bangers Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Massive Game!! For me would go 442 after the Palace game, with Pearson on the left to give more support to McGivern, with Cisse and Elliot in the middle, as with Kilkenny I feel we could get over run. James Foster Fontaine McManus McGivern Adomah Elliott Cisse (if fit) Pearson Wood Pitman Gerken Wilson Kilkenny Bolasie Stead Thoughts???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leetrundlesrightfoot Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Massive Game!! For me would go 442 after the Palace game, with Pearson on the left to give more support to McGivern, with Cisse and Elliot in the middle, as with Kilkenny I feel we could get over run. James Foster Fontaine McManus McGivern Adomah Elliott Cisse (if fit) Pearson Wood Pitman Gerken Wilson Kilkenny Bolasie Stead Thoughts???? +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcbcfc Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Personally I would play Wilson at RB and foster at LB rather than mcgivern Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipdawg Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Personally I would play Wilson at RB and foster at LB rather than mcgivern +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brizzle Jordan Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Looks good, but Kilkenny in for Elliott. Kilkenny in a 4-4-2.. not great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lew-T Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Even though I would like to go for 442, I would stick with 451 as peterborough do score shetloads as well as conceding. If its 0-0 and nothing is happening, go 442 and have a go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bangers Posted February 16, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Kilkenny in a 442 against one of the more attacking teams in the league = Disaster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_BCFC Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Kilkenny in a 4-4-2.. not great. But did look good on Tuesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redcherryberry Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Pboro score a few but let in loads also. It's clear we can only score now playing 442 so i would go with - GK James DR Wilson DL Foster DC Mcmanus DC Fontaine CM Cisse MR Adomah CM Elliot CF Pitman CF Wood ML Pearson SUBS - Kilkenny, Mcgivern, Bolasie, Stead, Gerken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton1 Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 If we go for 2 up front then cisse and Marv need to dig deep and hold the centre of midfield . Don't think we have the luxury of playing wingers ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brizzle Jordan Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 If we go for 2 up front then cisse and Marv need to dig deep and hold the centre of midfield . Don't think we have the luxury of playing wingers ! So we play a narrow formation of 4-1-2-1-2? James Foster McManus Fontaine McGivern Cisse Elliot Pearson Adomah Wood Pitman I think we'd get ripped down the flanks tbh. Looks decent on paper though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Kilkenny in a 4-4-2.. not great. This is a bit of a myth really since Kilkenny has only started in a 442 a handful of times and as far as I can remember never with Cisse or Skuse as the other midfielder, only with Elliott. Kilkenny and Elliott doesn't work because Elliott is an aggressive energetic player who chases things down and ends up beyond the ball a lot of the time, so Kilkenny has to sit in front of the back four and isn't great at protecting them especially with a big gap in front of him. With Cisse alongside I expect Kilkenny will be able to play further forward where he's more effective. We might not win back possession as much as with Elliott in the side, but we ought to lose it less in the first place with two good on the ball players like Pitman and Kilkenny in the team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor10 Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Massive Game!! For me would go 442 after the Palace game, with Pearson on the left to give more support to McGivern, with Cisse and Elliot in the middle, as with Kilkenny I feel we could get over run. James Foster Fontaine McManus McGivern Adomah Elliott Cisse (if fit) Pearson Wood Pitman Gerken Wilson Kilkenny Bolasie Stead Thoughts???? Pretty much spot on except I would play Nyatanga (if fit) at left back or move Foster to right back and start Wilson at right back. McGivern is a liability and won't be able to cope with pboro's attacking approach. I would probably start Killa as well, I know in a 4-4-2 this could be a risk but I think he would retain the ball well for us, and I think we will need to keep it as much as poss sat. Be a tough call out of Marv and Cisse though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashton1 Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 I guess the point I would make is , I would leave abert out and play a traditional 442 ! No wingers just a right sided midfielder. Albert would be a hell of a impact sub. Feel I little awkward suggesting we leave out the fans favourite, however there we go, a bit controversial I know but to me he Is the common denominator