Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Davefevs

3-5-effin-2 (aka How Do You Solve A Problem like Niclas Eliasson)

Recommended Posts

Ok, this is not the most analytical piece I’ve ever done, and could well be ripped apart, but here goes.

We started the season in a 352/532 (back 3 type formation) and were generally tough to beat. We did switch to a four in parts of games but it was mostly a 3.

Eliasson barely started but did well off the bench.

In those games culminating in defeat at West Brom we W7D8L3 (29pts).  This was off the back of a 0-0 v Forest that forced a LJ’s hand into starting Eliasson.

We then went 4231 with Brownhill narrow and Weimann sort of behind Fam, but it was compact and despite the myth of one up top we won our next two inc Fulham. Problem solved. Not quite. This 16 game run saw 8W 8L. A drop off in ppg.  But why was it boom or bust?

If you ignore those two wins in a compromised 4231 to accommodate Nic...it becomes W6 L8, getting worse. If you the ignore the 4 wins on the bounce in a predominantly 4141, it becomes W2 L8!!!

Now this all looks like I’m blaming it all on Eliasson.  I’m not!

What I am saying is Eliasson in a 442 just doesn’t work, results-wise.  Or maybe it’s purely 442 that doesn’t work?  Some if you will be saying “no shit Sherlock” 😀

So....

LJ - if you want to play Nic, it’s gotta start 4141 it 4231.

LJ - if you want to play two strikers it’s gotta 532 without Nic.

You decide.  Time to be ruthless. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He should keep his place tomorrow for me. 12 assists this season speaks for itself, and ok he's had a poor couple of games but it was Leeds and WBA, they can stop most forwards in this div. Let him loose on Huddersfield tomorrow night (he slaughtered them at AG this year) and try to let him recover some form. 

Maybe in an ideal world, he finds form for the rest of the season and even if we miss play-offs we can sell him for very good money then focus next season on the 5-3-1-2 without having to worry about wasting his talent. We could on paper have a front line of Palmer behind Wells and Benik (sure we'll buy him on the cheap) and still have a tonne of Eliasson money to strengthen elsewhere. That could be a promotion level attack. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think football is rarely as simple as just using some magic formation and everything will be perfect again.  Much more important is consistency of approach and personnel.

How many games have Williams and Benkovic played together?  Nagy and Henriksen?  Diedhiou and Wells?  They've barely had 3 games together between them.  Of course they're gonna look disjointed and all over the place in awful conditions against the best teams in the league.

We may have been somehow grinding out results a little better earlier in the season using 3-5-2 (often relying on Eliasson's assists from the bench, I might add) but the football wasn't any better than either.

Not to mention we have actually tried to go back to it several times anyway, usually to absolutely terrible end product (Charlton & Sheffield Wednesday away).

Edited by Roe
  • Like 2
  • Flames 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not convinced that 352 is a panacea. I think we just need the team to be clear on what is expected of them and to perform to their potential. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The trouble is he is the one player who creates chances in a team that creates very little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was thinking today about "my team for tomorrow", it would be interesting to see 3-5-1-1 with Palmer behind Wells and HNM,Nagy and Henriksen in a 3. HNM is mobile and I think he could get up and beyond Wells and with WB's and runners Palmer has options. Problem being he needs a run to find form, we don't have time to play players into form, so back to Eliasson.

I have been banging on about 3 in CMF for a while, Vs Leeds and even more so WBA I couldn't believe LJ didn't try it. I thought Nagy (yes he wasn't brilliant) and Henriksen were left with too much space to cover, specially up against 3 WBA MF'ers. If Smith is fit we have options of 3 from 4 , and at least 2 of those could get up to support the forwards, Smith has done so in the past and Massengo's first few games he looked like he enjoyed getting forward.

You can't deny that Eliasson is a potent weapon, and with 2 forwards to aim for could be even more dangerous, maybe a 4-3-3 ? On the other side he has been poor lately ( a few have TBF), and it may be time to rest him. The team has to come first, so if we go to a 5-3-2 and get results I wouldn't care who was dropped. On form ( ignoring Leeds), I would want Paterson , and Fam to be first names on the team sheet, along with Baker. Kalas must be close to a start at CB, and AW looks like he could do with a rest. I would expect changes for tomorrow, and the 3 CB system seems a fit, but we are talking about Lee Johnson.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My team tomorrow would be 4 2 3 1.

