The thread about how we should play

[Ryan_Taylor]

4-3-3 all went to pot (in the mind of Pardew) after we got twatted at Wigan last season. We've been full of fear ever since, give or take the odd half decent game/45 mins (usually after a panic switch from 4-42). What we need to do more than change the formation, is get over the fear of conceding and playing just to "nick a goal" then hope for the best. Fear, more than formation is crippling us this season. IMO

[loki679]

If Cabaye and Tiote are outnumbered and struggling in the centre, getting pushed deeper and deeper and hence dragging our wingers deeper, what would you suggest?

 

edit to add:  Saying the formation means nothing is just as retarded as saying it means everything.  You need good players combined with a coherent gameplan, off the ball movement and a system that allows the players to perform to their best.  It's not one or the other, you need to combine the aspects to build a team.

[Ryan_Taylor]

If Cabaye and Tiote are outnumbered and struggling in the centre, getting pushed deeper and deeper and hence dragging our wingers deeper, what would you suggest?

 

edit to add:  Saying the formation means nothing is just as retarded as saying it means everything.  You need good players combined with a coherent gameplan, off the ball movement and a system that allows the players to perform to their best.  It's not one or the other, you need to combine the aspects to build a team.

 

This aimed at me?

[loki679]

If Cabaye and Tiote are outnumbered and struggling in the centre, getting pushed deeper and deeper and hence dragging our wingers deeper, what would you suggest?

 

edit to add:  Saying the formation means nothing is just as retarded as saying it means everything.  You need good players combined with a coherent gameplan, off the ball movement and a system that allows the players to perform to their best.  It's not one or the other, you need to combine the aspects to build a team.

 

This aimed at me?

 

It's not really aimed at anyone, more of a theoretical question   I think we can be guilty of oversimplifying things sometimes.  My point of view is that by playing the 4-4-2 formation we're hamstringing ourselves to a certain extent.  If we want to play the best we can then we will need to optimise all aspects of our game of which the formation is one.  We have the players to get away with playing 4-4-2 if the other aspects of are game are being well executed but, all other things being equal I think we would play better in 4-3-3 than 4-4-2.

 

That is to say that if we cloned our whole team and had both teams playing to exactly the same standard, same amount of movement etc etc with the only difference being the formation then I think 4-3-3 would win.

[madras]

Regarding the point you made about Ben Arfa, say that we're not in possession and we already have three midfielders in that area of the pitch, that makes it less likely for Ben Arfa to be forced to drop as deep and as often as he would have to in a 4-4-2, it's not rocket science.

so what if we have 3 midfielders in there, they may have 5 at that bgiven time and if so numerous things could happen, they may be very light up front and that could leave an ooprtunity for a full back to push in a bit or one of the forwards (not necessarily ben arfa) depending on the position on the field they are at that given time. we'll put that under the title of "AWARENESS".

 

remember back to the entertainers, nominally a 4-4-2, in practise very fluid and a team full of movement and awareness you could take an in game picture and not work out a set formation or who was supposed to be where, the best teams usually are. right now you can take a snap shot in game and you can see the rigidity of our formation, you can close your eyes and if someone tells you we have the ball in a particular place on the place you'd have a90% chance of naming the player.

 

you're right it's not rocket science but for many it's like a computer game.

[Ikon]

Regarding the point you made about Ben Arfa, say that we're not in possession and we already have three midfielders in that area of the pitch, that makes it less likely for Ben Arfa to be forced to drop as deep and as often as he would have to in a 4-4-2, it's not rocket science.

so what if we have 3 midfielders in there, they may have 5 at that bgiven time and if so numerous things could happen, they may be very light up front and that could leave an ooprtunity for a full back to push in a bit or one of the forwards (not necessarily ben arfa) depending on the position on the field they are at that given time. we'll put that under the title of "AWARENESS".

