especially in the first half of the last two away games is because we haven't had any control in the midfield.  In the Wycombe game the game turned against us when we lost the control we had.  The solution isn't to take a player out of that area to give us more control is it?

    I can also see the argument that Campbell, neither of them, is actually a central midfielder so you wouldn't lose anything by swapping them and Leaburn round and basically playing a 424.  With round pegs in round holes.  That might well be a better way of using the players selected/available but it's probably not the long term answer either.

    Long term we need 3, at least, proper central midfielders away from home and against the better teams at home else we won't have control of anything.  Fraser, Taylor and Camara being fit will make a massive difference.

    The big question is how do you get your 3 best attacking players, May, Leaburn and CBT in the same side AND 3 central mids.  Or do you come to the conclusion you don't actually try and sacrifice one for a better balanced team, in the long run?
    In a proper 4 4 2 you have four midfielders! The two wide ones go wider up front and narrower defending eg Newton and Robinson for example. 
    It’s not formations though it’s the lack of quality midfielders. 
  • edited October 2023
    kentred2 said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    Across the Premier League, Championship and League One yesterday, four teams (6.66%) played in 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 formations.

    - Everton (4-4-1-1) lost 1-2 at home to Luton. They’ve lost 5 out of 7 games so far this season.

    - Cheltenham (4-4-2) lost 2-0 at Lincoln. They haven’t scored all season and are rock bottom of the league.

    - Reading (4-4-2) and Burton (4-4-2) played out a nil nil draw against each other. Burton are 20th in the league, Reading are 21st.



    There’s a reason teams at our level don’t play it anymore… it doesn’t win games of football.
    Ok so we’ll do the same despite being utter garbage at 4 3 3 for the last 3 seasons let’s not try to change it up just stick with what others do. 
    The question is more why are we utter garbage despite having a totally different set of players.  Most of whom will never had played 442 in their professional careers.  

    One of the reasons we have been out played, especially in the first half of the last two away games is because we haven't had any control in the midfield.  In the Wycombe game the game turned against us when we lost the control we had.  The solution isn't to take a player out of that area to give us more control is it?

    I can also see the argument that Campbell, neither of them, is actually a central midfielder so you wouldn't lose anything by swapping them and Leaburn round and basically playing a 424.  With round pegs in round holes.  That might well be a better way of using the players selected/available but it's probably not the long term answer either.

    Long term we need 3, at least, proper central midfielders away from home and against the better teams at home else we won't have control of anything.  Fraser, Taylor and Camara being fit will make a massive difference.

    The big question is how do you get your 3 best attacking players, May, Leaburn and CBT in the same side AND 3 central mids.  Or do you come to the conclusion you don't actually try and sacrifice one for a better balanced team, in the long run?
    In a proper 4 4 2 you have four midfielders! The two wide ones go wider up front and narrower defending eg Newton and Robinson for example. 
    It’s not formations though it’s the lack of quality midfielders. 
    It's true but also worth remembering that in the times of Newton & Robinson the opposition were also playing 442. Sitting narrow was a way of showing a team outside, not really a way of picking up the oppo's extra midfielder. Your wideman can't get that central. 
  • kentred2 said:
    Cafc43v3r said:
    Across the Premier League, Championship and League One yesterday, four teams (6.66%) played in 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 formations.

    - Everton (4-4-1-1) lost 1-2 at home to Luton. They’ve lost 5 out of 7 games so far this season.

    - Cheltenham (4-4-2) lost 2-0 at Lincoln. They haven’t scored all season and are rock bottom of the league.

    - Reading (4-4-2) and Burton (4-4-2) played out a nil nil draw against each other. Burton are 20th in the league, Reading are 21st.



    There’s a reason teams at our level don’t play it anymore… it doesn’t win games of football.
    Ok so we’ll do the same despite being utter garbage at 4 3 3 for the last 3 seasons let’s not try to change it up just stick with what others do. 
    The question is more why are we utter garbage despite having a totally different set of players.  Most of whom will never had played 442 in their professional careers.  