 

GK - Bentley

RB - Pereira - Hunt keeps getting played and isnt great. Would give pereira a go to actually work out if hes worth purchasing, looked alright earlier in the season when he got a game

CB - Benkovic - We have clearly brought him in the start

CB - Kalas - If hes fit, hes probably our best defender

LB - Dasilva - Not many other options

CM - Henriksen - Good player with rust, hopefully he can play that off in the next couple weeks

CM - Smith/Rowe - If Smith is not fit, id bring in Rowe, its his favoured position and he would add a bit of bite and solid passing, Henriksen +smith or Rowe would be a decent 'Axis'

LW - Patterson - Has a little extra spark sometimes and works reasonably hard

ACM - Palmer - Has to be in the side to add some creativity, needs a run of games and we have to get him firing 

RW - Elliason - Our main threat - has to play even though he isnt playing great right now. Potentially needs a rest in that case start weimann wide.

ST - Wells - Has to start, movement will make a world of difference for Palmer

 

Fam would be a great option from the bench

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4312 would work with the midfield able to give some decent protection and Hunt and Dasilva still able to give a viable width option at times.

We need Palmer sliding things through to Nahki and Andi - the latter will drift wide right always so Hunt can still sit off 15 yards giving an option and ensuring their winger has to mark him - not so worried about Dasilva as he is up and down for days and we have the added protection of 3 in midfield covering.

Edited by Meh

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Shtanley said:

I’d take out Eliasson and Diedhiou and go 352. Bring both on if needed. 

Palmer behind Weimann and Wells. 

Bold I like it but it would probably end in 

Shtanley out ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, scrumpy88 said:

Just drop Eliasson. He hasn’t been affective in games for quite a few games now. Not sure if he’s been ‘found out’ 

 

Of course he’s been ‘ found out ‘ what really gets me angry is that with two sometimes three opponents on him no one is using that space created to attack . 
 

He can’t do it all on his own and there is often little movement around him so that he can lay the ball off. 
 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the Eliasson to Lazio point briefly.

Lazio play a 3-5-2 or at times a 3-5-1-1. That could change but generally under Inzaghi they like 3 at the back.

Would seem an odd fit...unless of course they find a way to get a decent performance out of him in that shape, which would beg the question why couldn't LJ?

Still wonder about him in a 3-4-3, kind of like Wolves shape 2 seasons ago- not as a winger more as a wide forward.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BCFCGav said:

He should keep his place tomorrow for me. 12 assists this season speaks for itself, and ok he's had a poor couple of games but it was Leeds and WBA, they can stop most forwards in this div. Let him loose on Huddersfield tomorrow night (he slaughtered them at AG this year) and try to let him recover some form. 

Maybe in an ideal world, he finds form for the rest of the season and even if we miss play-offs we can sell him for very good money then focus next season on the 5-3-1-2 without having to worry about wasting his talent. We could on paper have a front line of Palmer behind Wells and Benik (sure we'll buy him on the cheap) and still have a tonne of Eliasson money to strengthen elsewhere. That could be a promotion level attack. 

That’s absolutely fine....but in a 442?  That’s the gist of my post....it’s not that Eliasson shouldn’t play, but it requires a compromise somewhere else.

5312 - thats one too many 😂

1 hour ago, Roe said:

I think football is rarely as simple as just using some magic formation and everything will be perfect again.  Much more important is consistency of approach and personnel.

How many games have Williams and Benkovic played together?  Nagy and Henriksen?  Diedhiou and Wells?  They've barely had 3 games together between them.  Of course they're gonna look disjointed and all over the place in awful conditions against the best teams in the league.

We may have been somehow grinding out results a little better earlier in the season using 3-5-2 (often relying on Eliasson's assists from the bench, I might add) but the football wasn't any better than either.

Not to mention we have actually tried to go back to it several times anyway, usually to absolutely terrible end product (Charlton & Sheffield Wednesday away).

Agree 100%, but playing a 442 with “touchline huggers” (which is what Eliasson does) leaves us exposed when our head-coach wants us to play out through our centre midfielders!  That’s why I think he has a decision to make.  How is he gonna progress us this season?  Pick your partnerships and stick with them (in the main).

