How to play Tomlin, or, should I say, around Tomlin?

[redpole]

36 minutes ago, Snufflelufagus said:

I think he could fit in in a 4-4-2 but at left midfield. he played here the end of last season with good success. For that to happen though I think a very defensive fullback in Magneson would be required at Leftback and then also two defensive CM in Hegler and O'Neil.

Finally someone making sense, Tomlin has to start, he offers something different to every other player we have. Looking at our squad we are set up for 442.  Totally agree Tomlin needs a defensive minded left back to cover him and in Magnuson we have that. Both Bryan and Goldborne are too attacking. 

This then leaves us a option. To go Duric and Tammy up top with Hegler and O'Neil in the middle with cott's flying down the right to get the crosses in. 

However this all makes to much sense so I expect LJ to go 4-4-1-1 with Patterson in behind Tammy with Duric,Matty and Tomlin on the bench.

[Bobfish]

17 minutes ago, WestonRobin said:

In my opinion Tomlin playing in the hole is by far his best position...we have seen him here a few times this season (Hull in the cup, Sheff Weds at home to name just a couple) and he creates so much.

However, playing him here means we need to start with two up top or someone like Bobby along side him in a midfield five whereby Bobby makes lots of forward runs. I'm afraid that Tammy doesn't make 'smart' runs and drag the opposition defenders out of position, this just isn't his game. This means that Tomlin does not have either space to run in to or thread balls through for the striker. They both then become far too easy to mark 'out' of the game.

For me, we need to have two up top and Tomlin in the hole...I know we have only seen him once but Taylor's movement on Saturday is exactly the type of player we need. He was dragging their defence all over the place, this would then provide Tammy with the space to run in to and Tomlin, as we know, can easily find him.

So, how do we play two up top and Tomlin in the hole...there have been a couple of formations mentioned but my favourite would be 4-1-2-1-2. This is dependant on the squad being fully fit, which means in the short term at least we can't adopt this system, and our players playing well (goes without saying!). So, my team would be:

Giefer

Matthews   Flint   Wright   Magnusson

Hegeler

Cotterill                   Bryan

Tomlin

Tammy        Taylor

Both Cotterill and Bryan have the engine to both support the defence and get forward, they can also both pay a midfield role and put in a tackle or two. 

We have option off the bench to replace both Cotterill and Bryan, with ODowda and Paterson, as this system puts them under the greatest amount of strain as well as switching Tomlin for Reid too.

I prefer this to 3-5-2 as I believe the defence is more suited to a back 4.

I prefer the diamond too. I am guessing you selected Cotterill and Bryan as they could drift wide as required to cover our full backs and additionally bomb down the wing? I would like to see how Magners does as a left full back, as I believe that was the role he was selected for as back up for his national side during that awful, awful time. He can display a sweet left foot on occasion, so I would be intrigued to see his crossing. However, like with Zak, I believe he played at CB behind closed doors yesterday (someone please correct me if I am wrong.)

35 minutes ago, cynic said:

 

Tomlin behind the strikers - one of which would be Taylor making the runs he can make, like kodjia did.

We now have a different dynamic to the team with Taylor up front actually moving into space which has been unheard of since Kodjia left. Tomlin will have someone to pass the ball to now.

 

I wonder for how many more games we need to play Tammy to complete his quota with Chelsea. I would like to keep Chelsea sweet as they could be a good source of talent, and the last thing we want is to piss them off like the gas did. The poor kid is perhaps suffering from “combat fatigue” and more importantly not ours. Taylor and Djuric are and I would like to see if they can build a partnership. Djuric, I feel, gives us another element of play, especially with some of our defenders’ habit of lumping the ball long. Perhaps Tammy can be a super sub for a while?

And the more Taylor scores, the more it will piss off the gas. Win win.

[WestonRobin]

2 minutes ago, Bobfish said:

I prefer the diamond too. I am guessing you selected Cotterill and Bryan as they could drift wide as required to cover our full backs and additionally bomb down the wing?

Three reasons Bobfish;

1) They can drift wide, bomb down the wing and put in decent crosses. In my opinion they are the best 'crossers' of the ball at the club. That said, Matthews can put in a decent cross too.

2) They both have good engines and can cover the full backs - we saw Little have much more protection this weekend with Cotterill in front of him. We all know Joe can provide good cover for the full back

3) They can both play in midfield too. Both aren't scared to put in a tackle so if and when we need to be a bit more narrow they have the ability to support Hegeler.

[BRISTOL86]

2 hours ago, Fordy62 said:

The stats of the start of the season of them being the 2nd most prolific strike force in the division suggest otherwise Dan. 

It's no coincidence that we started created chances against Wednesday last week when he was included. 

I think Tomlin & Tammy must start together. 

Therein lines the conundrum of LT. A 'Wednesday' performance happens how often? Once every 2/3/4/5 games? 

Hes just as capable of pulling a 'Rotherham' where he's blowing out his arse after 30 mins. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt after his 'illness' but that's the ultimate conundrum is how dependable his performance is.

Which LT is going to show up?

[Garland-sweden]

Tammy and Taylor upfront, Tomlin feed them with smart passes. Djuric come in twenty left and takes everything in the air. If it dont work for Tomlin, take him off ht. Think Tomlin is our best player when he is in the mood.

[BCFC Rich]

42 minutes ago, WestonRobin said:

For me, we need to have two up top and Tomlin in the hole...I know we have only seen him once but Taylor's movement on Saturday is exactly the type of player we need. He was dragging their defence all over the place, this would then provide Tammy with the space to run in to and Tomlin, as we know, can easily find him.