    One of the reasons we have been out played, especially in the first half of the last two away games is because we haven't had any control in the midfield.  In the Wycombe game the game turned against us when we lost the control we had.  The solution isn't to take a player out of that area to give us more control is it?

    I can also see the argument that Campbell, neither of them, is actually a central midfielder so you wouldn't lose anything by swapping them and Leaburn round and basically playing a 424.  With round pegs in round holes.  That might well be a better way of using the players selected/available but it's probably not the long term answer either.

    Long term we need 3, at least, proper central midfielders away from home and against the better teams at home else we won't have control of anything.  Fraser, Taylor and Camara being fit will make a massive difference.

    The big question is how do you get your 3 best attacking players, May, Leaburn and CBT in the same side AND 3 central mids.  Or do you come to the conclusion you don't actually try and sacrifice one for a better balanced team, in the long run?
    In a proper 4 4 2 you have four midfielders! The two wide ones go wider up front and narrower defending eg Newton and Robinson for example. 
    It’s not formations though it’s the lack of quality midfielders. 
    Robinson and Newton came through youth team football when that was the norm, Campbell(s), CBT and any other modern players didn't and as @Chunes says everyone one else did it so it cancelled its self out. 

    Curbs ditched it half way through our first season  in the Prem, 25 years ago, for a reason and that reason hasn't changed.
  • If a couple of more players are off form on a given day then any formation can break down and look poor.
    Paper, rock, scissors: meaning that if players play poorly the best coaches can look useless and 3-5-2 can beat 4-3-3 or vice Versa.
    Roberto De Zerbi yesterday as his team lacked energy and they were so open when they kept losing the ball in midfield and were thrashed in transition.

    For Charlton it makes common sense that if you have a 6ft 4 striker he spends more time central than out wide. No issue in dragging a CB out wide on occasions but headed goals will only happen for Leaburn in the box not on the wing. 

    Switching formations during a game really shouldn't be an issue for a professional team that can spend morning and afternoon at the training ground during the week getting it off pat.

    Intelligent footballers may sound like an oxymoron but understanding coaching instructions should be why they are professionals and not playing on the common.

  • Sponsored links:


  • A pretty awful first half, in which Shrewsbury were a yard faster, won practically all the 50/50s and were unfortunate not to be ahead following a couple of excellent saves from Isted. In the face of the pressure they exerted when out of possession, we were unable to put more than a couple of passes together (save along the backline) and there was practically zero movement from our players.

    Things improved in the second half, particularly once Shrewsbury started to tire and we introduced Aneke and Watson, although the home side still had the better, clear-cut chances. Objectively speaking, I think we were a shade fortunate to come away with a point. 

    Although I've seen goalless draws with far less goalmouth action, this was a very low quality game and an extremely hard watch. As ever, however, there were a few positives, namely:
    - a clean sheet and a point away from home; 
    - further minutes for Tennai Watson and Chuks;
    - the return of Fraser and Asiimwe; and
    - the fact that Dobbo and May managed to navigate another game without picking up a 5th yellow card to trigger a suspension.
  • Right more time to post.

    Off the rip I will say quite literally no one played well expect Isted, Chuks when he came on, Fraser for his cameo and Jones. The rest were bang average, which happens. 

    Worth noting that every Shrewsbury fan I spoke to, and it was a fair few, all said that they are quite unlucky and have been playing decent footie just not getting the results. Can be tricky playing a team in a rut as they are desperate to get out of it. I think Appleton should be credited with sorting us out defensively as we would have conceded with Holden for sure. Now he needs to find a way of making us more creative though as the attacking play was terrible first half and we could have been 2 or 3 down if it wasn't for the fantastic Isted. 