I’m perfectly happy for 532 to grind the opposition down and Eliasson to become a super-sub, or 4231 with Eliasson but sacrificing one of our strikers.  If LJ really does want to go 442, those wide players have got to be flexible.  

1 hour ago, mozo said:

I'm not convinced that 352 is a panacea. I think we just need the team to be clear on what is expected of them and to perform to their potential. 

Definitely not, nor is 4231 either.  But with our current personnel, 442 is the worst fit.

1 hour ago, 1960maaan said:

Was thinking today about "my team for tomorrow", it would be interesting to see 3-5-1-1 with Palmer behind Wells and HNM,Nagy and Henriksen in a 3. HNM is mobile and I think he could get up and beyond Wells and with WB's and runners Palmer has options. Problem being he needs a run to find form, we don't have time to play players into form, so back to Eliasson.

I have been banging on about 3 in CMF for a while, Vs Leeds and even more so WBA I couldn't believe LJ didn't try it. I thought Nagy (yes he wasn't brilliant) and Henriksen were left with too much space to cover, specially up against 3 WBA MF'ers. If Smith is fit we have options of 3 from 4 , and at least 2 of those could get up to support the forwards, Smith has done so in the past and Massengo's first few games he looked like he enjoyed getting forward.

You can't deny that Eliasson is a potent weapon, and with 2 forwards to aim for could be even more dangerous, maybe a 4-3-3 ? On the other side he has been poor lately ( a few have TBF), and it may be time to rest him. The team has to come first, so if we go to a 5-3-2 and get results I wouldn't care who was dropped. On form ( ignoring Leeds), I would want Paterson , and Fam to be first names on the team sheet, along with Baker. Kalas must be close to a start at CB, and AW looks like he could do with a rest. I would expect changes for tomorrow, and the 3 CB system seems a fit, but we are talking about Lee Johnson.

We tried that away at West Brom.  That’s not to say it can’t work though.  As much as I like Palmer, Pato’s recent form gives him the start for me if you’re gonna play someone in there.  I appreciate Palmer is a better creative passer, and Pato more the dribbler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Major Isewater said:

This whole thread just highlights to me that despite everything LJ doesn’t know our best team or our best formations .

or possible we have a number of new players being integrated and other players going in and out of form

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

We tried that away at West Brom.  That’s not to say it can’t work though.  As much as I like Palmer, Pato’s recent form gives him the start for me if you’re gonna play someone in there.  I appreciate Palmer is a better creative passer, and Pato more the dribbler.

Forgot WBA away, but there would be 5/6 changes in personnel from that team.
As I said, Pato, Baker and Fam would start on current form, it does make it harder to do if you also add Wells as a must start, probably means 2 in CM, or play a back 4.

 

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

or 4231 with Eliasson but sacrificing one of our strikers.

Hasn't Wells played a 10 role before? Wells, Pato and Eliasson behind Fam?

 

1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

but playing a 442 with “touchline huggers” (which is what Eliasson does) leaves us exposed

Absolutely, and after Saturday I hope he never plays that system (with  “touchline huggers” ) ever again.

As you are a man for the stat Dave, I'd love to know how many formations we play in these final 12 games. A little unfair on LJ I guess as circumstances dictate change, but would be interesting to keep an eye on it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

Forgot WBA away, but there would be 5/6 changes in personnel from that team.
As I said, Pato, Baker and Fam would start on current form, it does make it harder to do if you also add Wells as a must start, probably means 2 in CM, or play a back 4.

 

Hasn't Wells played a 10 role before? Wells, Pato and Eliasson behind Fam?

Saturday versus West Brom from 61 minutes onwards 😂😂😂

Seriously though, it’s not something I’ve noticed from watching him.  He can drop short though to link up.

 

Absolutely, and after Saturday I hope he never plays that system (with  “touchline huggers” ) ever again.