2

I think this is spot on and gets to the heart of it. If we are going to play Tomlin then we need two in front to get the best from him/ give him the space and time he needs and the targets to aim for. So for me it has to be:

                                                                                                     Tomlin

                                                                              Tammy                               Taylor/Duric 

As the front three otherwise he doesn't fit and we won't be getting the best out of him. This is why he is a luxury player because he dictates a formation that accommodates him. 

So if I was going to have him in the team I would want something solid and defensively sound behind him. I'd do this by utilising Helgers flexibility:

                                                                                                        GK

                                                  Cotterill/Little     Flint/Magnusson        Wright         Golborne/Magnusson

                                                                                                      Helger       

                                                                 Reid/Brownhill/Cotterill               Bryan/Reid

                                                                                                     Tomlin

                                                                              Tammy                               Taylor/Duric 

Helger is the key here as he makes this formation 4-1-2-1-2 in possession and 5-2-1-2 when defending by dropping into defense to make a back three. The other positions where I have suggested more than one player are like that because they depend on who we are playing, home or away etc. And therfore how attacking we can be.

[Marina's Rolls Royce]

There must be very few of us, if any, that didn't want BCFC to bring in Lee Tomlin as a permanent player.

The fact that it's so difficult to work out the best team with Tomlin in it coupled with his incredibly patchy form this season does make me wonder if his best position, for the moment, is on the bench but given time as a sub to affect the game if we're not winning.

( this is another way of me saying I don't know the answer)

[Alessandro]

Tomlin has been one of the biggest disappointments of the season for me.

As I said elsewhere, given his previous he was a bit of a gamble, and by all accounts has brought a fair amount of 'baggage' with him.

The question is has his fitness and mentality held him back or the way LJ has utilised him. Bit of both I would suggest, LT out on the left, is just a big no no, for me.

Ultimately we need to find ASAP the combination of his mental state and the manager using him correctly. For me, I'd have two holding midfielders so he can have the free role and partner him up front with Tammy or Matty. Ideally the two wide men would have the ability to get up and down supporting both Tomlin and their respective full backs, which we might have now with Cotterill and Bryan.

[NorfolkInChance]

18 minutes ago, Marina's Rolls Royce said:

There must be very few of us, if any, that didn't want BCFC to bring in Lee Tomlin as a permanent player.

The fact that it's so difficult to work out the best team with Tomlin in it coupled with his incredibly patchy form this season does make me wonder if his best position, for the moment, is on the bench but given time as a sub to affect the game if we're not winning.

( this is another way of me saying I don't know the answer)

I'm with you on this one - when did football get so complicated?  Perhaps keeping it simple and just concentrating on doing your job on the pitch and being better than your opponent might work?  A lot of this formation stuff is carp - the game is fluid  (well perhaps not in our case) so apart from a bit of structure around the defence it changes... Perhaps I'm just an old fart....

[spudski]

All this talk of where to fit Tomlin in...he's played pretty much all over midfield and up front. He's done well sometimes and been awful the majority of other times.

The problem isn't where to fit him in...the problem is Tomlin himself, and whether he performs on the day.

He played well partly against Wednesday and then the next match against Rotherham, he was garbage.

You can't build your side around a player like Tomlin, if he only turns up once in a blue moon.

You can't keep carrying a player. You can't set a team up, and then find you have to keep changing and substituting him, because he's not performing.

He's meant to be our playmaker and provider...that's all well and good. However we are constantly having to cover for him when tracking back.

Scoring isn't our problem...defending is. And it's often our midfield letting the defenders down, as they are struggling as three men only, covering Tomlins lazy backside.

Even going forward, he'll play a nice pass, then stand their and admire it.

That isn't good enough...that's the reason he's playing for a struggling Bristol City and not higher up the leagues.

Good playmakers...pass then move. Not jog around blaming everyone else in the side, for his poor performances.

I personally hope we get rid of him...more of a problem than he's worth, and imo, one of the reasons why we are struggling this season.

Problem is...City fans are suckers for a lazy skilled player...we've had our fair share.

[JoeAman08]

Granted it was 30 minutes but from what I saw from Taylor you don't need Tomlin. He's more than willing and capable of dropping into the space behind the other striker and linking with the midfield. This means you don't need Tomlin to link the midfield to the attack which he hasn't done effectively most of the season. It might actually make us better to drop him completely as with Matty and Tammy you get two willing pressers as well. 

Tomlin is the ultimate luxury and right now we don't need it. Last year we got a bounce from a new manager and new system that allowed teams not to know how we'd play and allowed Tomlin to play free. Plus, Kodjia took a lot of attention from Lee and did a lot of work off the ball to cover for Lee. As good as Tammy is, he's not the same threat in behind Kodjia was which I think means the defense can play a bit higher and makes less space for LT. My opinion anyway. 

I would go 4-4-2 and drop Tomlin but Matty T has to start and play the same way as he did the other day in 30 minutes for it to work. 

                  Giefer

Matthews Flint Wright Bryan

Cotterill Brownhill Hegeler COD

            Taylor Abraham

That would be my preferred starting XI. Think it allows for everyone to play their natural games. Taylor dropping and linking up with the midfield with players running off him. Wingers able to cross with their strong foot. Two wingers that will track back allowing our fullbacks who have attacking talent some freedom to do so. 

