Redhyde Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Righto if you want to play a three up front you need to play the best people for the roles not the best players crammed into them. You need two very quick and skillful players capable of getting crosses in. And you need a player in the centre capable of bringing players into play and who can hold the ball up. Nicky isn't either of these and as reported he was pretty awful yesterday. He is our best player when he's played in his correct position, and the benefits of having a squad is when you want options you have them. 4-3-3 Should be Clarkson/Our left winger we don't have...Saborio/Akinde...Haynes/Sproule Anything where you play two strikers in the middle is Maynard + 1. You don't buy Ronaldo and stick him in a holding role in midfield, you don't buy John Terry and put him at left back. You don't buy a central striker and stick him on the wing? Do you? Oh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petehinton Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 drop Maynard? Look at the season he's had so far! 10 goals before December is superb If anyone should be dropped it's Saborio Yesterday didn't even know he was playing, he did bugger all...runs around like a headless chicken and doesn't know what to do with the ball when he has it Clarkson, Haynes, Maynard....everytime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhyde Posted November 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 drop Maynard? Look at the season he's had so far! 10 goals before December is superb If anyone should be dropped it's Saborio Yesterday didn't even know he was playing, he did bugger all...runs around like a headless chicken and doesn't know what to do with the ball when he has it Clarkson, Haynes, Maynard....everytime He's scored all those goals playing wide has he? Yes he's had a great season playing in the middle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidercity1987 Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 4-3-3 is the worst formation we can play. It sounds attacking but in reality is far from it. If we dropped Maynard we would never score. We need to build the team around Maynard in a central striking position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeBlueRouge Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Righto if you want to play a three up front you need to play the best people for the roles not the best players crammed into them. You need two very quick and skillful players capable of getting crosses in. And you need a player in the centre capable of bringing players into play and who can hold the ball up. Nicky isn't either of these and as reported he was pretty awful yesterday. He is our best player when he's played in his correct position, and the benefits of having a squad is when you want options you have them. 4-3-3 Should be Clarkson/Our left winger we don't have...Saborio/Akinde...Haynes/Sproule Anything where you play two strikers in the middle is Maynard + 1. You don't buy Ronaldo and stick him in a holding role in midfield, you don't buy John Terry and put him at left back. You don't buy a central striker and stick him on the wing? Do you? Oh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhyde Posted November 8, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 4-3-3 is the worst formation we can play. It sounds attacking but in reality is far from it. If we dropped Maynard we would never score. We need to build the team around Maynard in a central striking position. No, if we dropped Nicky in a 2 we would never score, but the aim quite clearly yesterday was not to score. So we might as well have players who can not score better than Nicky can. You think Nicky is a good payer to have in a three up front? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Righto if you want to play a three up front you need to play the best people for the roles not the best players crammed into them. You need two very quick and skillful players capable of getting crosses in. And you need a player in the centre capable of bringing players into play and who can hold the ball up. Nicky isn't either of these and as reported he was pretty awful yesterday. He is our best player when he's played in his correct position, and the benefits of having a squad is when you want options you have them. 4-3-3 Should be Clarkson/Our left winger we don't have...Saborio/Akinde...Haynes/Sproule Anything where you play two strikers in the middle is Maynard + 1. You don't buy Ronaldo and stick him in a holding role in midfield, you don't buy John Terry and put him at left back. You don't buy a central striker and stick him on the wing? Do you? Oh. I take what is being said here is that if we play 4-3-3 Maynard is not effective as a left forward/left winger, and I agree with that view. Maynard comes narrow and we lost balance and width on the left because he wants to play through the middle where he has got 10 goals from. Playing him wide is a waste of his talents, and to not play him through the middle is absurd. Saborio has been poor in that formation too, so to continue with 4-3-3 is definetly not the way forward. Drop the formation, not Maynard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC_Dan Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 You don't buy Ronaldo and stick him in a holding role in midfield, you don't buy John Terry and put him at left back. You don't buy a central striker and stick him on the wing? Do you? Oh. No. But you might buy Ronaldo and stick him in a central attacking position and maybe also buy Wayne Rooney and ask him to play a wide attacking position. I'm no fan of 4-3-3 either but player positioning shouldn't be thought of so rigidly. The best teams play in a fluid manner with players swapping positions during the game and no one formation stuck to for the entire game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashbrisc11 Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 drop maynard in a 4-3-3 no :L i understand he was rubbish yesterday and he got 8 of those 10 goals playing in a 3-5-2 this season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Everyone was telling Sir Alf to drop Geoff Hurst before the final in 1966, good job he didn't listen to the fans !