As you are a man for the stat Dave, I'd love to know how many formations we play in these final 12 games. A little unfair on LJ I guess as circumstances dictate change, but would be interesting to keep an eye on it.

yes, absolutely, things dictate....but I think the players coukd do with some familiarity.  I have no problems say going 532 for 65 minutes and winning it with 442 because you’ve ground down the opposition.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why does it have to be a choice between 4-4-2 or 5-3-2, what's wrong with going 4-3-3 -  certainly would suit our CM players more. Maybe against Huddersfield we can get away with playing 2 in CM and 2 wide, but against side like Leeds, Brentford, WBA who pack the midfield only a tactically inept head coach would play only 2 in CM!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any team capable of dictating a game of football can afford an Eliasson. Not sure they have to though. Why should they rely on one single threat - a player capable of crossing (you don't get much for money do you?)   

Edited by bristolcitysweden
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Seriously though, it’s not something I’ve noticed from watching him.  He can drop short though to link up.

I was out with a couple of QPR mates Saturday, as you'd expect Wells comes up a fair bit. I'm sure one of them said he had played as a genuine No.10. It's a shame we couldn't have had him earlier, I think him and Fam could strike up a decent partnership, maybe wells/Wiemann too. His movement is good, just wish we could create a little more .

34 minutes ago, old_eastender said:

what's wrong with going 4-3-3

I think it could work, 4-3-3 in possession, 4-5-1 out of possession ...... this is where @Davefevs said we played this last week 🤣

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

                    Bentley

    Kalas    Benkovic    Baker

Hunt.            Nagy            Dasilva 

                  Henriksen 

   Massengo          Palmer/Pato

                      Wells

 

Then Fammy on for Henriksen or Nagy if we’re chasing a game, Eliasson for HNM too if needed.

We’re shipping goals, we need to sort that out first and foremost. For me this is the best defence we have with the personnel available (assumed fit).

Dasilva and Hunt are both great getting forward and both can cross. Admittedly Fam could be more suited up top, but I can’t leave Wells out!

I’d like to see HNM a bit more advanced, think he has the ability to see runs/threat himself. 

Ultimately would like to see an upgrade on Hunt. That ayling lad at Leeds looks decent  


 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Maltshoveller said:

Just a question

Could we go 4-3-3 like liverpool

Wells - Frammy  - Eliasson

 

We could!

I would prefer:

Weimann | Wells | Eliasson

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Smokey said:

In a 433 or a 343?

I don’t Know.....703 for all I care 😂😂😂

Millwall played 343....

       Bodvarsson | Bradshaw | J.Wallace

M.Wallace | Molumby | Williams | Romeo

                 Cooper | Pearce | Hutchinson
 

We could play that.

             Eliasson | Wells | Weimann

Dasilva | Henriksen | Smith | Pereira

                 Baker | Kalas | Benkovic

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, FreshPrinceofBristol said:

3-5-2 works for all the players we have, except for Eliasson.

I'd like to see us play 3-5-2 every game with Eliasson being plan B.

I’d certainly start 3-5-2 tomorrow. I do think teams are getting better at stopping Eliasson. I’d start with Palmer or Paterson central behind Fam and Wells. Henriksen and Nagy/Massengo as the more defensive midfielders. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Davefevs said:

I don’t Know.....703 for all I care 😂😂😂

Millwall played 343....

       Bodvarsson | Bradshaw | J.Wallace

M.Wallace | Molumby | Williams | Romeo

                 Cooper | Pearce | Hutchinson
 

We could play that.

             Eliasson | Wells | Weimann

Dasilva | Henriksen | Smith | Pereira

                 Baker | Kalas | Benkovic

I could see that working quite well!

Eliasson Wells Weimann- flexible, fluid and yet some control with the numbers behind be it 4-3-3 or 3-4-3. Would be interesting to see...Weimann especially could drift in and out- Eliasson it'd be interesting to see.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Super said:

The trouble is he is the one player who creates chances in a team that creates very little.

Is it as simple as that though? Be interesting to know how many of his assists came from when he was brought on v when he started.

Plus, going on early season performances and with the right players up front, the likes of Palmer would be up there statistically from a creative point of view I would think.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Think the squad is made for 3-5-2.

Especially since we since benkovic.

problem was Elliasson was in form and does not fit into 3-5-2

We must play a team like this

BFFD8DCB-10A4-48E6-8859-F65A29634049.jpeg

  • Flames 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely LJ must have done all of this analysis and more

He knows the players better than us and sees them in training all the time.