[Davefevs]

6 hours ago, Bobfish said:

How to play Tomlin, or, should I say, around Tomlin. This is the conundrum that has plagued us all season, so I thought I would start a thread to discuss it. No in/out LJ stuff please, the Tomlin conundrum is one that any manager will have to deal with. I am not talking about personality, etc, but structural in a tactical sense. He can only play “in the hole” as it was, behind the striker/s. Any attempt to play on the wing for example has led to lack of cover to the player behind with disastrous consequences.

 

 

So what are our options?

Playing behind a single striker – this has been tried with 4411 or 4231. Whilst the latter had some success at the start of the season, it soon led to Tammy being man marked out the game. Many, myself included, prefer two strikers upfront for the extra workload on their defenders, more options for Tomlin etc to pass to, especially now we have the presence of Djuric to add hold-up play, flick ons, and a target for crosses. 4411 provides the options of crosses into the box from wide, but, again, with only a solitary striker to aim for.

Playing behind two strikers – what are the options?

442 - The diamond, (arguably 41212) a favourite of mine, I must admit, yet one I now feel our team cannot manage. The reason? Whilst Tomlin would be the tip and Jens the base, giving opportunity to a balance of attacking and defending roles in between, the real issue lies with the lack of full backs. The sad truth is that too many crosses come in from wide areas, whether from the opposition overloading us two against one (Cardiff post substitution for example,) poor positioning in the later periods from being exhausted from running up and down the line all game, or lack of being able to effectively attack and defend. If our full backs can’t attack, we play narrow from lack of width; if they can’t defend, crosses punish us. The modern full back is a hell of a job.

So, 352 or 532 - Wing backs. A potential solution, one that has been tried with two midfielders behind Tomlin. Whilst I would prefer one of these two to be a holding player and the other more attacking minded to help link play, our defence’s lack of pace (sorry flint) may have led to two holding players here instead. So the wing backs still face the problem of overloading/attacking and defending roles as above, but with the added support of the extra defender being able to come across and help cover. This obviously needs a well-drilled back three with excellent positional awareness: Insert your own jokes here. This could be viable though and does add to our attacking options. It did enable us to take the lead against Cardiff twice, yet it also led to us being punished. And, in relation to the initial question, Tomlin wasn’t actually playing in that game for 80 odd minutes too.

Any more? 3412, similar to the pros and cons of wingbacks above perhaps, in essence 352. How about 4312? How would the three across the midfield line up? Would you have Jens in the centre with two wingers? This would add to covering our own full backs, yet poor Jens would be left doing the job of two or more men in the midfield battle. The other option is three centrally in the middle of the park, enabling a balance of attacking/defensive/link play, but would leave our flanks exposed. Perhaps a combination of the two could be utilised? Such as a player plays wide when the ball is on that side of the pitch, yet drifts into the centre when the ball is in the middle of the park or on the opposite side, much like how the back three of a 352 play? This could work well, helping the battle in the centre of the park, but would require a positional awareness that could arguably be lacking. It would however enable some attacking focus down the wing for crosses, but may do little in stretching the opposition.

I wrack my brains for other options. Could he play in the central pairing of a more traditional flat 442? Alongside Jens for example, helping out the midfield battle then pushing forward into the hole from deep? But then the question must be asked if another player, such as perhaps Reid, Brownhill, or even Jens (if another player took the holding role instead) be more suitable for this, providing the energy required?

 

 

What opinions, solutions does everyone have?

Great post Bob.  Surely you just pick eleven players in a formation like on Football Manager and it all takes care of itself.

Seriously, though, you raise exactly the points I've made separately in numerous posts this season.

6 hours ago, pongo88 said:

This discussion illustrates the problems caused by LJ's transfer dealings. He's signed a lot of players, but there is no obvious solution as to how to fit them into the team.  I mentioned in another thread that he reminds me of someone who plays fantasy football, where you can be successful by signing good players without having to worry about how they would play as a team in the real world. 

In answer to Bobfish's original question, I haven't a clue, and I don't think LJ has either. 

Yep, bit like Football Manager.

5 hours ago, Matty Taylor [BCFC] said:

Or a more positive and (imo, rational) spin. He played incredibly well for Peterborough and got them promoted, then in the Championship the rest of his team struggled. Due to him being so good he earned himself a move to Boro, one of the best teams in the Championship. Boro didn't go up and due to his standout performances, for a team we can only hope of being as good as in the next 5 years, he got his move to the Prem. He started the season for Bournemouth, got injured, fell out with the manager and then left to come here for game time. The rest is history.

I don't know what else the man can do to get a good rep (footballing wise), he's almost done what every footballer that starts from the 'bottom' dreams of.

I think the reason he got left out at AFCB was not his injury but Callum Wilson's.  Eddie Howe thought Tomlin needed a pacy, energetic, run in behind striking partner (mmmm, Kodjia!), so when Wilson got injured he suddenly didn't have the right partner....I think he reverted to Murray and Josh King - might be wrong, please correct me.  But the essence was one striker to stretch the defence, one no10 to exploit any space.  

3 hours ago, Garland-sweden said:

Tammy and Taylor upfront, Tomlin feed them with smart passes. Djuric come in twenty left and takes everything in the air. If it dont work for Tomlin, take him off ht. Think Tomlin is our best player when he is in the mood.

Who are the other 8 and in what formation?  As a 3 in isolation, fantastic, but Bob's OP highlights the issues surrounding the other 8 players.

41 minutes ago, JoeAman08 said:

Granted it was 30 minutes but from what I saw from Taylor you don't need Tomlin. He's more than willing and capable of dropping into the space behind the other striker and linking with the midfield. This means you don't need Tomlin to link the midfield to the attack which he hasn't done effectively most of the season. It might actually make us better to drop him completely as with Matty and Tammy you get two willing pressers as well. 

