Esmond Million's Bung Posted August 10, 2013 Report Share Posted August 10, 2013 I think the idea that we'll have a rigid formation this season is silly. SOD will change depending on what is best suited to the opposition. If that means playing wide men or two up front then so be it. Whilst the "Clubs in the bag" mantra cannot ever be a fruitful transfer policy, having several options formation and personnel wise is of paramount importance. I agree but the better teams play to their own strengths and let the opposition worry about them and their formation and not vice versa, that has been a problem that the past 2 managers have got themselves into changing formations with players that cannot even tie their own shoe laces, never mind remember 4 or 5 different formations and their roles within those formations, keep the formation changes for games that are not going right and clubs in the bag firmly on the bench until needed IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted August 10, 2013 Report Share Posted August 10, 2013 I agree but the better teams play to their own strengths and let the opposition worry about them and their formation and not vice versa, that has been a problem that the past 2 managers have got themselves into changing formations with players that cannot even tie their own shoe laces, never mind remember 4 or 5 different formations and their roles within those formations, keep the formation changes for games that are not going right and clubs in the bag firmly on the bench until needed IMO. I agree, but with the passing, patient philosophy that SOD is implementing I think that the transition between formations becomes a bit easier and simpler. We seem to have a more fluid team than in previous years, so adding an extra forward or playing without any width should have a less profound effect on the team than previous tactical inconsistency. Was it SOD who said that formations are simply how you line up at kick off? I like that quote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted August 10, 2013 Report Share Posted August 10, 2013 I agree, but with the passing, patient philosophy that SOD is implementing I think that the transition between formations becomes a bit easier and simpler. We seem to have a more fluid team than in previous years, so adding an extra forward or playing without any width should have a less profound effect on the team than previous tactical inconsistency. Was it SOD who said that formations are simply how you line up at kick off? I like that quote. Very true the main ingredient to this is a reliable midfield who know their roles, limitations and strengths and or a back four who sometimes play as a back three, both of these have been sadly lacking in the past 4/5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted August 10, 2013 Report Share Posted August 10, 2013 Very true the main ingredient to this is a reliable midfield who know their roles, limitations and strengths and or a back four who sometimes play as a back three, both of these have been sadly lacking in the past 4/5 years. Agreed. Early signs are good on the midfield front at least! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.