 

remember back to the entertainers, nominally a 4-4-2, in practise very fluid and a team full of movement and awareness you could take an in game picture and not work out a set formation or who was supposed to be where, the best teams usually are. right now you can take a snap shot in game and you can see the rigidity of our formation, you can close your eyes and if someone tells you we have the ball in a particular place on the place you'd have a90% chance of naming the player.

 

you're right it's not rocket science but for many it's like a computer game.

[madras]

Regarding the point you made about Ben Arfa, say that we're not in possession and we already have three midfielders in that area of the pitch, that makes it less likely for Ben Arfa to be forced to drop as deep and as often as he would have to in a 4-4-2, it's not rocket science.

so what if we have 3 midfielders in there, they may have 5 at that bgiven time and if so numerous things could happen, they may be very light up front and that could leave an ooprtunity for a full back to push in a bit or one of the forwards (not necessarily ben arfa) depending on the position on the field they are at that given time. we'll put that under the title of "AWARENESS".

 

remember back to the entertainers, nominally a 4-4-2, in practise very fluid and a team full of movement and awareness you could take an in game picture and not work out a set formation or who was supposed to be where, the best teams usually are. right now you can take a snap shot in game and you can see the rigidity of our formation, you can close your eyes and if someone tells you we have the ball in a particular place on the place you'd have a90% chance of naming the player.

 

you're right it's not rocket science but for many it's like a computer game.

well 3 would get over ran by 5 so someone would still have to drop in or push in. think about it man, we are often getting over ran with 4 in the middle.

[Mick]

For f***s sake, this has now gone too far, it's very champ manageresque.

 

if we play the fabled 4-3-3 and ben arfa is given license to roam and drops a little deeper, hey presto we've got a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-1-2, if santon attacks down the left have we gone to a 3 man back line ?. julian dicks as described above was basically right. it doen't matter what the system or formation if there is no movement or awareness hence it's players that win games. it's probably this over reliance on formations etc that is negating the movement and making us so rigid.

 

i'd rather, even with the personnel we have, play a mobile type of 4-4-2 that a rigid 4-3-3.

 

I'd rather play a mobile 4-3-3 with our players than a mobile 4-4-2.  We don't have wingers who can make a 4-4-2 work on a regular basis. 

 

PS

 

I've never played a computer football game in my life.

[Ikon]

Regarding the point you made about Ben Arfa, say that we're not in possession and we already have three midfielders in that area of the pitch, that makes it less likely for Ben Arfa to be forced to drop as deep and as often as he would have to in a 4-4-2, it's not rocket science.

so what if we have 3 midfielders in there, they may have 5 at that bgiven time and if so numerous things could happen, they may be very light up front and that could leave an ooprtunity for a full back to push in a bit or one of the forwards (not necessarily ben arfa) depending on the position on the field they are at that given time. we'll put that under the title of "AWARENESS".

 

remember back to the entertainers, nominally a 4-4-2, in practise very fluid and a team full of movement and awareness you could take an in game picture and not work out a set formation or who was supposed to be where, the best teams usually are. right now you can take a snap shot in game and you can see the rigidity of our formation, you can close your eyes and if someone tells you we have the ball in a particular place on the place you'd have a90% chance of naming the player.

 

you're right it's not rocket science but for many it's like a computer game.

well 3 would get over ran by 5 so someone would still have to drop in or push in. think about it man, we are often getting over ran with 4 in the middle.

 

Yes someone would have to drop in, but Ben Arfa for example wouldn't have to drop as deep as he has to now when we only have 2 there centrally. Surely you 've got to agree with me on this?

 

And more importantly when we're about to regain possession again in our own third, Ben Arfa can take more chances going forward/finding space in a more advanced position further up the field before we play the ball to him as we have more bodies in there. And at the same time having someone like Cabaye there creating some playing depth to our other two more central cm's.

[Ikon]

Sorry for my poor english, im at work and i might type a bit too fast atm.

[Cronky]

I think regardless of whether it's 4-3-3 or 4-4-2, the midfield and the strikers have to link up, and that's what's not happening. Although formations are categorised as though they were horizontal lines across the pitch, in practice if a team operated like that (as we're inclined to do) they'd look very static and predictable. Players have to operate as much one behind the other, as side by side. They have to look for space in between the lines.