Tomlin is the ultimate luxury and right now we don't need it. Last year we got a bounce from a new manager and new system that allowed teams not to know how we'd play and allowed Tomlin to play free. Plus, Kodjia took a lot of attention from Lee and did a lot of work off the ball to cover for Lee. As good as Tammy is, he's not the same threat in behind Kodjia was which I think means the defense can play a bit higher and makes less space for LT. My opinion anyway. 

I would go 4-4-2 and drop Tomlin but Matty T has to start and play the same way as he did the other day in 30 minutes for it to work. 

                  Giefer

Matthews Flint Wright Bryan

Cotterill Brownhill Hegeler COD

            Taylor Abraham

That would be my preferred starting XI. Think it allows for everyone to play their natural games. Taylor dropping and linking up with the midfield with players running off him. Wingers able to cross with their strong foot. Two wingers that will track back allowing our fullbacks who have attacking talent some freedom to do so. 

Lots to agree with there Joe.  One of the things I think is part of the problem is our two central midfielders.  Whenever they are referenced it is always as the "two holding midfielders".  Why do they have to be holding?  When we haven't got the ball in our final third I accept we want the space between CBs and CMs to not be great so that any striker or no10 dropping short, doesn't get the exact space we want Tomlin to have when we've got the ball. 

However, when we have the ball, the likes of Pack and Smith rarely get ahead of the ball.  We become easy / easier to play against.  That's why they score so few, in fact, not even getting many shots.

Part of the basis of our early season better form (not brilliant but better) was both O'Neil and Reid's willingness to try to make runs past the line of the ball.  More Reid, but O'Neil too, but both were disciplined enough to know when the other had gone to not leave us exposed.  Hegeler has shown (more from RCB when we played a 3) that there are benefits to showing a bit more attacking willingness.  Early season, Reid and O'Neil getting past the line of the ball and their marker, dragged either the CDM or the CBs out and guess what....Tomlin afforded more space.

The other issue is I don't think LT is as fit as either earlier this season or last season.  Last season he worked harder off of the ball, now he is using all his reserves for when he has it, and the team suffers.  He could have done with doing a mini pre-season.  If Tomlin could give me 60-65 minutes of running both with the ball and without it, I'd find a way to fit him in.  But he's only giving us 70-75 in one direction predominantly - that causes issues.

There is no easy answer.  One other option is the 4141.  Yes, it's one up top, but in effect you have one CDM, but he never attacks.  He not only covers the 2 CBs, but he also has to partly cover the full backs, who can go one at a time.  You end up with something like this:

                      Giefer

Matthews, Flint, Wright, Magnüsson

                            ^

            <       Hegeler      >

Cotterill, Tomlin, O'Neil, Bryan    

                      Abraham / Taylor

 

All four in the midfield can get forward, encouraged to try and get past their man and get closer to Tammy (whoever).  Full-backs can get forward to overload on the possession side.

It doesn't solve everything, but it tries to address some of the inadequacies of other formations, whilst keeping Tomlin (or Reid, or Paterson.

We have become cautious in the CM area.

[WestonRobin]

2 hours ago, spudski said:

All this talk of where to fit Tomlin in...he's played pretty much all over midfield and up front. He's done well sometimes and been awful the majority of other times.

The problem isn't where to fit him in...the problem is Tomlin himself, and whether he performs on the day.

He played well partly against Wednesday and then the next match against Rotherham, he was garbage.

You can't build your side around a player like Tomlin, if he only turns up once in a blue moon.

You can't keep carrying a player. You can't set a team up, and then find you have to keep changing and substituting him, because he's not performing.

He's meant to be our playmaker and provider...that's all well and good. However we are constantly having to cover for him when tracking back.

Scoring isn't our problem...defending is. And it's often our midfield letting the defenders down, as they are struggling as three men only, covering Tomlins lazy backside.

Even going forward, he'll play a nice pass, then stand their and admire it.

That isn't good enough...that's the reason he's playing for a struggling Bristol City and not higher up the leagues.

Good playmakers...pass then move. Not jog around blaming everyone else in the side, for his poor performances.

I personally hope we get rid of him...more of a problem than he's worth, and imo, one of the reasons why we are struggling this season.

Problem is...City fans are suckers for a lazy skilled player...we've had our fair share.

In my opinion that's a bit harsh on Tomlin there Spud.

I agree that on the face of things Tomlin hasn't turned up on many occasions this season...but, and for me this is a large but, how many times has he played in a team that provide him with options? Where is the movement in front of him that enables Tomlin to either play a pass to a man in space or to run in to a gap where he can be threatening?

Tammy plays on the shoulder and with only him up front - Championship quality defenders are able to mark him out of the game and place enough men on Tomlin to close any gaps when only Tammy is up top; especially as we have been so narrow.

When Tomlin has Tammy and A.N Other - that could be Bobby, Djuric, Kodjia, Taylor (and anyone else who has played along Tammy this season) in the team moving and creating space he thrives and we create more than enough to win two games. Unfortunately for me we haven't started with a formation that provides Tomlin with the opportunity to do what he does best. He needs movement in front and players trying to lose their marker...and I'm afraid at times he has been playing with statues. 

[JoeAman08]

19 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Great post Bob.  Surely you just pick eleven players in a formation like on Football Manager and it all takes care of itself.

Seriously, though, you raise exactly the points I've made separately in numerous posts this season.

Yep, bit like Football Manager.