If he cannot by this point in the season work our his best formation and team it is a sad state of affairs

His obsession of picking a team to stop the opposition shows his lack of confidence in his players

Perhaps its time for him to have a chat with his more experienced players and get their perspective. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Clutton Caveman said:

Surely LJ must have done all of this analysis and more

He knows the players better than us and sees them in training all the time.

If he cannot by this point in the season work our his best formation and team it is a sad state of affairs

His obsession of picking a team to stop the opposition shows his lack of confidence in his players

Perhaps its time for him to have a chat with his more experienced players and get their perspective. 

Starting to come round to the view that he's just stubborn- "My way or the Highway, I know best" etc.

OTOH, doesn't explain all the chopping and changing- seems both stubborn and to like his tinkering- an odd combination but he's managed it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy, drop him. 

Play Pato/Palmer in behind a front two and give the wingback an opportunity to get forward. (Pato would probably be my choice away from home due to his tackling back) 

Elliason is (even with rose tinted glasses on) a one trick pony, if cutting in and crossing doesn't work, he doesn't have the ability to drive inside and create space on the wings for Dasilva/Hunt or even have a strike at goal. 

Now, if we needed to change the game when players are tired, bring him on to have a go at crossing into the box. 

We played our best football playing 5-3-2 and have ruined it trying to shoehorn in Elliason. 

Fans booing his substitution on Saturday was embarrassing. 

Edited by UREDS_91
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bob Turnip said:

Is it as simple as that though? Be interesting to know how many of his assists came from when he was brought on v when he started.

Plus, going on early season performances and with the right players up front, the likes of Palmer would be up there statistically from a creative point of view I would think.

 

 

Eliasson:

20 starts: 2 goals / 9 assists (1623 mins)

13 subs: 1 goal / 5 assists (449 mins)

4 unused

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Riaz said:

Think the squad is made for 3-5-2.

Especially since we since benkovic.

problem was Elliasson was in form and does not fit into 3-5-2

We must play a team like this

BFFD8DCB-10A4-48E6-8859-F65A29634049.jpeg

Agree, rotate Massengo/Smith. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think he was particularly good against West Brom but I'll be disappointed if Nagy doesn't play again tbh (unless Smith is fit).

We need to start building partnerships and believing in our own players rather than dropping them in and out all the time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Roe said:

I don't think he was particularly good against West Brom but I'll be disappointed if Nagy doesn't play again tbh (unless Smith is fit).

We need to start building partnerships and believing in our own players rather than dropping them in and out all the time.

Not particularly good is an understatement tbh - He was really quite awful.

However, agree with the principle.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Eliasson:

20 starts: 2 goals / 9 assists (1623 mins)

13 subs: 1 goal / 5 assists (449 mins)

4 unused

Put those stats alongside our overall pattern of scoring goals and they will have context. Or next to O'Dowda's or Palmer's 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Johnson is here for the long haul he may as well leave him out. Let's face it Niclas Eliasson is going in the summer anyway. Loved watching him, good luck in the game young man 

 You are a credit as a person too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, The Bard said:

Put those stats alongside our overall pattern of scoring goals and they will have context. Or next to O'Dowda's or Palmer's 

Feel free! 😜

The topic tries to focus on a complex perceived /suggested correlation of results versus formation versus number of strikers versus wingers (one of which is Eliasson).

You can draw and debate your own conclusions.

1st half: 1g / 9a (853 mins)

2nd half: 2g / 5a (1219 mins)

Summarised - start him but take him off at h-t, or bring him on as  sub!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Davefevs said:

We could!

I would prefer:

Weimann | Wells | Eliasson

Why would yo drop by far our best striker at the moment to accommodate Weimann? 

All the people suggesting that we leave fam out, did anyone see how totally shit we were without him against Leeds? Add to that him being our best player against WBA, I find it absolutely mental that people are genuinely advocating the man who has been by far our best player over the last 2/3 months. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well liverpool play 433 as far as i know, and get a crazy amount of assists from the full backs as well as the 3 forwards. The 3 midfielders are pretty much ball winners who can play a bit, and have great energy, the whole team is set up to press. 
 

