Would a formation change help?

Rambo Pumpkins

Rambo Pumpkins

Full Back
I was just thinking about our ability (or lack of it) to get the ball to our strikers and was missing whether we would be better with two out and out wingers crossing in to 2 strikers.

But then I thought, would it actually even change anything? This is a team that can't do dead balls so why should a moving one be any more fruitful? But more importantly this is a young side bereft of confidence and playing like one, and as a result of the whole Bealtastorophie, have also seemingly tuned out..

Think we have also been found out to a large degree, and our reliance from season to season on a talisman simply isn't helpful, and when we lack the talisman, we look lost.

And ultimately, play kids, and that's what kids do.

Thoughts?
 


I think that one of the problems with how we’re setting up is that no matter what we’ve done in the last, say, 3 months is that it’s a system that makes sense for a team that is dominating, especially against a team sitting back.

The problem at the start of the season was that we couldn’t break teams down when they did that, so the focus has always been on how to find more space, how to get more players forward, work the ball into the box past a solid compact defence with a midfield sitting in front - we couldn’t get in behind etc

Now, teams aren’t playing against us like that, they’ve realised if you press us, we aren’t good enough to pass it round the press and we have zero out ball in terms of going longer.

Maybe we need to start setting up like we’re the weaker team? Maybe we need to start playing on the counter and sitting a bit deeper? Maybe we need to stop being obsessed with inverted wingers and just have players playing on their strongest side and getting wider - at least that might give us an out ball if teams are pressing us high.
 
Rambo Pumpkins said:
I was just thinking about our ability (or lack of it) to get the ball to our strikers and was missing whether we would be better with two out and out wingers crossing in to 2 strikers.

But then I thought, would it actually even change anything? This is a team that can't do dead balls so why should a moving one be any more fruitful? But more importantly this is a young side bereft of confidence and playing like one, and as a result of the whole Bealtastorophie, have also seemingly tuned out..

Think we have also been found out to a large degree, and our reliance from season to season on a talisman simply isn't helpful, and when we lack the talisman, we look lost.

And ultimately, play kids, and that's what kids do.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I keep saying what you say about crosses when people complain about us not putting it in the box. How can you expect a lad to cross on the run, when he can’t do it from a dead ball.
 
There's not much Dodds can do to be honest, both first choice wingers are out and playing two up front is out of the question because none of them can hit a barn door. 5 at the back might be okay with Ballard coming back.
 
I honestly don't think a system ever comes into Speakman's train of thought when he decides on recruitment otherwise we woulb't end up with players that don't complement each other. Ibstead we end up with loads of people who prefer playing in a similar role. We end up with players wanting to play the 10 or 8 role in midfield and 6 full backs. No centre forward and no defensive midfielder.
If we are to play inverted wingers we should have attack minded full backs on the overlap to put doubt in the defenders mind.
That probably means having 3 at the back, which we can't cater for and accommodate a midfield 3.
Hume can play in a back 3 and give Pembele a shot with Roberts on the right when Huggins is unavailable.
Cirkin can play on the left with Clarke when he's fit or Alese .
The midfield 2 would be Neil and a.n.other.
And for the moment I'd probably play Bellingham or Rusyn in the central striker role from those available
 
Rambo Pumpkins said:
I was just thinking about our ability (or lack of it) to get the ball to our strikers and was missing whether we would be better with two out and out wingers crossing in to 2 strikers.

But then I thought, would it actually even change anything? This is a team that can't do dead balls so why should a moving one be any more fruitful? But more importantly this is a young side bereft of confidence and playing like one, and as a result of the whole Bealtastorophie, have also seemingly tuned out..

Think we have also been found out to a large degree, and our reliance from season to season on a talisman simply isn't helpful, and when we lack the talisman, we look lost.

And ultimately, play kids, and that's what kids do.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

That would be two strikers to not get any forward passes instead of one.
 
Legend said:
I think that one of the problems with how we’re setting up is that no matter what we’ve done in the last, say, 3 months is that it’s a system that makes sense for a team that is dominating, especially against a team sitting back.

The problem at the start of the season was that we couldn’t break teams down when they did that, so the focus has always been on how to find more space, how to get more players forward, work the ball into the box past a solid compact defence with a midfield sitting in front - we couldn’t get in behind etc

Now, teams aren’t playing against us like that, they’ve realised if you press us, we aren’t good enough to pass it round the press and we have zero out ball in terms of going longer.

Maybe we need to start setting up like we’re the weaker team? Maybe we need to start playing on the counter and sitting a bit deeper? Maybe we need to stop being obsessed with inverted wingers and just have players playing on their strongest side and getting wider - at least that might give us an out ball if teams are pressing us high.
Click to expand...
We’ve set up as the weaker team at least a couple of times - v Southampton and v Leeds. Worked Ok

But all season except the Soton game we’ve been too slow in transition.
 
Need to go back to playing on the front foot and getting at teams, I’d personally drop Bellingham as I think he’s too slow in possession and we lose momentum going forward because of it but he’s not getting dropped anytime soon as he’s Speakman’s cash cow!
 

Back
Top