I think the reason he got left out at AFCB was not his injury but Callum Wilson's.  Eddie Howe thought Tomlin needed a pacy, energetic, run in behind striking partner (mmmm, Kodjia!), so when Wilson got injured he suddenly didn't have the right partner....I think he reverted to Murray and Josh King - might be wrong, please correct me.  But the essence was one striker to stretch the defence, one no10 to exploit any space.  

Who are the other 8 and in what formation?  As a 3 in isolation, fantastic, but Bob's OP highlights the issues surrounding the other 8 players.

Lots to agree with there Joe.  One of the things I think is part of the problem is our two central midfielders.  Whenever they are referenced it is always as the "two holding midfielders".  Why do they have to be holding?  When we haven't got the ball in our final third I accept we want the space between CBs and CMs to not be great so that any striker or no10 dropping short, doesn't get the exact space we want Tomlin to have when we've got the ball. 

However, when we have the ball, the likes of Pack and Smith rarely get ahead of the ball.  We become easy / easier to play against.  That's why they score so few, in fact, not even getting many shots.

Part of the basis of our early season better form (not brilliant but better) was both O'Neil and Reid's willingness to try to make runs past the line of the ball.  More Reid, but O'Neil too, but both were disciplined enough to know when the other had gone to not leave us exposed.  Hegeler has shown (more from RCB when we played a 3) that there are benefits to showing a bit more attacking willingness.  Early season, Reid and O'Neil getting past the line of the ball and their marker, dragged either the CDM or the CBs out and guess what....Tomlin afforded more space.

The other issue is I don't think LT is as fit as either earlier this season or last season.  Last season he worked harder off of the ball, now he is using all his reserves for when he has it, and the team suffers.  He could have done with doing a mini pre-season.  If Tomlin could give me 60-65 minutes of running both with the ball and without it, I'd find a way to fit him in.  But he's only giving us 70-75 in one direction predominantly - that causes issues.

There is no easy answer.  One other option is the 4141.  Yes, it's one up top, but in effect you have one CDM, but he never attacks.  He not only covers the 2 CBs, but he also has to partly cover the full backs, who can go one at a time.  You end up with something like this:

                      Giefer

Matthews, Flint, Wright, Magnüsson

                            ^

            <       Hegeler      >

Cotterill, Tomlin, O'Neil, Bryan    

                      Abraham / Taylor

 

All four in the midfield can get forward, encouraged to try and get past their man and get closer to Tammy (whoever).  Full-backs can get forward to overload on the possession side.

It doesn't solve everything, but it tries to address some of the inadequacies of other formations, whilst keeping Tomlin (or Reid, or Paterson.

We have become cautious in the CM area.

Agree with the CMs. It's the reason Bobby and Tomlin worked so well because Bobby was willing to go forward at times and was an option when LT dropped deep. Bobby became the link. This is where I feel Brownhill needs to take the step up. Whether LT plays or not, one of the two midfielders needs to get forward from time to time. I'm not sure if it's instruction or not though. It's probably why Joe always seems to have stormers in that position because he's willing to get forward. He also provides some athleticism in there which we really lack as none of Pack, Smith, GON, Brownhill or Hegeler are top athletes. It's not a must but we really look a different team when Bobby or Joe are in there harassing defenders and using little bursts of pace attacking. 

[spudski]

26 minutes ago, WestonRobin said:

In my opinion that's a bit harsh on Tomlin there Spud.

I agree that on the face of things Tomlin hasn't turned up on many occasions this season...but, and for me this is a large but, how many times has he played in a team that provide him with options? Where is the movement in front of him that enables Tomlin to either play a pass to a man in space or to run in to a gap where he can be threatening?

Tammy plays on the shoulder and with only him up front - Championship quality defenders are able to mark him out of the game and place enough men on Tomlin to close any gaps when only Tammy is up top; especially as we have been so narrow.

When Tomlin has Tammy and A.N Other - that could be Bobby, Djuric, Kodjia, Taylor (and anyone else who has played along Tammy this season) in the team moving and creating space he thrives and we create more than enough to win two games. Unfortunately for me we haven't started with a formation that provides Tomlin with the opportunity to do what he does best. He needs movement in front and players trying to lose their marker...and I'm afraid at times he has been playing with statues. 

As I said in my post WR...it's not going forward with Tomlin that's the problem. He can provide passes and assists on occasion.

It's the rest of his game that leaves us wanting.

If he was producing every game...then I'd accept it. But he's not. We carry him, especially defensively, and when he's not producing offensively, he's just a waste of space.

[Rocking Red Cyril]

8 hours ago, Spoons said:

For me if Tomlin plays so must bobby Reid . He seems to make Tomlin tick. At the start of the season when we were on a good run both were in the team and both were contributing with assists and goals.

It a no brainier !!

[WestonRobin]

4 minutes ago, spudski said:

As I said in my post WR...it's not going forward with Tomlin that's the problem. He can provide passes and assists on occasion.

It's the rest of his game that leaves us wanting.

If he was producing every game...then I'd accept it. But he's not. We carry him, especially defensively, and when he's not producing offensively, he's just a waste of space.

Agree to a point Spud.

If we were set up in a way which enabled Tomlin to create much more with two players in front making runs, creating space and pushing defenders back then the opposition wouldn't be able to break in the numbers they have...this, in turn, wouldn't put as much pressure on either the midfield or defence. They'd need to cover the options we have and the way we play therefore he wouldn't be required to track back nearly as much.

It's a fine balance, I get that, and you're right that Tomlin doesn't track back...that's plain to see when he is put out on the wing. Look at the first 20 mins again Sheffield Weds - Little was dreadfully exposed...but we need to play to our strengths and stop setting up to counter the oppositions threats, if we did that we may just nullify some of the oppositions threats as they'd need to be more defensive in their approach.

