Guest michaelfoster Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 Never going to work with our squad, when we are under attack a back 3 becomes a back 5, and with Nicky Butt playing as the defensive minded midfielder of the 3, we end up only having 4 players able to get forward GK CB CB CB RWB LWB MC MC MC ST ST I think our best shout is 4-3-1-2 because we are nowhere near good enough to play 3 in defence, when everyone is fit *coughs* this would be my idea team. Harper Beye Coloccini Taylor Enrique Jonas Barton Guthrie Owen Viduka Martins Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Luque Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 ok lets do that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segun Oluwaniyi Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 The thing with the 3-5-2 today, was that we only really have one player capable of being a wingback, and he was playing in centre midfield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parsley Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 As someone mentioned in one of the other post-match threads, its clearly a stop-gap until Enrique's back in the side. With his return we'll go back to 4-3-3 indefinitely in my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 4-3-1-2? Hey, that's like a 4-3-3 isn't it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexf Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 how many times this season have we have. beye,bassong, enrique, jonas, barton, guthrie,owen,viduka, martins all fit at the same time? i cnt rememer one game where we were able to field all those players in the same team. because argueable they are all 1st choice but never fit at the same time. so fingers crossed we have them available for the 3 home games. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest michaelfoster Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 4-3-1-2? Hey, that's like a 4-3-3 isn't it? No its like 4-3-1-2 Owen's pretty shit up front these days tbf and he plays better behind the 2 strikers (ala Keegan) so maybe him playing there will benefit us because he couldnt score in a brothel atm Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 whens enrique back ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 4-3-1-2? Hey, that's like a 4-3-3 isn't it? No its like 4-3-1-2 Owen's pretty s*** up front these days tbf and he plays better behind the 2 strikers (ala Keegan) so maybe him playing there will benefit us because he couldnt score in a brothel atm You mean the Keegan 4-3-3? Gotcha. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segun Oluwaniyi Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 I'm sorry, but Keegan does not own a formation ffs. Especially when he's only used it like 6 times in his entire career. But yeah, as the man figured out last year, we have 3 real good strikers who are probaly all better than our midfielders. So 4-3-3 it is. Use our talent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest optimistic nit Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 Never going to work with our squad, when we are under attack a back 3 becomes a back 5, and with Nicky Butt playing as the defensive minded midfielder of the 3, we end up only having 4 players able to get forward GK CB CB CB RWB LWB MC MC MC ST ST I think our best shout is 4-3-1-2 because we are nowhere near good enough to play 3 in defence, when everyone is fit *coughs* this would be my idea team. Harper Beye Coloccini Taylor Enrique Jonas Barton Guthrie Owen Viduka Martins Bassong? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest michaelfoster Posted April 19, 2009 Share Posted April 19, 2009 Bassong? Knew id forgot someone Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparta Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 To be honest i think it looks more like a 2-3-2-1-2 formation... or a attacking 5-3-2 if you like GK CB CB RB DM LB CM CM ACM/ST ST ST From what i could see, we always had one attacking fullback, wich works best with the 4-3-3 system, but is adequate with the 5-3-2 as well. I think shearer is trying to protect our goalie by having a lot of people back, and then pushing on the counter attack (usually producing a corner where we can move more people up and snatch the winner) Problem is, the system fails miserably since we dont have players for that system... or 4-3-3... (we might at 4-3-3 if EVERYONE is match fit) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jayson Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 To be honest i think it looks more like a 2-3-2-1-2 formation... or a attacking 5-3-2 if you like GK CB CB RB DM LB CM CM ACM/ST ST ST From what i could see, we always had one attacking fullback, wich works best with the 4-3-3 system, but is adequate with the 5-3-2 as well. I think shearer is trying to protect our goalie by having a lot of people back, and then pushing on the counter attack (usually producing a corner where we can move more people up and snatch the winner) Problem is, the system fails miserably since we dont have players for that system or 4-3-3... (we might at 4-3-3 if EVERYONE is match fit) Yep, we should have though. Duff & Taylor on the wings should both have been capable of getting foward, they simply didnt want to. Lack of confidence or confusion who knows, but they left massive gaps on each side in midfield which spurs exploited. I think in general the players have to be more confident in attacking with the ball, we're far to happy to loop a crap ball in...lose it...& run around after it. Only to repeat. Its as if they dont expect to do anything with the ball..so they want to be prepared for the oppositions attack by not even having to run back into position. So they dont go foward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 Three at the back is so rarely used by anyone now, whether here or on the continent. It seems to me that it has to be used as an attacking formation, because if it ends up as a 5-3-2 the midfield just ends up getting overrun. We just aren't good enough or confident enough to make it work at the moment. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted April 20, 2009 Share Posted April 20, 2009 I think if you replaced the 2nd rate/clapped out players with better quality ones you could play any formation you want. As it is, it's like playing with eight men. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shak Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 The only team I've ever seen make wing backs work was Brazil around the turn of the century. They did have possibly the two best players ever suited to the wing-back position of course, Cafu and Roberto Carlos. We have Ryan Taylor and Damien Duff. Enrique or not next Monday it'd be absolute lunacy to try this fucking bullshit formation again. We've looked absolutely and completely useless every second we've been in this system the last two games. It was only when we abandoned it against Stoke and let Duff play much further up field that we started to look in any way threatening and got our goal. The moment we reverted to it after the goal it handed Stoke the initiative and they naturally finished the game looking the more likely winners. Can't believe Shearer claimed it actually worked against them, we were useless. Same against Spurs for most of the first half, again the minute we abandoned it we improved immediately. If Enrique doesn't make it next Monday, play Duff or Bassong at LB. I can only hope that Shearer has gotten it out of his system and is going to go with a formation that makes some sense. If he hasn't, I don't see us getting a win next Monday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luc Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 With the players we have in midfield it's more like 3-3-2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JH Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 ... Nah, it's more of a 2-2-3-1-2 IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rinaldo #18 Posted April 21, 2009 Share Posted April 21, 2009 Imo the starting 11 should be: Harper Beye-Bassong Edgar-Enrique Guthrie-Smith-Barton --------Jonás Martins-Viduka/Carroll Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now