Jordan Tansley Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 Should Albert be taken to the African Cup of Nations in January we will have a massive part of the way we play taken from us. We have the option of replacing like with like by playing Anderson on the right or even giving the young lad on loan at Wimbledon a chance, but we also have an opportunity to try something completely new. The 3-5-2/5-3-2 formation has always been a favourite of mine, We've had discussions on the merits of the formation for many years on this formation and for a time we tried to use it (GJ when we signed Clarky and Harltley & subsequently Millen in his caretaker stint used it well with Ribs playing centrally very well). The reason I suggest this particular formation is that it can fully utilise our strengths in the squad and offer a little more in terms of our weaknesses. We have strength in depth at full back and up front, we also have significant numbers at centre half (although they are all crap! ). Adding an additional centre half could give us the protection we need, as one of the three can happily commit to closing the ball down higher up the pitch without leaving a gaping hole in our defence. One of our biggest problems for me is our complete over reliance on Albert. He's exceptional, but teams in this division know exactly how to nullify him. On Saturday Derby tripled up on him all game and instead of getting a few red shirts close to him so we could keep the ball and take advantage of Derby having three men over. Losing Albert will obviously force us to attack differently with our other players. Now I'm advocating getting rid of wing play completely other than full/wing back, which means we need to have all our goal threats on the pitch... From what I've seen of Steven Davies, he is much more dangerous arriving late and from outside the area. He seems to have good vision, is lethal from 18-25 yards and needs to be facing the goal at every opportunity. Everyone knows my opinion on Taylor, I think he is excellent and needs to be in the side to hold the ball and bring others into the game, Likewise I think I've made it obvious how highly I rate the movement and finishing of Sammy Baldock, so getting all three on the pitch could help us fill the void left by Albert. I would like to see Davies slightly withdrawn from a front pairing of Baldock and Taylor, with Taylor as ever playing with his back to goal, Davies offering an option in an advanced position straight away and Baldock on the shoulder of the last defender. In midfield I would like to see Danns playing his best role, a proper box to box player. Energy, good on the ball and strong in the tackle. He would obviously have to be a little more disciplined in what is essentially a two man midfield, but he is a complete player at this level. His partner for me would be Skuse. I know there has been much debate over Cole on the forum over the course of this season, but I don't think we have anyone else who is capable of keeping the ball and offering some protection to the defence when under those specific instructions (This is not an invitation Harry! haha!). The formation has been making something of a revival in world football, particularly by those managers with a reputation for playing attractive passing football- Rogers has used it excellently in European competition this season at Liverpool, Man City have used a variation, even Barca have used it on occasions. I'd love to see this side at some point. Heaton Bates McManus Wilson Edwards Cunningham Skuse Danns Davies Taylor Baldock In light of the doom and gloom we're all feeling with regards to our performances I thought it'd be nice to discuss something a little more ideological like this, I've no doubts that with Derek in charge such a change in tactics will never occur, but yeah... 'discuss' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderArmyy Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 I always believe in a solid back 4, and 90% of teams do. But surely something has to change and this could be a good formation. Trying Wigans variance of 3-4-3 could be an idea iswell. I don't think Edwards would have the quality to bomb up and down the wings, which a 3 5 2 requires. But Cunningham is the perfect man for that formation. Also another worry if the Wing backs are tied back and are pushed back to defend. We'd have no width at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 Danns? No longer here when "Bert" goes to Africa. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted December 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 <blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="Roger Red Hat" data-cid="1682857" data-time="1355736019"><p> Danns? No longer here when "Bert" goes to Africa.</p></blockquote> Nor is Wilson, their stays have been hypothetically extended! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chivs Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 Danns? No longer here when "Bert" goes to Africa. Danns? Wasn't here on Saturday... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 We have nothing to lose at all by trying this formation, even playing Skuse, because a major part of the Skuse enigma is IMO he has never had the correct midfield partner to educate him about his responsibilities and allow him to play with more freedom and to his strengths and maybe just maybe Danns is that man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Brent Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 Heaton Bates McManus Wilson Edwards Cunningham Skuse Danns Davies Taylor Baldock I do like that formation, and I think a change in thought and approach is needed. Lack of Albert will force Del to change his style although he has always maintained he prefers 4-4-2. I would swap Wilson for Carey though. Cunningham can probably play the left hand side on his own anyway. Big responsibility for Edwards. And, if no Danns i'd go with Pearson. I wonder (and hope), does Fontaine have a tenuous link to an African Nation, one of the smaller ones? Perhaps one of his grandparents was born in DR Congo. and they are in desperate need of a CB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBW Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 Ignoring everything about the formation here as your man crush for Taylor continues. ... and Danns and Wilson's contracts are up by then too so ignoring some facts that should be considered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted December 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 <blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="Libertine1" data-cid="1682883" data-time="1355740167"><p> I do like that formation, and I think a change in thought and approach is needed. Lack of Albert will force Del to change his style although he has always maintained he prefers 4-4-2.<br /> <br /> I would swap Wilson for Carey though. Cunningham can probably play the left hand side on his own anyway. Big responsibility for Edwards. And, if no Danns i'd go with Pearson.<br /> <br /> I wonder (and hope), does Fontaine have a tenuous link to an African Nation, one of the smaller ones? Perhaps one of his grandparents was born in DR Congo. and they are in desperate need of a CB. </p></blockquote> I actually quite like Foster, but he's in a dire run and could really do with a few weeks off, likewise Joe has always done well when given the chance, he's hardly gonna do any worse!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted December 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 <blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="Robin TBW" data-cid="1682895" data-time="1355741691"><p> Ignoring everything about the formation here as your man crush for Taylor continues.<br /> <br /> ... and Danns and Wilson's contracts are up by then too so ignoring some facts that should be considered.</p></blockquote> See post 4, clown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coxy27 Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 It's a nice idea, looks a decent team, but I think we all know that the sad reality is that it will not happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Taylor's Knob Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 Definitely worth a go. Seem to also recall us playing better end of last season when Albert wasn't a regular starter. Forced the other players to be a bit more imaginative perhaps? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 I'd prefer Carey to McManus. McManus always seems to be there when we defend attrociously. He's never the worse offender, but by doing very little over 90 minutes he somehow absolves himself from the blame of trying something and it not working. I'm not a fan of the man at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JammyOne Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 Not sure about McManus as a sweeper. Would prefer Carey to do that role, but I do like the formation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted December 17, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 I like McManus, we don't have much areal ability in the side and with Bates and A N other next to him he should have the protection positionally to actually commit himself to winning the ball. Carey is still excellent in my opinion, so he could definitely come in to this set up and do well. We do miss his grit and determination. Blood sweat and tears and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CIDER NOT CIDRE Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 Don't see why not. May as well have a go... I mean there isn't really anything to lose, as what we are doing now isnt exactly working! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 A well thought-out post. Sometimes an exceptional player (in context) can unbalance a team. I mean, look at Messi at Barca; sorry, only joking There does seen to be a tendency to "give it to Albert" and then stand back and watch. That won't be an option with Albert in Africa. Your formation certainly suits what might be our strengths if the players were up for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted December 17, 2012 Report Share Posted December 17, 2012 That looks good and I like your ideas, but given that the average City team can barely understand how to operate in a 4-4-2, the most basic of all formations, I think the above might lead to total chaos, mass confusion and utter hammerings. Sorry mate I couldn't help but laugh for some unknown reason that last sentence reminded of the Spanish inquisition monty python sketch. Much like BCFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 Sorry mate I couldn't help but laugh for some unknown reason that last sentence reminded of the Spanish inquisition monty python sketch. Much like BCFC. *enter a cackling maniacal tracksuited Scotsman* NOBODY expects the McInnes formation!!! We have three main defensive line-ups. Er, we have four main defensive line-ups, erm, we have five ..... [repeat ad nauseum until relegation] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted December 18, 2012 Report Share Posted December 18, 2012 *enter a cackling maniacal tracksuited Scotsman* NOBODY expects the McInnes formation!!! We have three main defensive line-ups. Er, we have four main defensive line-ups, erm, we have five ..... [repeat ad nauseum until relegation] Couldn't resist it and they are dressed in red. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.