 

We struggle because we don't have a striker who can drop back or a CM who really gets forward (I'd see Cabaye as more a playmaker). That's a problem for either formation.

 

[loki679]

static and predictable.

 

Nailed it.  That's the biggest problem we have right now regardless of formation.

[madras]

For f***s sake, this has now gone too far, it's very champ manageresque.

 

if we play the fabled 4-3-3 and ben arfa is given license to roam and drops a little deeper, hey presto we've got a 4-4-2 or a 4-3-1-2, if santon attacks down the left have we gone to a 3 man back line ?. julian dicks as described above was basically right. it doen't matter what the system or formation if there is no movement or awareness hence it's players that win games. it's probably this over reliance on formations etc that is negating the movement and making us so rigid.

 

i'd rather, even with the personnel we have, play a mobile type of 4-4-2 that a rigid 4-3-3.

 

I'd rather play a mobile 4-3-3 with our players than a mobile 4-4-2.  We don't have wingers who can make a 4-4-2 work on a regular basis. 

 

PS

 

I've never played a computer football game in my life.

the point i was getting at is that it doesn't matter which formation it is without the movement, a movement which should make it almost impossible to pigeon hole us to an exact formation.

[Guest neesy111]

Formation is least of our worries.  Some players need to learn how to pass and move again for starters.

[Mick]

the point i was getting at is that it doesn't matter which formation it is without the movement, a movement which should make it almost impossible to pigeon hole us to an exact formation.

 

I wouldn't really disagree with you too much as our movement is crap, it's being made worse though because of our lack of central midfielders.  Teams can just pass around us through the middle and then they are in on our defence.

[madras]

Regarding the point you made about Ben Arfa, say that we're not in possession and we already have three midfielders in that area of the pitch, that makes it less likely for Ben Arfa to be forced to drop as deep and as often as he would have to in a 4-4-2, it's not rocket science.

so what if we have 3 midfielders in there, they may have 5 at that bgiven time and if so numerous things could happen, they may be very light up front and that could leave an ooprtunity for a full back to push in a bit or one of the forwards (not necessarily ben arfa) depending on the position on the field they are at that given time. we'll put that under the title of "AWARENESS".

 

remember back to the entertainers, nominally a 4-4-2, in practise very fluid and a team full of movement and awareness you could take an in game picture and not work out a set formation or who was supposed to be where, the best teams usually are. right now you can take a snap shot in game and you can see the rigidity of our formation, you can close your eyes and if someone tells you we have the ball in a particular place on the place you'd have a90% chance of naming the player.

 

you're right it's not rocket science but for many it's like a computer game.

well 3 would get over ran by 5 so someone would still have to drop in or push in. think about it man, we are often getting over ran with 4 in the middle.

 

Yes someone would have to drop in, but Ben Arfa for example wouldn't have to drop as deep as he has to now when we only have 2 there centrally. Surely you 've got to agree with me on this?

 

And more importantly when we're about to regain possession again in our own third, Ben Arfa can take more chances going forward/finding space in a more advanced position further up the field before we play the ball to him as we have more bodies in there. And at the same time having someone like Cabaye there creating some playing depth to our other two more central cm's.

all you seem to besaying there is that ben arfa shouldn't be the one dropping back all the time and ba/cisse should take a turn. if you stick rigidly to having three in the middle then we have to be outnumbered unless the opposition does exactly the same as us.

 

all this talk of formations is taking place as if players aren't allowed to move.

[madras]

the point i was getting at is that it doesn't matter which formation it is without the movement, a movement which should make it almost impossible to pigeon hole us to an exact formation.

 

I wouldn't really disagree with you too much as our movement is crap, it's being made worse though because of our lack of central midfielders.  Teams can just pass around us through the middle and then they are in on our defence.

not just defensivly. how many times have you saw any of our central midfield be alongside or in advance of our forwards ?

[Ikon]

Don't know how many times i've mentioned our lack of movement during the season.