It all depends on personnel, but our strongest players are at centre back, plus eliasson and wells and diedhou. Eliasson can play off either side in terms of whipping crosses in, it seems to me if we could trust him at right wing back with JD on the left, that would be ideal,,,, however, he doesnt have the defensive mentality or the engine to do it. 

 

to sum up, i dont know what the answer is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

                      Bentley

        Kalas   Benkovic   Baker

Pereira   Henriksen  Nagy   Dasilva

                   Pato/Palmer

               Wells      Diedhiou

 

 

Eliasson needs a rest so happy to see us change to this for the next game. I don't understand the logic of many for not playing Diedhiou if we are playing 352, especially if we are playing Pato in the 10 role. They have shown before that they have the ability to link up well (Wigan away?), and considering that Pato covers more ground than Palmer and doesn't necessarily hold on to it for as long, it could be very useful to have a presence that he and Wells can play the ball off of going forward. Even if Fammy did not link well with Palmer in the 352 as Palmer was more the static player that required runners in behind, Pato is not that type of player and definitely could be considered more of a 'mover' that could get in behind himself. That being said, i'm still not convinced that Palmer and Diedhiou wouldn't be able to learn to play together over time.

Edited by marcofisher
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Spud55 said:

Why would yo drop by far our best striker at the moment to accommodate Weimann? 

All the people suggesting that we leave fam out, did anyone see how totally shit we were without him against Leeds? Add to that him being our best player against WBA, I find it absolutely mental that people are genuinely advocating the man who has been by far our best player over the last 2/3 months. 

I responded to a 3 man attack that had Wells on the right. I’d rather have Wells in the middle, so in that suggestion, yes, I’d leave Fam out.

Best player v West Brom?  That’s subjective. Made some great clearances from corners, lost the ball dribbling out for their second, consistently had the ball nipped away from him by Sawyers and Livermore, when he got it into feet first hour. He had a better final 30 minutes.

In general he’s been playing well over a decent period of games.

Personally I’d play 532/5212, and he’d partner Wells. I rate Weimann, but at the mo’ Fam deserves the pairing.

But in a 3 man attack I think very differently!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Major Isewater said:

This whole thread just highlights to me that despite everything LJ doesn’t know our best team or our best formations .

After 4 years and a transfer budget far beyond Dad and Cotts.

 

22 minutes ago, marcofisher said:

                      Bentley

        Kalas   Benkovic   Baker

Pereira   Henriksen  Nagy   Dasilva

                   Pato/Palmer

               Wells      Diedhiou

Only two options I can come up with against this:

* Weimann starting and Diedhiou replacing him up front. We need Fam's energy much later on when we bring off the hole man for Eliasson.

* Weimann starting, then putting Diedhou in the hole in place of Pato/Palmer. It would give him more holding responsibility yet more freedom to move as he won't be the focal point of attack, he'll have less ground to cover if he needs to defend and it'll confuse a lot of H'field players as to who theyre marking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, sephjnr said:

After 4 years and a transfer budget far beyond Dad and Cotts.

 

Only two options I can come up with against this:

* Weimann starting and Diedhiou replacing him up front. We need Fam's energy much later on when we bring off the hole man for Eliasson.

* Weimann starting, then putting Diedhou in the hole in place of Pato/Palmer. It would give him more holding responsibility yet more freedom to move as he won't be the focal point of attack, he'll have less ground to cover if he needs to defend and it'll confuse a lot of H'field players as to who theyre marking.

1st one I could understand, it's good to rotate as well. 2nd I can't at all, Fammy doesn't have the passing range, close control and vision to play in that role. It would be incredibly defensive even if we were to be winning and would result in us frequently giving the ball away in the middle of the park. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, marcofisher said:

1st one I could understand, it's good to rotate as well. 2nd I can't at all, Fammy doesn't have the passing range, close control and vision to play in that role. It would be incredibly defensive even if we were to be winning and would result in us frequently giving the ball away in the middle of the park. 

It's playing to Fammy's strengths as a defender, in the hole he doesn't need tremendous passing range as his presence is diversionary, and he will have Weimann, Wells, either Pedro or Henriksen and Jay moving for him to play to. Plus with our current setup more passes are (ahem) bypassing the midfield/forward-mid altogether.

Edited by sephjnr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...