[BobBobSuperBob]

6 hours ago, Bobfish said:

That’s interesting. Sorry I missed that post. So do you mean that Tomlin remains in the hole, so a 4213 when we are attacking and a 4411 when we are out of possession? The only issue I see is Tammy the best choice for this out left, when we would have O’dowda and Patterson who I assume have more experience playing both in midfield and attack? And how about Taylor? It does however provide a solution and would also enable a high press with TA and DC’s work rate, as you mentioned. I agree that MD is more suitable to that central position.

That is interesting. So would the two in midfield be more “holding” players behind Tomlin? I must admit I shuddered when you mentioned England, Welbeck, and effective. ;-)

The three in midfield Bob playing narrow, certainly out of possession with either LT in the middle of the three with Hegler and Brownhill / Pack / GON  either side or as you say could be a holding 2 with Tomlin just in front 

The main thing is the three becomes a 5 when out of possession giving us a 4-5-1 when opposition have possession 

And I'd see us more a 4-3-3 in possession , or if  you squeeze LT forward  a 4-2-1-3 or 4-2-3-1 , in possession

It also puts less responsibility on the full backs when we have possession allowing them to concentrate predominantly on defensive duties

 

 

I thought Welbeck was actually effective coming in off the left for England !!!

[Bobfish]

24 minutes ago, Rocking Red Cyril said:

It a no brainier !!

I too would like to see Reid with Tomlin, but to call it a “no brainer” without more information is more than a little ironic. As my original post asked, how do you set the team up? I’m actually curious to people’s solution. If you played Tomlin and Reid, what formation would you play? You would have to deplete the team in another area. Would you remove from the defensive ability of the midfield and expose our defenders, something that has led to us conceding far too many, thus why we bought Jens? Or would you remove the extra pair of wide men, reducing our ability to stop crosses and cross ourselves? Or would you play one up front, leading to a striker being easily man marked out the game? Please explain, because this “no brainer” is less than obvious to most. I would love to have a forward runner in the midfield, but they need to contribute to the battle for possession as Tomlin doesn’t. Our defense, especially Flint, is too slow to deal with fast strikers, through balls, or a ball over the top etc without a protective shield to stop this. Perhaps Brownhill can grow to do both defensive and attack roles in midfield, like Jen's can, but Pack, Smith, and I would argue O’neil don’t. Reid is energetic but potentially a bit lightweight to muscle in for this dual role and would be better in a similar role to Tomlin. Please enlighten. I am actually curious, thus why I started the topic.

[Davefevs]

Glad you started this thread @Bobfish - some really good stuff being posted.

[Ashtonwurzel]

50 minutes ago, spudski said:

As I said in my post WR...it's not going forward with Tomlin that's the problem. He can provide passes and assists on occasion.

It's the rest of his game that leaves us wanting.

If he was producing every game...then I'd accept it. But he's not. We carry him, especially defensively, and when he's not producing offensively, he's just a waste of space.

Look at Tomlin as a coach and not as a fan = big difference.

I agree with the Spudster on this one.

[Bobfish]

22 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Glad you started this thread @Bobfish - some really good stuff being posted.

It’s all just to help my champ manager team.

Seriously though, this forum has recently degenerated to the level of a kindergarden sandpit, but worst of all was seeing intelligent posters dragged into the prison yard/playground face off. I know some people think different, but football is not a simple game and hasn’t been since at least when the dutch introduced total football. League one enabled us to get away with frailties that the championship punishes. I feel we have the potential to have a really good team, and I feel some of LJ’s chopping and changing has been to try to address our weaknesses. The Tomlin one is a challenge and I seriously am intrigued to how people see the solution. I think Jen’s attacking and defensive utility provides a big piece in this jigsaw. I was impressed with westonrobin's idea of bryan and cotterill on either side of the diamond to enable both wide and central play: It would be interesting to see if this works in practice. One thing I have noticed is how many want Magners as a left full back. Has anyone seen him play in this role, as whilst I know he can, I have not witnessed it myself. How does he get on? Is he more defensive minded like SG? Could he function as a modern full back, or more like the ones we have?

[Ashtonwurzel]

3 minutes ago, Bobfish said:

It’s all just to help my champ manager team.

 

 

Seriously though, this forum has recently degenerated to the level of a kindergarden sandpit, but worst of all was seeing intelligent posters dragged into the prison yard/playground face off. I know some people think different, but football is not a simple game and hasn’t been since at least when the dutch introduced total football. League one enabled us to get away with frailties that the championship punishes. I feel we have the potential to have a really good team, and I feel some of LJ’s chopping and changing has been to try to address our weaknesses. The Tomlin one is a challenge and I seriously am intrigued to how people see the solution. I think Jen’s attacking and defensive utility provides a big piece in this jigsaw. I was impressed with westonrobin's idea of bryan and cotterill on either side of the diamond to enable both wide and central play: It would be interesting to see if this works in practice. One thing I have noticed is how many want Magners as a left full back. Has anyone seen him play in this role, as whilst I know he can, I have not witnessed it myself. How does he get on? Is he more defensive minded like SG? Could he function as a modern full back, or more like the ones we have?

From what I have seen Magnusson is ideal for the left sided CH in a 3-5-2, a bit delicate as a regular 4-4-2 CH and I would imagine a decent LB but maybe not currently a top half Championship one - But then again is Goldbourne ?

[Davefevs]

You're right about this forum of late, it has regressed.

