loki679 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Didn't play either tonight Just happy the 'scrap 4-4-2' bit came true tbh Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Didn't play either tonight I've always assumed '4-3-3' was more of a blanket term on here for anything other than flat 4-4-2. last season during that run it was always seemed more of a 4-2-3-1 or 4-2-1-3 Cabaye's role was exactly same as Marveaux's was tonight. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagten Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Didn't play either tonight We played 4-3-3 tonight, no? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Didn't play either tonight We played 4-3-3 tonight, no? No. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagten Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Didn't play either tonight We played 4-3-3 tonight, no? No. Fairly sure we did, like. Tiote Anita - Marveaux Cisse - Ba - Jonas Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Didn't play either tonight We played 4-3-3 tonight, no? No. Fairly sure we did, like. Tiote Anita - Marveaux Cisse - Ba - Jonas wouldn't that be a 4-1-2-3 ? what i saw was a 4-1-2-2. haven't the foggiest where or what joans was supposed to be doing so haven't included him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ponsaelius Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Was 4-2-3-1. It's a similar shape though the way we played it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagten Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 That's the standard 4-3-3. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagten Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Was 4-2-3-1. It's a similar shape though the way we played it. Really thought it was a 1-2. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Flash Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Didn't play either tonight We played 4-3-3 tonight, no? No. Fairly sure we did, like. Tiote Anita - Marveaux Cisse - Ba - Jonas Jonas hardly went near the box tbh. Certainly not enough to call him a forward anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 The only important thing about the line up was that we had bodies in midfield. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 The only important thing about the line up was that we won the game. fyp. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 We definitely played exclusively 433. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATB Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Didn't play either tonight I've always assumed '4-3-3' was more of a blanket term on here for anything other than flat 4-4-2. yup Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted December 4, 2012 Share Posted December 4, 2012 Interested in what people's formations would be with everyone fit but on most up to date form Krul Simpson Saylor Colo Santon Anita Bigi HBA Cabaye Marv Ba probably, simpson out of place and Bigi is prefered to tiote leaving us lacking much physicality in that area but that side does make me drool right now. Doubt some will maintain form tho Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATB Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Fixed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pata Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 You can't pick Bigi ahead of Tiote. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mole_Toonfan Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 You can't pick Bigi ahead of Tiote. Aye as it stands it's definitely Anita-Tiote for me with Marv ahead of them at least until Cabaye is back anyway. Love Bigi to bits though although i'm unsure what his position is yet as he seems to excel in quite a few different roles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanSkÃrare Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Even Pardew says Bigi shouldn't be playing. He's very raw, we've seen that on several occasions now. I think Anita-Tioté-Marveaux has very good potential. Bigi looks as if he's a good replacement for Anita rather than Tioté. I think Perch is Tioté's best back-up. He has the aggression and physicallity to win the battle. Bigi's more of a technical, dynamic player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 I sort of agree just really sort of fed up with tiote :| Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sima Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 Bigirimana instead of Tiote ffs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiresias Posted December 5, 2012 Share Posted December 5, 2012 :'( Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbelievable Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 Well, at least we're more entertaining for the neutral viewers.. In all seriousness, whilst we look a damn sight more dangerous and attractive going forward in a 433/451 for some reason we also are considerably more vulnerable defensively, despite what some people say. Personally I think it is worth persevering with as a tactical setup (although not with a striker shoehorned in a wide position), but for it to work long term it needs better defenders first and foremost, Tiote (or defensive midfield replacement) to focus on his defensive role and hard working wide players that track back when the opposition full back likes to get forward. It's not just a matter of simply organising the frontline differently, it requires a transformation to our entire team dynamics. For all the flack Pardew gets lately, I think he has been badly let down by Ashley & co this summer in terms of not getting the defensive reinforcements he wanted and has massively overachieved last season, mainly thanks to giving our mediocre defenders as much protection as possible. It may have been negative, but at least it was effective. Discuss. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cronky Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 Well, at least we're more entertaining for the neutral viewers.. In all seriousness, whilst we look a damn sight more dangerous and attractive going forward in a 433/451 for some reason we also are considerably more vulnerable defensively, despite what some people say. Personally I think it is worth persevering with as a tactical setup (although not with a striker shoehorned in a wide position), but for it to work long term it needs better defenders first and foremost, Tiote (or defensive midfield replacement) to focus on his defensive role and hard working wide players that track back when the opposition full back likes to get forward. It's not just a matter of simply organising the frontline differently, it requires a transformation to our entire team dynamics. For all the flack Pardew gets lately, I think he has been badly let down by Ashley & co this summer in terms of not getting the defensive reinforcements he wanted and has massively overachieved last season, mainly thanks to giving our mediocre defenders as much protection as possible. It may have been negative, but at least it was effective. Discuss. In my distant and somewhat modest playing days, everyone played 4-4-2, so my knowledge of the finer points of 4-3-3 is limited. However, the theoretical problem that occurs to me is who protects the full back. In 4-4-2, it's obvious. In 4-3-3, is it the job of the wide midfield player, or the wide attacking player, or are they expected to sort it out between them? Genuine question. It does look to me like far more often now, our full backs are being exposed one-on-one. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 Well, at least we're more entertaining for the neutral viewers.. In all seriousness, whilst we look a damn sight more dangerous and attractive going forward in a 433/451 for some reason we also are considerably more vulnerable defensively, despite what some people say. Personally I think it is worth persevering with as a tactical setup (although not with a striker shoehorned in a wide position), but for it to work long term it needs better defenders first and foremost, Tiote (or defensive midfield replacement) to focus on his defensive role and hard working wide players that track back when the opposition full back likes to get forward. It's not just a matter of simply organising the frontline differently, it requires a transformation to our entire team dynamics. For all the flack Pardew gets lately, I think he has been badly let down by Ashley & co this summer in terms of not getting the defensive reinforcements he wanted and has massively overachieved last season, mainly thanks to giving our mediocre defenders as much protection as possible. It may have been negative, but at least it was effective. Discuss. In my distant and somewhat modest playing days, everyone played 4-4-2, so my knowledge of the finer points of 4-3-3 is limited. However, the theoretical problem that occurs to me is who protects the full back. In 4-4-2, it's obvious. In 4-3-3, is it the job of the wide midfield player, or the wide attacking player, or are they expected to sort it out between them? Genuine question. It does look to me like far more often now, our full backs are being exposed one-on-one. when out of possession most 4-4-2's and 4-3-3's become 4-5-1 anyway. 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