    Second half way better (largely thanks to Chuks). We had a fair few chances just wasn't our day. Not a terrible result though, positives are, we are still chipping away at points, we looked solid defensively & kept a clean sheet. 

    I will say now though, it's very important to get at least 4 points in our next two home games against Exeter and Blackpool to keep this 'momentum' going. Anything less means we will still be chasing.

    Enjoyable last half an hour game of footie certainly. 
  • Four points would be acceptable but we should be targetting six. If this run is a springboard then it requires us jumping off it!
  • NabySarr said:
    NabySarr said:
    Across the Premier League, Championship and League One yesterday, four teams (6.66%) played in 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 formations.

    - Everton (4-4-1-1) lost 1-2 at home to Luton. They’ve lost 5 out of 7 games so far this season.

    - Cheltenham (4-4-2) lost 2-0 at Lincoln. They haven’t scored all season and are rock bottom of the league.

    - Reading (4-4-2) and Burton (4-4-2) played out a nil nil draw against each other. Burton are 20th in the league, Reading are 21st.



    There’s a reason teams at our level don’t play it anymore… it doesn’t win games of football.
    Our best run of the season last year came playing 4-4-2. Also Norwich have been playing it most of the season and doing well, Villa have been playing it too and doing well, and beat Brighton who played it yesterday too. 

    It would probably mean sacrificing control of the game and playing more direct, which I think would suit us. But that’s not appletons style so it won’t happen. 

    We need to play 3-4-1-2, that’s what this squad was built for. It is really strange that we recruited a manager to play a different system to Holden. Appleton needs to be pragmatic and get the best out of the squad he has, not trying to fit the squad into how he plays 

                          Isted 
            Jones   Hector  Thomas 
    Watson  Watson   Dobson   CBT
                       C.Campbell (Fraser when fit)
                    Leaburn May 

    We showed on the opening day that if CBT has Thomas behind him we can almost convert to a back 4 and mean that he won’t have to defend much. That is still our best performance of the season but it seems Holden and now Appleton don’t realise this 
    I might be wrong because I only went off a scan of formations in my scores app but I have both Aston Villa and Brighton playing 4-2-3-1 yesterday. Moussa Diaby and Danny Welbeck setting up as central attacking midfielders. Norwich similarly in past weeks with Ashley Barnes playing off of Adam Idah.

    I think there is a wider conversation to be had about the fluidity of formations and how ultimately they don’t really matter a great deal in the attacking phase as ideally when you’re attacking, 4-3-3 easily becomes a 4-2-3-1 which becomes a 4-4-1-1 which becomes a 4-4-2 which becomes a 4-3-3 etc etc. but I’ve tried approaching that topic before and got shut down so here we are.
    The apps often have these things wrong. And it is often that teams have different shapes in and out of possession or things are more fluid as you say. Villa is a bit of hybrid but Diaby is playing more as a striker than he is anything else, Emery has often favoured 4-4-2 at both Villa and Villarreal, especially when they don’t have the ball. This screenshot below looks very 4-4-2 vs 4-4-2 but Villa were also 3-4-1-2 at times 



    I tend to look at average positions, rather than what the apps have said the formation is. If you look at Norwich games when Barnes was fit, he was playing alongside Idah, and Diaby is often alongside Watkins for Villa. 

    I think the learnings from this is probably you can’t play an old fashioned 4-4-2 but you can still play it with maybe a hybrid element. For us I think that could be playing the right winger as a bit of a hybrid CM/RM maybe something that Camara, C. Campbell or Anderson could do, and then you have Tenai Watson bombing on and making it a 3-5-2 going forward. With Thomas at LCB/LB it should be quite easy for us to set up in this way