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chappers Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Idiot thread of the day! Haynes and maynard is looking like our best pair up front, Saborio looks pretty average, but with no width, he gets the wrong service, and can't comment on Clarkson as he has hardly played up front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob k Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Drop Maynard????? What has saborio done since hes been here? Next to nothing, he does not even play for his team mates as hes to lazy, every player yesterday ran themselves into the ground apart from him, He offers nothing and thank god hes only on loan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDOXO Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Whilst I have a 'tiny' bit of sympathy for what the original poster is trying to say, I dont believe we ever start and finish a match without adapting the formation and style of play at least once. If the rules were that you must play the way you line up for the entire 90 minutes then perhaps you could have marginally more sympathy for the post, but they dont The difference between a good side and an exceptional side is often their ability to adapt to the circumstances and have players that are comfortable in multiple roles, giving players experience in unnatural positions ( :noexpression: ) is sometimes why some of our players are played in what the supporters feel is out of position, however it can pay dividends in the long-term Our manager is not a fool he knows Nicky Maynard is not a winger and Jamie McCombe is not a centre forward but we may not have won a point yesterday without the centre back getting on the end of the Hartley cross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 You think Nicky is a good payer to have in a three up front? Quite simply. yes. Its not the first time he's played out wide and he's managed to play well and score on previous occasions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lack of Action Man Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Maynards form at the moment doesn't warrant hm beng dropped imo. I wasn't there yesterday so can't comment on the formation played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chinapig Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Clarkson played on the left of a front three at Well according to Pete Johnson. Haynes is used to playing right. So a three with Maynard middle is fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leedsred Posted November 8, 2009 Report Share Posted November 8, 2009 Anything where you play two strikers in the middle is Maynard + 1. You don't buy Ronaldo and stick him in a holding role in midfield, you don't buy John Terry and put him at left back. You don't buy a central striker and stick him on the wing? Do you? Oh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 I think this is mainly posted with the aim of being controversial. You don't drop your on form top scorer, simple as that. If the formation doesn't suit him, and I'm not convinced either way, then you're playing the wrong formation. Also anyone watching Maynard this season will see that his link play is massively improved and there's no reason he couldn't play as the central player very effectively IF we play it on the deck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3_RED Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 I dont think the poster is having a go at Maynard at all. What he is pointing out is that a 4 3 3 does not suite our most important player and as such its a waste. I wish some people on here would actually read what is said before having a pop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Rollason Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 As others have posted you have to be flexible in your thinking these days. It might say 4-3-3 on the packet but in reality formations are far more fluid than that, apart maybe from the centre halves. Chelsea, for instance, do not play with wingers but any of their players , especially Drogba , Anelka, cole and the right back, will add width during play if they can. Manure ,on the other hand ,started with Valencia and Giggs who are wide men but you would be just as likely to see Rooney out there. So in that formation is Rooney wasted? Is he wasted for England in a front 3? Ask Fergie or Capello. Maynard, Saborio and Haynes would all rather be up in a two i'm sure but they have to do a job for the team sometimes. I suppose if we had the personel we could play with wingers but not in a 4-4-2, we are not strong enough and the midfield would be overrun. Gj knows this from last season and has tried to make us harder to play through and harder to beat. Imo we need a bit more quality in our squad to be able to play with the fluidity that we as supporters would like to see. Personally i would like Clarkson/Williams behind Maynard and Haynes in a 3-4-1-2 Without really showing our top form we are right in the mix so if we do get a bit of steam up and a bit of confidence then............