the frampton balti Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 given our current dilema in midfield and fear of going four four two, which do you feel would be our best selection for a 352 and do you think it could work? I'l go; SKUSE CAREY NYATANGA ADOMAH ELLIOTT KILKENNY CISSE PEARSON STEAD MAYNARD I RECKON THIS WOULD WORK IN CUP GAMES AGAINST CRAWLEY! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinman-is-god Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 given our current dilema in midfield and fear of going four four two, which do you feel would be our best selection for a 352 and do you think it could work? I'l go; SKUSE CAREY NYATANGA ADOMAH ELLIOTT KILKENNY CISSE PEARSON STEAD MAYNARD I RECKON THIS WOULD WORK IN CUP GAMES AGAINST CRAWLEY! If we used we would essentially be employing Albert and Pearson, our two most creative outlets, as wing backs having to cover defensively against any attack that comes from the wide positions. We need to stick with 4-5-1 and have Albert and Pearson either side of Maynard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcfcbs20 Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Pearson might not be able to play if the loan doesn't get extended and it will be intresting to see to if Maynaard plays. I think we will go 442 or 451 looks like Marv could be out so it's a chance for some fringe players to have a crack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Murraysrightplum Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 I said this a while ago. I think it could work against certain teams: -------------------------------James---------------------- ----------Carey/Wilson-----Fonts-------Nyatanga/Mcgivern- -Skuse---------------------Cisse------------------Pearson -------------------Elliott---------------Kilkenny------------- ------Albert---------------Striker----------------------------- Gets Albert further forward, but he would still be wide right, not central before anyone says it. In defence Skuse would drop back into right back if needed. Cisse would have to be prepared to cover the left wing if Pearson pushes forward and Elliott would have to drop in alongside him. Looks a bit lop sided but I think we play in this way to an extent already... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbcfc Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 If it was up to me for crawley I'ld play 4-1-4-1 This assumes Pearson hasn't re-signed, Marv is injured and we dont sign anyone else before James Wilson Carey Nyatanga McGivern Cisse Bolasie Killa Skuse Adomah Pitman Subs Gerkin, Stewert, Clarkson, Maynard, Stead, JCR and Bobby Reid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pederho ll Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 If 3 at the back was an option, then l would play Fontaine Carey Wilson. Carey is a good leader at the back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 given our current dilema in midfield and fear of going four four two, which do you feel would be our best selection for a 352 and do you think it could work? I'l go; SKUSE CAREY NYATANGA ADOMAH ELLIOTT KILKENNY CISSE PEARSON STEAD MAYNARD I RECKON THIS WOULD WORK IN CUP GAMES AGAINST CRAWLEY! Doubt Maynard will feature in that game as it would cup tie him for potential purchasers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brizzle Jordan Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 3-5-2 is a bad formation. We dont have wingers who do a good enough job defensively to play 3-5-2 otherwise the opposition wingers will have an absolute field day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtyeoRed Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Are we being serious here, Play three at the back, we can't defend with four at the back, we were lucky against Forest ,Coventry, and Millwall (not at Southampton game) their finishing was awful, and lucky for us they did not punish our schoolboy mistakes that happen game after game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 if we were to use 3 CB's I would go, assuming Pearson's loan isn't extended and Maynard hasn't left ........................James........................ .........Wilson......Carey......Fontaine.(when fit) Skuse.........................................McGivern .......................Cisse .............Elliott...........Kilkenny .......................Adomah ......................Maynard Skuse and McGivern both get forward well so when we have the ball we have players wide, and allow albert to float so its harder to have more than one player marking him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 352 works by requiring wing backs to do both the full back and the winger's job. We don't have a single player capable of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 The times when Millwall really troubled us was from down the wings, especially with Pearson's tendency to tuck in. 3-5-2 really isn't viable right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the frampton balti Posted January 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 if we were to use 3 CB's I would go, assuming Pearson's loan isn't extended and Maynard hasn't left ........................James........................ .........Wilson......Carey......Fontaine.(when fit) Skuse.........................................McGivern .......................Cisse .............Elliott...........Kilkenny .......................Adomah ......................Maynard Skuse and McGivern both get forward well so when we have the ball we have players wide, and allow albert to float so its harder to have more than one player marking him. Now that deffo looks like a 5 3 2 Could work though................. AT BRIGHTON IN THE LEAGUE Its kind of defensive but with albert and nicky up front you never know.///??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 The times when Millwall really troubled us was from down the wings, especially with Pearson's tendency to tuck in. 3-5-2 really isn't viable right now. Best spell of football this team have played in the last 3 years was with a 352. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 given our current dilema in midfield and fear of going four four two, which do you feel would be our best selection for a 352 and do you think it could work? I'l go; SKUSE CAREY NYATANGA ADOMAH ELLIOTT KILKENNY CISSE PEARSON STEAD MAYNARD I RECKON THIS WOULD WORK IN CUP GAMES AGAINST CRAWLEY! I said this on another thread but I'd take it over 4-4-2 when we're chasing games but still think 4-5-1 is the best starting formation for us in most games at the moment. 4-5-1 does raise issues when Maynard goes though as I'm not sure Pitman or Stead would work as a lone striker for different reasons (it doesn't suit Pitman and Stead doesn't score enough, especially as our midfield don't get enough to compensate for that, so we may need to experiment then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Best spell of football this team have played in the last 3 years was with a 352. 