    Or alternatively you could have Edun or Assimwe (probably better than Watson at this type of role) inverting into midfield so that we still have 3 in there, and again end up with a 3-5-2 shape when we have the ball and then 4-4-2 (or 4-4-1-1) without. This one is probably less good as an option and maybe a bit complex for league 1 
    I think there's little value in comparing formations against Premier League teams because it's just such a different level of tactical ability. If you look at Villa's shape there out of possession their centre mids are pushed right up onto Brighton's two and their wide men are far deeper, monitoring runs from the full backs as they know the likes of Estupinan are a big part of Brighton's attacking threat. Villa had John McGinn, a centre mid essentially, on the right and had Zaniolo on the left who is a winger. He was poor though and got replaced by Jacob Ramsey, another narrow wide man/centre mid who was much better in that role. I just don't see that working for us out of possession, neither Dobson nor Fraser have the positional discipline to press consistently and CBT and Campbell aren't the narrow, tactically disciplined wide players required. Our press isn't triggered in certain phases and consistent like a lot of these teams. I don't think our players can work multiple shapes in and out of possession so we're on a different planet to a lot of these Prem teams. I don't love 352 but I think it's probably a bit of a shame that it's been chucked in the bin after Holden was forced to set up without a proper pair of wingbacks and fit strikers as it's one of the ways we could get Leaburn and May playing close to each other
  • And am I understanding right? , Shrewsbury narrowed the plitch before this game?

    Not quite, speaking to a Shrews ury supporter, the manager narrowed the pitch at the start of the season, to favour the style of football he wanted to play, and of course to deny width to the opposition.


    If he’s right, and he must know more than us then it’s perfectly reasonable, and what the law intended, so Shrews have no case to answer. So there will be other pitches and teams like that and MA will need to work out how to deal with them. ( I am sure he can). 
  • edited October 2023
    NabySarr said:
    NabySarr said:
    Across the Premier League, Championship and League One yesterday, four teams (6.66%) played in 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 formations.

    - Everton (4-4-1-1) lost 1-2 at home to Luton. They’ve lost 5 out of 7 games so far this season.

    - Cheltenham (4-4-2) lost 2-0 at Lincoln. They haven’t scored all season and are rock bottom of the league.

    - Reading (4-4-2) and Burton (4-4-2) played out a nil nil draw against each other. Burton are 20th in the league, Reading are 21st.



    There’s a reason teams at our level don’t play it anymore… it doesn’t win games of football.
    Our best run of the season last year came playing 4-4-2. Also Norwich have been playing it most of the season and doing well, Villa have been playing it too and doing well, and beat Brighton who played it yesterday too. 

    It would probably mean sacrificing control of the game and playing more direct, which I think would suit us. But that’s not appletons style so it won’t happen. 

    We need to play 3-4-1-2, that’s what this squad was built for. It is really strange that we recruited a manager to play a different system to Holden. Appleton needs to be pragmatic and get the best out of the squad he has, not trying to fit the squad into how he plays 

                          Isted 
            Jones   Hector  Thomas 
    Watson  Watson   Dobson   CBT
                       C.Campbell (Fraser when fit)
                    Leaburn May 

    We showed on the opening day that if CBT has Thomas behind him we can almost convert to a back 4 and mean that he won’t have to defend much. That is still our best performance of the season but it seems Holden and now Appleton don’t realise this 
    I might be wrong because I only went off a scan of formations in my scores app but I have both Aston Villa and Brighton playing 4-2-3-1 yesterday. Moussa Diaby and Danny Welbeck setting up as central attacking midfielders. Norwich similarly in past weeks with Ashley Barnes playing off of Adam Idah.