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redhyde Posted November 9, 2009 Author Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 I think people missed the part where i said he was our best player when used correctly. When you put Wayne Rooney out wide, he's still better than his competition out there, and yes he is still "wasted" in that role from the aspect of utilising his talent. It's not mutually exclusive. Ditto with Steven Gerrard. Nicky Maynard is not IMO better than Haynes playing as a wide striker, and if Clarkson can't do that better too then i struggle to see the point of him being here. Do we want to see our "best" players when they're played out of position when there are "worse" players who would provide a better option in that role? I don't think so, that's what i've said. I don't think that's remotely controversial. Evander Sno is a much better player than Michael McIndoe. I'd still rather see McIndoe on the left wing. Nicky Maynard is better than Danny Haynes and probably David Clarkson. I'd rather see people played in their correct positions if they're a better option. When we had Liam Rosenior, he was still better wherever he played than pretty much any other player in that position. Was he wasted there? Well..we all know his reaction to being played out of position. A note on Geoff Hurst/Jimmy Greaves situation, GJ under his policy would have selected Geoff Johnson after his performance in the semi finals against Barnsley, but we'd have wanted him replaced with Jimmy Hartley who was the better player. It really comes down to how high you rate Maynard. If you think he's a world beating superstar (at this level of course) you think he should play no matter where because he's good enough. I don't. Sorry. Just my opinion. I think he's very good in a certain role, and that if he's not played in that role others can do a better job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 it's funny how simple the OP's point was... and has been so blindly missed by near all replies. GJ has got a thing for 4-3-3 at the moment, and you're right, if Maynard is going to be played as a wide striker then we are losing most of his effectivness! and like the poster points out, haynes is a better wide striker than Maynard, and Clarkson should be having seen a little bit of him (what on earth has he done wrong btw?) that is in no way a dig at Nicky, but he isn't and doesn't ever look likely to be a wide player... so, you're right mr OP, if GJ wants to play 4-3-3 then Nicky isn't the best man for the job out wide! moral of the story... 4-3-3 is a **** formation and shouid go away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Great Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 moral of the story... 4-3-3 is a **** formation and shouid go away While I do agree that 4-3-3 is not the most effective use of our current squad, last season the same formation coincided with our best spell of the season around Christmas time. Both Nicky and Ivan :noexpression: stepped up their games in that formation (and commented on how Stern John had helped them to improve!). Back to the original point though, to drop Maynard isn't an option whatever formation we're playing. I'd rather see us playing the 3-5-2, or if we're going 4-3-3 I'd like to see Clarkson wide left and NM through the middle - as someone else metioned above his hold up play has improved no end this year as long as we play it on the deck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS3_RED Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 While I do agree that 4-3-3 is not the most effective use of our current squad, last season the same formation coincided with our best spell of the season around Christmas time. Both Nicky and Ivan :noexpression: stepped up their games in that formation (and commented on how Stern John had helped them to improve!). And it also coincided with us playing all the weaker teams in a 8 week spell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton Great Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 And it also coincided with us playing all the weaker teams in a 8 week spell. But who's to say our results would have been any better if we'd continued to play hoofball to Dele +1 up front? My recollection is that we played our best footy of the season in that formation last year, although as I've said above I wouldn't be playing it now with our current squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy g Posted November 9, 2009 Report Share Posted November 9, 2009 The original poster has a point (although spoils it slightly by the ridiculous suggestion that you drop Maynard). Unfortunately we have a problem at the moment. The simple fact is that while we have a very good squad of players, they don't naturally fit into a recognisable system. If you play 442, then you'll have to do it without a left winger (or play someone like Skuse out of position) If you play 433 then you can't leave maynard in the middle, because he's not going to hold the ball up and win the flick-ons for his team-mates. So Maynard has to play on one of the flanks and drop back into midfield when we're defending. 532 seems to fit the players we have best, but it's left us massively exposed on the flanks at times. And I'm not convinced that Orr and McAllister are our best attacking options down the wing. If the problem was that easy to solve I reckon Gary Johnson would have solved it by now, rather than the amateur managers on this forum. (and I include myself in that) If I had to go with one of those formations I'd go for 433 simply because it allows you to play Maynard, Haynes AND Saborio (sorry Clarkson-fans but I've really not seen him do anything to justify a place in the team) And it seems our most solid formation. But I'm sure everyone will have their own opinions, because as I said at the start, there's no obvious answer to this dilemna. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.