Best we've played in years

[Loosey Boy]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

So which player are you leaving out to get the second striker on the pitch and what impact does that have.

It’s just like a bunch of levers, pulling one impacts another part of our game.

FWIW I’d leave out one of the 3 CBs, but I’d need to tweak a few other things too.

If we were to do that @Davefevs, I think it would have to be GT that gets left out (harsh I know) as really like RM and CP as our full-backs, longer term.

[Robbored]

19 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

So which player are you leaving out to get the second striker on the pitch and what impact does that have.

It’s just like a bunch of levers, pulling one impacts another part of our game.

FWIW I’d leave out one of the 3 CBs, but I’d need to tweak a few other things too.

It’s old school but the basic template of 4-4-2 is very adaptable. 

If Manning sees width as the way forward, then both full backs can get forward as can the two wide midfielders.

I hope he’s not another LJ trying to reinvent the wheel.

 

 

[Cowshed]

1 hour ago, Robbored said:

So……in simple terms by going wide isn’t it more beneficial to have two strikers in the box? Surely that would increase the chances of scoring?

If the team is attempting to create numerical superiority wide in an attempt unbalance, overloading to isolate the opposition the answer is no. The chances of a scoring are increased by creating 1v1's and players joining in to create the overload.

Go 4-4-2 and the opponents sit in and don't shift because the overload is lost in midfield. 

If the intent is to go wide and cross its the reverse. 

[mozo]

3 hours ago, Davefevs said:

That is the big hope isn’t it?  Personally I think it will take more than Twine, but that’s just me.

Don't worry, we've just signed the Irish Messi and the non league Cristiano