[Mick]

not just defensivly. how many times have you saw any of our central midfield be alongside or in advance of our forwards ?

 

Again, I wouldn't disagree.

[madras]

not just defensivly. how many times have you saw any of our central midfield be alongside or in advance of our forwards ?

 

Again, I wouldn't disagree.

just can't bring yourself to say you agree with me can you mick.

 

 

 

 

:D

 

 

 

 

 

[The College Dropout]

Yep passing and moving would be lovely. Not being so flat is another thing.

 

 

We have isolated strikers. Often low width. Our 4-4-2 is only close to working with Cabaye-Tiote who won't play together until mid February at the best of times.

[loki679]

Regarding the point you made about Ben Arfa, say that we're not in possession and we already have three midfielders in that area of the pitch, that makes it less likely for Ben Arfa to be forced to drop as deep and as often as he would have to in a 4-4-2, it's not rocket science.

so what if we have 3 midfielders in there, they may have 5 at that bgiven time and if so numerous things could happen, they may be very light up front and that could leave an ooprtunity for a full back to push in a bit or one of the forwards (not necessarily ben arfa) depending on the position on the field they are at that given time. we'll put that under the title of "AWARENESS".

 

remember back to the entertainers, nominally a 4-4-2, in practise very fluid and a team full of movement and awareness you could take an in game picture and not work out a set formation or who was supposed to be where, the best teams usually are. right now you can take a snap shot in game and you can see the rigidity of our formation, you can close your eyes and if someone tells you we have the ball in a particular place on the place you'd have a90% chance of naming the player.

 

you're right it's not rocket science but for many it's like a computer game.

well 3 would get over ran by 5 so someone would still have to drop in or push in. think about it man, we are often getting over ran with 4 in the middle.

 

Yes someone would have to drop in, but Ben Arfa for example wouldn't have to drop as deep as he has to now when we only have 2 there centrally. Surely you 've got to agree with me on this?

 

And more importantly when we're about to regain possession again in our own third, Ben Arfa can take more chances going forward/finding space in a more advanced position further up the field before we play the ball to him as we have more bodies in there. And at the same time having someone like Cabaye there creating some playing depth to our other two more central cm's.

all you seem to besaying there is that ben arfa shouldn't be the one dropping back all the time and ba/cisse should take a turn. if you stick rigidly to having three in the middle then we have to be outnumbered unless the opposition does exactly the same as us.

 

all this talk of formations is taking place as if players aren't allowed to move.

 

You're talking as if this is something we've never seen before, as if we'd be trying to play a 4-3-3 for the first time.  Look at the games from last season.  Where is your evidence that we play better in a 4-4-2?

[madras]

Regarding the point you made about Ben Arfa, say that we're not in possession and we already have three midfielders in that area of the pitch, that makes it less likely for Ben Arfa to be forced to drop as deep and as often as he would have to in a 4-4-2, it's not rocket science.

so what if we have 3 midfielders in there, they may have 5 at that bgiven time and if so numerous things could happen, they may be very light up front and that could leave an ooprtunity for a full back to push in a bit or one of the forwards (not necessarily ben arfa) depending on the position on the field they are at that given time. we'll put that under the title of "AWARENESS".

 

remember back to the entertainers, nominally a 4-4-2, in practise very fluid and a team full of movement and awareness you could take an in game picture and not work out a set formation or who was supposed to be where, the best teams usually are. right now you can take a snap shot in game and you can see the rigidity of our formation, you can close your eyes and if someone tells you we have the ball in a particular place on the place you'd have a90% chance of naming the player.

 

you're right it's not rocket science but for many it's like a computer game.

well 3 would get over ran by 5 so someone would still have to drop in or push in. think about it man, we are often getting over ran with 4 in the middle.

 

Yes someone would have to drop in, but Ben Arfa for example wouldn't have to drop as deep as he has to now when we only have 2 there centrally. Surely you 've got to agree with me on this?

