old_eastender Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Let's look at the facts 5 defeats in previous 6 games playing 4-5-1 with no goals scored in any of those defeats. 70 mins against Palace with 4-5-1 no goals scored. 20 mins with two up front and hey presto - GOALS. And this without our best holding CM (Cisse) and Kilkenny on the pitch, which we keep being told can't work. Let's hope this finally sees a return to 2 up front and actually trying to win games, rather than playing not to lose. COYR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brizzle Jordan Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Del is a fan of 4-4-2 but he's obviously got concerns about playing it with our squad. I find 4-3-3 the best formation if you aim to control a football match but whatever gets us the required points to stay up, I couldn't care less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Reynolds Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Del is a fan of 4-4-2 but he's obviously got concerns about playing it with our squad. I find 4-3-3 the best formation if you aim to control a football match but whatever gets us the required points to stay up, I couldn't care less. This pretty much sums up my thoughts. I like either formation, but a club should never stick rigidly to an formation when it's not working. Unfortunately for us, neither has worked effectively this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Del is a fan of 4-4-2 but he's obviously got concerns about playing it with our squad. I find 4-3-3 the best formation if you aim to control a football match but whatever gets us the required points to stay up, I couldn't care less. Oh 433 is a very good formation if you have players with enough intelligence to plkay it. Unfortunately Bolasie is a bit of a headless chicken, you have no idea what you are going to get from the guy, and the final ball is not great. Albert is getting better, but is getting doubled up on. You need someone from the centre to find space that Albert has freed up. Sadly too many players missing the most important thing in a 433, the intelligence to utilise space and the ball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 4-3-3 wouldnt work, you need two good fullbacks to get up the field and back. 4-2-2 would be the best, where the backs and wingers covers each other when going forward. Also will help with any counter attacks. But we do need two up front, Woods or Stead along side PItman. So 4-4-2 and not the 4-5-1 crap were playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_BCFC Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Kilkenny and Pitman make a big difference regardless of formation. But has to be time for 4-4-2 on Saturday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BCFC Jordan Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 It was so clear tonight that we're much better off using 4-4-2. Yes we might concede more but we're going to keep conceding until we sort our defence out anyway, regardless of the formation. At least if we lose, we'll actually go down with a fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Colby-Tit Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 442 for me, at home anyway. Especially if it's the only way to accomodate Pitman. This one up front malarky is doing my nut in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beaverface Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 Oh 433 is a very good formation if you have players with enough intelligence to plkay it. Unfortunately Bolasie is a bit of a headless chicken, you have no idea what you are going to get from the guy, and the final ball is not great. Albert is getting better, but is getting doubled up on. You need someone from the centre to find space that Albert has freed up. Sadly too many players missing the most important thing in a 433, the intelligence to utilise space and the ball I'm also noticing that by the time Albert has actually ran somewhere, he's ridden so many challenges and is so off balance that his final ball either isn't there or he's just slashing a shot at goal. Fair play to the guy, the amount of territory he gains for us and the dangerous positions he gets in makes him one of our only decent outlets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East End Old Boy Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 4-2-2 would be the best But only when we've had two sent off! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forestred Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 442 but what midfield?adomah and bolassie wide for me marv and kilkenny in middle, thought marv was very poor tonite but pearson not acm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbcfc Posted February 14, 2012 Report Share Posted February 14, 2012 As mike Bassett said 'we will play 4-4 ******* 2' if it was me I would have Marv with cisse with Albert and Pearson as the wide men. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_eastender Posted February 15, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 As mike Bassett said 'we will play 4-4 ******* 2' if it was me I would have Marv with cisse with Albert and Pearson as the wide men. Gets my vote, keeping Yannick as an 'impact sub' and allows Skuse to play RB, Foster LB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor10 Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 IF we go 4-4-2 sat then we have to make sure there is a balance. I have said in other posts I haven't been a fan of 4-4-2 but we just look out of ideas at present. With this exception of this Saturday, where I would like to see 4-4-2, maybe the 4-3-3 is best for away games? At home we need to be on the front foot and attacking teams so perhaps shouldn't play it and go a bit more direct in a 4-4-2? Like I said in a 4-4-2 the balance is needed so maybe if Del is unsure about having 2 in the middle of the park and being exposed Brett could tuck in when we are defending? Anyway for sat, I would go jamo, skuse, McManus, fonts, foster as the back 4, but if skuse is injured bring nyatanga in at left back and shift foster over to right back. Then in midfield and assuming Cisse is injured and as Kilkenny made a difference last night I would go Adomah, Marv, Kilkenny, Pearson, with Brett and Wood up top. I know people have their doubts about playing Kilkenny in a 2 in the middle of the park but if you are going to be outnumbered in there, then when you do have the ball you need someone that can keep it and makes the right decisions, and on his day Killa can do that well. I would go with it and see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Posted February 15, 2012 Report Share Posted February 15, 2012 But only when we've had two sent off! With the way we are picking up bookings, i cant be far wrong :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.