bh_red Posted July 25, 2004 Report Share Posted July 25, 2004 Well it looks as if Tinman has decided that 4-3-3 is the formation to play for the start of the season, but what do we think about it??? Honestly. I don't think I like it, fair enough it is a good attacking formation, but anyone who was at Huish on Saturday will realise that when Yeovil went on the counter attack, they had tons of space on the wings and could bomb forward without any threat. Fair enough, the aim for our formation is to attack and there are only 3 or 4 teams that could seriously threaten us this season, (hull, Sheffield Wed, Hudders and maybe Walsall) but it did seem yesterday that the whole line up is far too narrow. It could work it might not, Pompey and West Brom will be the deciders? does anyone else agree? Personally I'd like 3-5-2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted July 25, 2004 Report Share Posted July 25, 2004 It doesn't matter whether we fans like 4-3-3.Its about how the players like the formation and whether BT feels that he has the players to play it effectively. If City a game or two with 4-3-3 then it will be everyones favourite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted July 25, 2004 Report Share Posted July 25, 2004 Ive always advocated that you play a formation that suits your squad rather than deciding a formation and then attempting to mould players. Ive never been a huge fan of 4-4-2 but we played this formation last season and finsihed 2(?) points of automatic promotion with the best defensive record in the divison. It may therefore be a smart move to keep a back four, even though the personnel will have changed (Carey.) I think that the players we have in the squad will be more suited to 3-5-2 as both Bell and Murray will be forced to adapt to 'new' positions if there are no defensive or attacking players on the flanks. It also makes sense in a 3-5-2 that Doherty sits in and allows the likes of Wilkshire, Goodfellow, Tinnion, Orr etc to have a {relatively} free license. I dont oppose the 4-3-3, i remember saying England should revert to this formation when Sven tampered but ultimately did away with it - with the right personnel or perhaps more specifically if you are limited by your personnel, the option of 3 central midfielders and 3 attackers is extremely appealing. As you correctly say playing 3 midfielders centrally does leave the flanks extremely vunerable and the full backs over exposed, but when we look at last year and consider the vast majority of teams came to Ashton Gate and put 6 men behind the ball it may be the case that effectively laying siege to the opponents goal and leaving ourselves vunerable is the sensible option. EDIT: Have to say I'm not sure if Huddersfield, but more specifically Walsall will pose any real threat this year. The ONLY team i am seriously concerned by is Tranmere, and i begrudingly have to say that the squad Sheffield Wednesday have brought in over the summer will surely amount to a play-off place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Ian M Posted July 26, 2004 Admin Report Share Posted July 26, 2004 Not been a huge fan of 433 myself for similar reasons to those outlined above but someone pointed out to me the other day that 3 out of the 4 Euro2004 semi-finalists based their selections on this formation as did last season's European Champions Porto. Maybe it IS the way forward? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.