It wouldn't be so bad if people stuck to the one topic, but we see 57 different Johnson threads, and I've been guilty of posting the same kind of stuff on each one.

I've become bored with myself and my repetitive posts, saying the same thing with different words.  I made a conscious decision on Monday night to stop it.  

This topic is great.  It also shows we see the game from slightly different oersoectives.  I liked the post (on the `Derby / Lecister thread I think) about us trying to impose our tactics on the opposition, rather than adapting to theirs.

Last season I thought each of the good teams had a standout CDM and we persevered with Freeman in the hole in our 5212.  I think it played into their hands because it was an easy man-mark for their CDM.  I wanted Cotts to swap it up and play a flatter 3 of Smith, Pack and Freeman, so all of a sudden their CDM had to go and find someone to mark, plus it gave us one extra in there too.  I don't recall us doing that, and I don't think we;d gave list anything, as Freeman was being nullified every game.

As it stands at the mo, I'd be very tempted to leave Tomlin out / bench, going big standard 442.  As someone posted above Taylor has shown he can drop into the hole if he plays and can face up the defenders.  Quite impressed by bus movement outside the box for a player stereotyped as a poacher.

[Red Army 87]

22 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You're right about this forum of late, it has regressed.

It wouldn't be so bad if people stuck to the one topic, but we see 57 different Johnson threads, and I've been guilty of posting the same kind of stuff on each one.

I've become bored with myself and my repetitive posts, saying the same thing with different words.  I made a conscious decision on Monday night to stop it.  

This topic is great.  It also shows we see the game from slightly different oersoectives.  I liked the post (on the `Derby / Lecister thread I think) about us trying to impose our tactics on the opposition, rather than adapting to theirs.

Last season I thought each of the good teams had a standout CDM and we persevered with Freeman in the hole in our 5212.  I think it played into their hands because it was an easy man-mark for their CDM.  I wanted Cotts to swap it up and play a flatter 3 of Smith, Pack and Freeman, so all of a sudden their CDM had to go and find someone to mark, plus it gave us one extra in there too.  I don't recall us doing that, and I don't think we;d gave list anything, as Freeman was being nullified every game.

As it stands at the mo, I'd be very tempted to leave Tomlin out / bench, going big standard 442.  As someone posted above Taylor has shown he can drop into the hole if he plays and can face up the defenders.  Quite impressed by bus movement outside the box for a player stereotyped as a poacher.

I'm sure we started the league 1 campaign with almost a flat 3 in midfield consisting of Elliott, Smith and Freeman. That worked well and was quite solid as they all worked together. 

With the players we have I don't see why a similar formation wouldn't work, Reid and Brownhill either side of Jens? Unfortunately don't see where Tomlin fits in!

[Bobfish]

33 minutes ago, Ashtonwurzel said:

From what I have seen Magnusson is ideal for the left sided CH in a 3-5-2, a bit delicate as a regular 4-4-2 CH and I would imagine a decent LB but maybe not currently a top half Championship one - But then again is Goldbourne ?

I concur. And as Bryan is playing a more advanced role, it disappointed me that the friendly behind closed doors yesterday appeared to have Magners playing alongside Zak as cb’s, both players who could perhaps provide some solution to our full backs issue, at least as cover. I believe Zak was on the right against Brighton last season, although perhaps not the best example! Did he play cb or rb on loan at Accrington? He played on the right against Burnley for us recently, but I confess that I only listened to it on the radio. We played 4231 I believe?

24 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You're right about this forum of late, it has regressed.

It wouldn't be so bad if people stuck to the one topic, but we see 57 different Johnson threads, and I've been guilty of posting the same kind of stuff on each one.

I've become bored with myself and my repetitive posts, saying the same thing with different words.  I made a conscious decision on Monday night to stop it.  

This topic is great.  It also shows we see the game from slightly different oersoectives.  I liked the post (on the `Derby / Lecister thread I think) about us trying to impose our tactics on the opposition, rather than adapting to theirs.

Last season I thought each of the good teams had a standout CDM and we persevered with Freeman in the hole in our 5212.  I think it played into their hands because it was an easy man-mark for their CDM.  I wanted Cotts to swap it up and play a flatter 3 of Smith, Pack and Freeman, so all of a sudden their CDM had to go and find someone to mark, plus it gave us one extra in there too.  I don't recall us doing that, and I don't think we;d gave list anything, as Freeman was being nullified every game.

As it stands at the mo, I'd be very tempted to leave Tomlin out / bench, going big standard 442.  As someone posted above Taylor has shown he can drop into the hole if he plays and can face up the defenders.  Quite impressed by bus movement outside the box for a player stereotyped as a poacher.

I think a flat 442 without Tomlin might be a solution whilst we find our feet, but one of the two central midfielders has to attack from deep. I understand two holding midfielders may offer more protection, but we need an attacking threat through the centre too to keep our opponents on the backfoot, which, for all his faults, Tomlin does provide. Reid alongside Jens perhaps, making forward runs from deep. And whilst I know Tammy is our leading goalscorer, I would really like to see how Djuric and Taylor work together, as that is likely to be our set up next season. Just as you mentioned Taylor surprising you, it appears that Djuric has some mobility for a "Target man" too.

[JamesBCFC]

1 hour ago, WestonRobin said:

Agree to a point Spud.

If we were set up in a way which enabled Tomlin to create much more with two players in front making runs, creating space and pushing defenders back then the opposition wouldn't be able to break in the numbers they have...this, in turn, wouldn't put as much pressure on either the midfield or defence. They'd need to cover the options we have and the way we play therefore he wouldn't be required to track back nearly as much.