when concideing our lack of goals and general supply to the strikers (many of which have tried and failed) one trip pony ? As stated before, I admire his ball control, pace and trickery but not sure about ability to know when to give/deliver ?? Happy to discuss more ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted February 16, 2012 Report Share Posted February 16, 2012 Exactly. But do you think that McInness will leave out Elliott ? He won't in my opinion. He's fallen into the same trap as Millen and Johnson - the perception we need his energy in midfield and his threat in the opposition box. That's at the cost of him being out of position for most of the game and not being able to trap a bag of cement or pass more than 5 yards. He's good at breaking up opposition play, but at a cost. He has his place, but it aint as an automatic first teamer in a 4-4-2 for me, We are playing Peterborough and we have to go for it, not West Ham where we have to stop them playing. As much as I hate to say it because I admire Marv's workrate and commitment, I wouldn't start him often. I hate the phrase "defend from the front" because all it means is have your forwards run a bit when we don't have possession so that the opposition defenders don't have lots of time on the ball. Seems an obvious thing. I've noticed though that you can't really do it effectively with 451/433 because you're typically one short until the ball is in midfield. Your front man can't pressure the defenders much, they'll just lay it off to the spare man. They have more time, they can get it wide and often bypass your crowded midfield and that's why that formation often means counter attacking, you have to wait until they're in the final third to get possession back a lot of the time. Marv is good at breaking the play up and giving the defenders less time, but he's so far up the pitch when he does it that in a 433 you've lost your advantage of an extra midfielder when defending and in a 442 you're a man down until play is held up. It's not hard for an extra forward to do the same job, they don't have to win the ball just not allow time on it, and they'll carry much more attacking threat when we do have the ball. I agree that the cost of having Marv around to do the job a second forward could is too high in a 433 and it's even worse IMO in a 442. If you look back to McInnes' first half a dozen games, we were playing in a way that saw us keep possession lots. Partly it's confidence but we seem to have allowed ourselves to get onto a back foot and are focusing on winning it back rather than keeping it. I think playing the ball players is the right way to address it and hopefully Pitman's forced the issue now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22A Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 BBC radio cambs this morning. Darren Fergie will decide later today whether to drop the goalie or not. If he does, paul Jones puts on the gloves. To replace the influential midfielder Zakwanni, Posh have got a guy in on loan from Macclesfield. BBC, the posh fans and Fergie are all stating this is a crunch match and a real biggie. Suggests to me they are scared of losing this. Therefore will they go for an early goal to sit on or just cut out our sertvice from midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lew-T Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 As much as I hate to say it because I admire Marv's workrate and commitment, I wouldn't start him often. I hate the phrase "defend from the front" because all it means is have your forwards run a bit when we don't have possession so that the opposition defenders don't have lots of time on the ball. Seems an obvious thing. I've noticed though that you can't really do it effectively with 451/433 because you're typically one short until the ball is in midfield. Your front man can't pressure the defenders much, they'll just lay it off to the spare man. They have more time, they can get it wide and often bypass your crowded midfield and that's why that formation often means counter attacking, you have to wait until they're in the final third to get possession back a lot of the time. Marv is good at breaking the play up and giving the defenders less time, but he's so far up the pitch when he does it that in a 433 you've lost your advantage of an extra midfielder when defending and in a 442 you're a man down until play is held up. It's not hard for an extra forward to do the same job, they don't have to win the ball just not allow time on it, and they'll carry much more attacking threat when we do have the ball. I agree that the cost of having Marv around to do the job a second forward could is too high in a 433 and it's even worse IMO in a 442. If you look back to McInnes' first half a dozen games, we were playing in a way that saw us keep possession lots. Partly it's confidence but we seem to have allowed ourselves to get onto a back foot and are focusing on winning it back rather than keeping it. I think playing the ball players is the right way to address it and hopefully Pitman's forced the issue now. Spot on! Very well put. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kaiser Posted February 17, 2012 Report Share Posted February 17, 2012 +1 -1 Two up front away from home with our defence is madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.