352 really needs to be worked at to work effectively. I do not think you have to get your wide players falling back defensively, you could quite easily have Elliot or cisse drop back either centrally and push a cental defender out wide when under attack. If worked on we could reap rewards. Cisse can drop centrally, Carey could move across right. Cisse drops back tango or fontaine push out left. In essence when being attacked we form 442, when in midfield or attack we can hold 352. I agree with Jordan, we did look good, but we did look at sea when defending, to make it work the players would have to be drilled in the formation to within a inch of their lives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 352 really needs to be worked at to work effectively. I do not think you have to get your wide players falling back defensively, you could quite easily have Elliot or cisse drop back either centrally and push a cental defender out wide when under attack. If worked on we could reap rewards. Cisse can drop centrally, Carey could move across right. Cisse drops back tango or fontaine push out left. In essence when being attacked we form 442, when in midfield or attack we can hold 352. I agree with Jordan, we did look good, but we did look at sea when defending, to make it work the players would have to be drilled in the formation to within a inch of their lives That's a good point. One of the pluses about our 4 central defender options (5 if you count McGivern. I'm discounting Stewart as he looks very out of favour) is they all can all play left or right back so either or both of Elliott or Cisse could make a back 4 or 5 when needed. As you say it would need a lot of work but that is definitely a way of doing it and, if it worked, it would make us incredibly fluid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 That's a good point. One of the pluses about our 4 central defender options (5 if you count McGivern. I'm discounting Stewart as he looks very out of favour) is they all can all play left or right back so either or both of Elliott or Cisse could make a back 4 or 5 when needed. As you say it would need a lot of work but that is definitely a way of doing it and, if it worked, it would make us incredibly fluid. You could even drop Elliot across into right back. Everyone would need to know one anothers roles really well. I would go like this. James Carey Wilson Fontaine Cisse Elliott Adomah Kilkenny pearson Maynard pitman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Montana Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Can someone please tell me what this ridiculous obsession is with city fans wanting us to play 3-5-2 !!?? I see it mentioned so much on here, its not exactly a solid formation ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 Best spell of football this team have played in the last 3 years was with a 352. At which point we had Orr, Ribeiro and Hartley, and no Adomah to stifle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fat Controller Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 You could even drop Elliot across into right back. Everyone would need to know one anothers roles really well. I would go like this. James Carey Wilson Nyatanga Cisse Elliott Adomah Kilkenny pearson Maynard pitman This. I've swapped Nyatanga in for Fontaine as he's out til February isn't he? But I personally wouldn't do 3-5-2 anyway. For me it has to be, with the way we're playing, 4-4-1-1. --------------James Skuse Carey Nyatanga McGivern Adomah Cisse Elliot Bolasie --------------Clarkson ----------------Pitman That's presuming Pearson doesn't sign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 --------------James Skuse Carey Nyatanga McGivern Adomah Cisse Elliot Bolasie --------------Clarkson ----------------Pitman That's presuming Pearson doesn't sign. I really like the look of that team, although perhaps Woolford (or Pearson if signing) over Bolasie for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 At which point we had Orr, Ribeiro and Hartley, and no Adomah to stifle. We still have Ribs, and he needs one last chance in the team for me. Kilkenny has 'replaced' Hartley and I think Skuse has more to his game than Brad did and could make an even better full back than him... Eventually. All I'm saying is the best I've seen us play in the last three years over a sustained period (10 games) was using that formation. Albert could play where Clarkson played and have a free role to roam about and then you have a straight choice between three central midfielders for the two deeper slots. Skuse and McGivern both push forward and over lap in our current formation but would have an extra man behind them to mop up if they are caught out of possession, Ribs has the energy to play as a ball playing centre half whilst Louis has the discipline and knowledge to play in the middle and to talk to the other two centre backs. It means we retain an element of width (via the wingbacks) but also keep the dominance of the midfield. If we need to go a bit deeper then Pearson or Kilkenny replaces Albert who in turn moves to play up front with Pitman/Maynard whoever. I really like the formation, always have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 We still have Ribs, and he needs one last chance in the team for me. Kilkenny has 'replaced' Hartley and I think Skuse has more to his game than Brad did and could make an even better full back than him... Eventually. All I'm saying is the best I've seen us play in the last three years over a sustained period (10 games) was using that formation. Albert could play where Clarkson played and have a free role to roam about and then you have a straight choice between three central midfielders for the two deeper slots. Skuse and McGivern both push forward and over lap in our current formation but would have an extra man behind them to mop up if they are caught out of possession, Ribs has the energy to play as a ball playing centre half whilst Louis has the discipline and knowledge to play in the middle and to talk to the other two centre backs. It means we retain an element of width (via the wingbacks) but also keep the dominance of the midfield. If we need to go a bit deeper then Pearson or Kilkenny replaces Albert who in turn moves to play up front with Pitman/Maynard whoever. I really like the formation, always have. Ribs played centre-back in that run if I remember rightly. Kilkenny when deployed to any use sits a lot further forward than Hartley and as much as Skuse does an adequate job at right-back, I would take Brad over him any day. The 4-3-1-2 we played at the end of 2007/8, albeit briefly, was a joy to watch, with flair players Noble, Trundle and Carle pulling the strings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fat Controller Posted January 4, 2012 Report Share Posted January 4, 2012 I really like the look of that team, although perhaps Woolford (or Pearson if signing) over Bolasie for now. Left side is a difficult one for me. I have seen enough of either Woolford or Bolaise playing in their natural position, but Bolasie has pace that Woolford lacks. I've been unimpressed in the little that i'd seen of Pearson, as i feel he drifts infield far too much (whether that's through instruction i don't know), up until last night, i thought he had an excellent game. The fact that he's already scored some important goals for us means that he'd be preferential to either of the other two if he does sign. Also on that side, McGivern really doesn't cut it for me. He's a centre half masquerading as a full back. Doesn't offer much going forward and drifts way too far away from the opposition winger (particularly last night), much like when Nyatanga or Fontaine plays there. We need another option as McAllister doesn't seem able to maintain fitness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.