It's a fine balance, I get that, and you're right that Tomlin doesn't track back...that's plain to see when he is put out on the wing. Look at the first 20 mins again Sheffield Weds - Little was dreadfully exposed...but we need to play to our strengths and stop setting up to counter the oppositions threats, if we did that we may just nullify some of the oppositions threats as they'd need to be more defensive in their approach.

Problem with this part is I don't think our players are good enough for this yet.

With our current squad we have to counter the opposition to an extent, though I think at the moment we put a bit too much emphasis on countering them and less on setting up to our strength.

For the short term we need to find the right balance, as our bright prospects improve we can shift more away from being set up to counter.

[Oops]

If everyone could please stop quoting the original post, thanks.

takes ******* yonks to scroll on an iphone

[Rocking Red Cyril]

On 08/02/2017 at 21:11, Bobfish said:

I too would like to see Reid with Tomlin, but to call it a “no brainer” without more information is more than a little ironic. As my original post asked, how do you set the team up? I’m actually curious to people’s solution. If you played Tomlin and Reid, what formation would you play? You would have to deplete the team in another area. Would you remove from the defensive ability of the midfield and expose our defenders, something that has led to us conceding far too many, thus why we bought Jens? Or would you remove the extra pair of wide men, reducing our ability to stop crosses and cross ourselves? Or would you play one up front, leading to a striker being easily man marked out the game? Please explain, because this “no brainer” is less than obvious to most. I would love to have a forward runner in the midfield, but they need to contribute to the battle for possession as Tomlin doesn’t. Our defense, especially Flint, is too slow to deal with fast strikers, through balls, or a ball over the top etc without a protective shield to stop this. Perhaps Brownhill can grow to do both defensive and attack roles in midfield, like Jen's can, but Pack, Smith, and I would argue O’neil don’t. Reid is energetic but potentially a bit lightweight to muscle in for this dual role and would be better in a similar role to Tomlin. Please enlighten. I am actually curious, thus why I started the topic.

Yes good points

[pillred]

On ‎2‎/‎8‎/‎2017 at 12:38, Bobfish said:

How to play Tomlin, or, should I say, around Tomlin. This is the conundrum that has plagued us all season, so I thought I would start a thread to discuss it. No in/out LJ stuff please, the Tomlin conundrum is one that any manager will have to deal with. I am not talking about personality, etc, but structural in a tactical sense. He can only play “in the hole” as it was, behind the striker/s. Any attempt to play on the wing for example has led to lack of cover to the player behind with disastrous consequences.

 

 

So what are our options?

Playing behind a single striker – this has been tried with 4411 or 4231. Whilst the latter had some success at the start of the season, it soon led to Tammy being man marked out the game. Many, myself included, prefer two strikers upfront for the extra workload on their defenders, more options for Tomlin etc to pass to, especially now we have the presence of Djuric to add hold-up play, flick ons, and a target for crosses. 4411 provides the options of crosses into the box from wide, but, again, with only a solitary striker to aim for.

Playing behind two strikers – what are the options?

442 - The diamond, (arguably 41212) a favourite of mine, I must admit, yet one I now feel our team cannot manage. The reason? Whilst Tomlin would be the tip and Jens the base, giving opportunity to a balance of attacking and defending roles in between, the real issue lies with the lack of full backs. The sad truth is that too many crosses come in from wide areas, whether from the opposition overloading us two against one (Cardiff post substitution for example,) poor positioning in the later periods from being exhausted from running up and down the line all game, or lack of being able to effectively attack and defend. If our full backs can’t attack, we play narrow from lack of width; if they can’t defend, crosses punish us. The modern full back is a hell of a job.

So, 352 or 532 - Wing backs. A potential solution, one that has been tried with two midfielders behind Tomlin. Whilst I would prefer one of these two to be a holding player and the other more attacking minded to help link play, our defence’s lack of pace (sorry flint) may have led to two holding players here instead. So the wing backs still face the problem of overloading/attacking and defending roles as above, but with the added support of the extra defender being able to come across and help cover. This obviously needs a well-drilled back three with excellent positional awareness: Insert your own jokes here. This could be viable though and does add to our attacking options. It did enable us to take the lead against Cardiff twice, yet it also led to us being punished. And, in relation to the initial question, Tomlin wasn’t actually playing in that game for 80 odd minutes too.

Any more? 3412, similar to the pros and cons of wingbacks above perhaps, in essence 352. How about 4312? How would the three across the midfield line up? Would you have Jens in the centre with two wingers? This would add to covering our own full backs, yet poor Jens would be left doing the job of two or more men in the midfield battle. The other option is three centrally in the middle of the park, enabling a balance of attacking/defensive/link play, but would leave our flanks exposed. Perhaps a combination of the two could be utilised? Such as a player plays wide when the ball is on that side of the pitch, yet drifts into the centre when the ball is in the middle of the park or on the opposite side, much like how the back three of a 352 play? This could work well, helping the battle in the centre of the park, but would require a positional awareness that could arguably be lacking. It would however enable some attacking focus down the wing for crosses, but may do little in stretching the opposition.

I wrack my brains for other options. Could he play in the central pairing of a more traditional flat 442? Alongside Jens for example, helping out the midfield battle then pushing forward into the hole from deep? But then the question must be asked if another player, such as perhaps Reid, Brownhill, or even Jens (if another player took the holding role instead) be more suitable for this, providing the energy required?

 

 

What opinions, solutions does everyone have?

a round tomlin!! he speaks well of you!