 

And more importantly when we're about to regain possession again in our own third, Ben Arfa can take more chances going forward/finding space in a more advanced position further up the field before we play the ball to him as we have more bodies in there. And at the same time having someone like Cabaye there creating some playing depth to our other two more central cm's.

all you seem to besaying there is that ben arfa shouldn't be the one dropping back all the time and ba/cisse should take a turn. if you stick rigidly to having three in the middle then we have to be outnumbered unless the opposition does exactly the same as us.

 

all this talk of formations is taking place as if players aren't allowed to move.

 

You're talking as if this is something we've never seen before, as if we'd be trying to play a 4-3-3 for the first time.  Look at the games from last season.  Where is your evidence that we play better in a 4-4-2?

i never said we did, i've been an advocate of a 3 since we signed ben arfa, however without movement both ways are rendered crap and a 4-4-22 of sorts with movement would be better than 4-3-3 without. football is far too fluid for such pigeon holeing, the best I've ever seen NUFC play you couldn't really pin us down to a formation within the games themselves.

 

when I put teams on here I always hesitate on ben arfa's 'position' or put a caveat in about movement of the nomianl 'front 3'.

[loki679]

Regarding the point you made about Ben Arfa, say that we're not in possession and we already have three midfielders in that area of the pitch, that makes it less likely for Ben Arfa to be forced to drop as deep and as often as he would have to in a 4-4-2, it's not rocket science.

so what if we have 3 midfielders in there, they may have 5 at that bgiven time and if so numerous things could happen, they may be very light up front and that could leave an ooprtunity for a full back to push in a bit or one of the forwards (not necessarily ben arfa) depending on the position on the field they are at that given time. we'll put that under the title of "AWARENESS".

 

remember back to the entertainers, nominally a 4-4-2, in practise very fluid and a team full of movement and awareness you could take an in game picture and not work out a set formation or who was supposed to be where, the best teams usually are. right now you can take a snap shot in game and you can see the rigidity of our formation, you can close your eyes and if someone tells you we have the ball in a particular place on the place you'd have a90% chance of naming the player.

 

you're right it's not rocket science but for many it's like a computer game.

well 3 would get over ran by 5 so someone would still have to drop in or push in. think about it man, we are often getting over ran with 4 in the middle.

 

Yes someone would have to drop in, but Ben Arfa for example wouldn't have to drop as deep as he has to now when we only have 2 there centrally. Surely you 've got to agree with me on this?

 

And more importantly when we're about to regain possession again in our own third, Ben Arfa can take more chances going forward/finding space in a more advanced position further up the field before we play the ball to him as we have more bodies in there. And at the same time having someone like Cabaye there creating some playing depth to our other two more central cm's.

all you seem to besaying there is that ben arfa shouldn't be the one dropping back all the time and ba/cisse should take a turn. if you stick rigidly to having three in the middle then we have to be outnumbered unless the opposition does exactly the same as us.

 

all this talk of formations is taking place as if players aren't allowed to move.

 

You're talking as if this is something we've never seen before, as if we'd be trying to play a 4-3-3 for the first time.  Look at the games from last season.  Where is your evidence that we play better in a 4-4-2?

i never said we did, i've been an advocate of a 3 since we signed ben arfa, however without movement both ways are rendered crap and a 4-4-22 of sorts with movement would be better than 4-3-3 without. football is far too fluid for such pigeon holeing, the best I've ever seen NUFC play you couldn't really pin us down to a formation within the games themselves.

 

when I put teams on here I always hesitate on ben arfa's 'position' or put a caveat in about movement of the nomianl 'front 3'.

 

Why does the 4-3-3 have to be without movement?

[Ikon]

Don't know why you're talking as if some of us/me want 'pigeon holeing' or rigidity. I want fluid footie in a 4-3-3, and by that i don't mean pigeon holeing 4-3-3 either. Of course the whatever formation you use changes with movement and playing style, but you still have to have some kind of basic output with positions in a formation or what you wish to call it and then from the basics create different types of plays and movement. That doesn't mean you have to start at cordinate XX