    I think there is a wider conversation to be had about the fluidity of formations and how ultimately they don’t really matter a great deal in the attacking phase as ideally when you’re attacking, 4-3-3 easily becomes a 4-2-3-1 which becomes a 4-4-1-1 which becomes a 4-4-2 which becomes a 4-3-3 etc etc. but I’ve tried approaching that topic before and got shut down so here we are.
    The apps often have these things wrong. And it is often that teams have different shapes in and out of possession or things are more fluid as you say. Villa is a bit of hybrid but Diaby is playing more as a striker than he is anything else, Emery has often favoured 4-4-2 at both Villa and Villarreal, especially when they don’t have the ball. This screenshot below looks very 4-4-2 vs 4-4-2 but Villa were also 3-4-1-2 at times 



    I tend to look at average positions, rather than what the apps have said the formation is. If you look at Norwich games when Barnes was fit, he was playing alongside Idah, and Diaby is often alongside Watkins for Villa. 

    I think the learnings from this is probably you can’t play an old fashioned 4-4-2 but you can still play it with maybe a hybrid element. For us I think that could be playing the right winger as a bit of a hybrid CM/RM maybe something that Camara, C. Campbell or Anderson could do, and then you have Tenai Watson bombing on and making it a 3-5-2 going forward. With Thomas at LCB/LB it should be quite easy for us to set up in this way

    Or alternatively you could have Edun or Assimwe (probably better than Watson at this type of role) inverting into midfield so that we still have 3 in there, and again end up with a 3-5-2 shape when we have the ball and then 4-4-2 (or 4-4-1-1) without. This one is probably less good as an option and maybe a bit complex for league 1 
    I think there's little value in comparing formations against Premier League teams because it's just such a different level of tactical ability. If you look at Villa's shape there out of possession their centre mids are pushed right up onto Brighton's two and their wide men are far deeper, monitoring runs from the full backs as they know the likes of Estupinan are a big part of Brighton's attacking threat. Villa had John McGinn, a centre mid essentially, on the right and had Zaniolo on the left who is a winger. He was poor though and got replaced by Jacob Ramsey, another narrow wide man/centre mid who was much better in that role. I just don't see that working for us out of possession, neither Dobson nor Fraser have the positional discipline to press consistently and CBT and Campbell aren't the narrow, tactically disciplined wide players required. Our press isn't triggered in certain phases and consistent like a lot of these teams. I don't think our players can work multiple shapes in and out of possession so we're on a different planet to a lot of these Prem teams. I don't love 352 but I think it's probably a bit of a shame that it's been chucked in the bin after Holden was forced to set up without a proper pair of wingbacks and fit strikers as it's one of the ways we could get Leaburn and May playing close to each other
    Yeah I do agree with you. Was more just to say that teams do still play 4-4-2 in the modern game. I’m sure Jackson’s Wimbledon are a better example of how that might work at this level and they seem to be doing very well at it. 

    3-5-2 has to be the way forward but I can’t see Appleton changing his ways. I think he’s going to be another Karl Robinson where we set up to his system rather than him picking the best system for the available players 
  • Gribbo said:
    Beale be available by Monday, just saying
    Top punditry there if I do say so myself


    ;)
  • Really disliked today’s game for many reasons. Shrewsbury are shit, we did not look like we were going to roll them over at any point today and if we are in for any sort of push for the play offs, we need to roll over teams like this. No more complicated. 

    I thought the formation was wrong today and the way Leaburn and TC were played was all wrong. Up to now have been pretty impressed with Appleton, today, less so. 

    CBT was absolutely anonymous. This happens from time to time and players can be marked out of a game, so why was he kept on for so long or kept in the same role. He can be one of our most potent threats, but wasted today.

    Isted’s shot stopping was top drawer, one of the flying saves absolutely brilliant, but I thought his slow distribution (unless instructed to do so) was such a drag and I got so wound up by taking the piss with the striker marauding down on him, that it kind of killed my appreciation of all the rest of his game (which was his best for us to date).

    Overall, really wound up, as regardless of what is to come, taking a point at Bolton or Derby is something to shout about toward a promotion push, these mediocre type performances and not taking three points back home kind of shouts mid table (again). 

    Struggled to clap them at the end of the game, didn’t boo or anything like that, but overall thought those up there were generous at the end of the game. 
    Yep agree 100% Pav
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!