WiltshireRed Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Firstly i want to say how glad i am we got the 3 points today! Much needed. I think we would have won even 11v11 and i must say i think it was Anderson who would have been the difference which begs the question, why this long? The fans have all collectively wanted to see him brought in for such a long time so i just wander what dmc was thinking to not even try him out? Another question for dmc, so many of us again have been saying when win games with 442 and attacking (attack best form of defence etc) so how come again it took so long to change his tactics? Lastly why oh why did he keep picking fontaine when today clearly showed we looked a lot more confident and organised bar one error, (i know we conceded 2 however i think the latter was switching off knowing we'd won (which i know is unacceptable as well)) I would like to say we looked alot better today, anderson was the highlight too me which i think shows again how much freedom players can have playing on the left wing when cunningham is behind. Roll on Millwall now and lets drive onwards! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SODS_LAW Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 It wasnt 442 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fiale Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Yup - we played 3-5-2 today with Anderson playing the old fashions central AM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiltshireRed Posted December 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 It wasnt 442 Really? What would you call it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorset_Cider Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Be as negative as you like, as long as BCFC keep winning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marksy Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 The eggs and bacon will taste a lot better tomorrow! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JammyOne Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 It wasnt 442 Started 4-4-2 like this: ---------------------------------Heaton -------------------------Bates--------McManus Foster--------------------------------------------------Cunningham ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------Skuse----------------Danns Adomah--------------------------------------------------Anderson -------------------Baldock-----------Stead THEN: ....................................................................Heaton .........................Bates.......................McManus .....................................................................Cunningham ....................Skuse ............................................Danns Adomah.........................Anderson........................Foster .......Baldock...................................Stead I've not messed up the formatting here, hard to put a shape on it! 3-5-2 I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Really? What would you call it? I could call it a lot of things and be closer to the truth than 4-4-2! Like, do people watch the game nowadays? or just the ball? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Really? What would you call it? anything but 442! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBW Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 I see you posted this thread twice and doesn't a double negative equal a positive? Yes? Great. WE WON! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcfcbs20 Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 It was more GK Heaton CB Cunnigham CB Mcmanus CB Bates RM/RWB Adomoah LM/LWB Foster CM Skuse CM Danns AM Anderson ATK Baldock ATK Stead Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiltshireRed Posted December 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 I said i was wrong with the formation but that wasn't actually the point i was making, and robin i rate your comment haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 It was more GK Heaton CB Cunnigham CB Mcmanus CB Bates RM/RWB Adomoah LM/LWB Foster CM Skuse CM Danns AM Anderson ATK Baldock ATK Stead this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Really? What would you call it? The Christmas Tree formation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pride of the west Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 The Christmas Tree formation.Everyone on the radio was calling it this after the game. The crimbo tree formation used by venables for england back in the day was 4321, thus looking like a christmas tree. Any other formation does not look like a christmas tree. Unless you buy your tree from the back of barrys van on christmas eve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Everyone on the radio was calling it this after the game. The crimbo tree formation used by venables for england back in the day was 4321, thus looking like a christmas tree. Isn't 4-3-2-1 pretty much what City played today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Isn't 4-3-2-1 pretty much what City played today? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Isn't 4-3-2-1 pretty much what City played today There certainly wasn't a back 4, more of a 3-5-2 or 5-3-2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dorset_Cider Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 The Christmas Tree formation.Naa, it was the Scots Pine Formation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pride of the west Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Isn't 4-3-2-1 pretty much what City played today? No. 352 or 532. May have looked 4321 at times as adomah didnt know what he was doing half the time at wing back. He tried his best and looked good on the ball but he was all over the place without the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 There certainly wasn't a back 4, more of a 3-5-2 or 5-3-2 It doesn't really matter what the formation was. The bottom line is that it worked. I agree that at times City had three at the back, particularly when attacking but there were other times when there was five at the back. Up top there were times when Anderson, Baldock, Stead and Albert were all ahead of the ball but City weren't playing 4 up front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pride of the west Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 It doesn't really matter what the formation was. The bottom line is that it worked. I agree that at times City had three at the back, particularly when attacking but there were other times when there was five at the back. Up top there were times when Anderson, Baldock, Stead and Albert were all ahead of the ball but City weren't playing 4 up front. Absolutely. We won end of. Skuse made a big difference as well today. But thats another thread which will surely end in a fight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Absolutely. We won end of. Skuse made a big difference as well today. But thats another thread which will surely end in a fight. I don't believe it will lead to a fight, perhaps after a 4 year search the injury that put Skuse out and directly led to us signing Danns has unwittingly given him the partner that might actually bring the best out of him and lead to him being far more consistent and push on to the next level and unlock the undoubted potential that has stagnated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steviestevieneville Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 Firstly i want to say how glad i am we got the 3 points today! Much needed. I think we would have won even 11v11 and i must say i think it was Anderson who would have been the difference which begs the question, why this long? The fans have all collectively wanted to see him brought in for such a long time so i just wander what dmc was thinking to not even try him out? Another question for dmc, so many of us again have been saying when win games with 442 and attacking (attack best form of defence etc) so how come again it took so long to change his tactics? Lastly why oh why did he keep picking fontaine when today clearly showed we looked a lot more confident and organised bar one error, (i know we conceded 2 however i think the latter was switching off knowing we'd won (which i know is unacceptable as well)) I would like to say we looked alot better today, anderson was the highlight too me which i think shows again how much freedom players can have playing on the left wing when cunningham is behind. Roll on Millwall now and lets drive onwards! It was 3-5-2 not 4-4-2 Foster was left wingback and Anderson seemed to have a free roll. It worked well though, Anderson kept finding space and they couldn't mark him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidercity1987 Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 It was 3412, certainly not the Christmas tree which is obviously 4321. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lager loud Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 I don't believe it will lead to a fight, perhaps after a 4 year search the injury that put Skuse out and directly led to us signing Danns has unwittingly given him the partner that might actually bring the best out of him and lead to him being far more consistent and push on to the next level and unlock the undoubted potential that has stagnated. I'd agree that Skuse needs the right sort of player(s) alongside him to get the best out of him, and I thought the same about Danns being the right type. Today, though, I thought Danns was pretty ordinary. He was sometimes the outlet for Skuse, but there were lots of players making themselves available, which has often not been the case this season. Stead, Baldock, Foster and Anderson in particular moved around and came looking for the ball, so that Skuse could concentrate on what he's always done well - winning the ball and making a simple pass to one of his team mates - although the through ball to Baldock for the first goal was a bit better than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 It was 3412, certainly not the Christmas tree which is obviously 4321. I thought it was more like 32212, the monkey-puzzle tree formation, as devised by Jose Araucaria, the great Chilean manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 I thought it was more like 32212, the monkey-puzzle tree formation, as devised by Jose Araucaria, the great Chilean manager. And part time crossword deviser. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 And part time crossword deviser. That as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted December 29, 2012 Report Share Posted December 29, 2012 I'd agree that Skuse needs the right sort of player(s) alongside him to get the best out of him, and I thought the same about Danns being the right type. Today, though, I thought Danns was pretty ordinary. He was sometimes the outlet for Skuse, but there were lots of players making themselves available, which has often not been the case this season. Stead, Baldock, Foster and Anderson in particular moved around and came looking for the ball, so that Skuse could concentrate on what he's always done well - winning the ball and making a simple pass to one of his team mates - although the through ball to Baldock for the first goal was a bit better than that. Danns was pretty dreadful in the first half. He was slow and uncoordinated. I don't know if he'd been on the old ganja, but at any rate by the second half a more dynamic, hustling and bustling and opportunistic Danns re-emerged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.