|
Post by Roller on Jul 22, 2018 8:45:17 GMT
I see that according to the report in WLS* we played in a 4-2-3-1 formation. I therefore assume that in the first half Scowen and Luongo were the holding midfielders with Cousins on the right of the 3, Freeman on the left and Eze in the middle. Swapping Smyth for Cousins, Hall (if he is ever fit) for Lynch and Furlong (when he returns) for Kakay, I think that does get all our better players on the pitch. As ever, any formation requires a level of compromise. This relies on either Freeman finding a level of discipline he rarely showed last season if he is to stay on the left or Eze showing maturity beyond his years to know when to float out that way himself. Luongo looked a totally different player when played as an advanced midfielder last season, Manning may be better suited to the holding role. I also don’t see Smith as being a forward in the same vein as Helguson, whether he can hold the ball up and lay off it off to the other players on a regular basis is debatable. I’m pretty sure that we’ve not got enough pace in our central defenders to consider 3 at the back and lining up in a 4-4-2 would probably require even greater compromises in midfield, so this is probably the way to go. Any better suggestions? * www.westlondonsport.com/qpr/new-signing-scores-as-qpr-pull-off-late-comeback-in-friendly
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Jul 22, 2018 10:00:04 GMT
That's certainly how it looked from the highlights and it was a similar setup at AFC Wimbledon. The variation in that setup being Freeman starting on the right with Washington on the left with Smith in the centre. Smyth then came on to play on the wide left and Osayi-Samuel came on to play on the right (as he did against Hoffenheim). I'd be surprised if both aren't playing a fairly significant role next season. Smyth looks like Smyth (bombastic, hyper-active, strong) which is great. Osayi-Samuel seems to have got stronger, putting on a bit of extra bulk in the upper body and I'm excited to see him used more.
In terms of how the 4-2-3-1 seems to be playing out in the friendlies, there looks to be a few key differences (other than the shape) to last season. The most obvious is the freedom afforded to Eze. He seems to float in a number 10 role (similar to Villa away, perhaps), drifting from side to side, inter-linking play or taking players on and spreading the ball/feeding Smith. It seems to point to what Luongo refers to in the interview Sharky posted, in terms of playing to his strengths and perhaps having the likes of Scowen and Luongo doing a lot of his heavy lifting to afford him the opportunity to express himself as part of the attack. As you say Roller, that may mean a degree of compromise in terms of Luongo being used more for his engine than his attacking-midfield strengths which we saw more of towards the tail end of last season (and for Australia, when they actually bloody play him).
Furlong and Bidwell look to be pushed higher than we saw last season. I know both have been used to overlap in the past, but it's noticeable in the friendlies just how much they're being tasked with bombing up and down the wings and relying on their strength, fitness and delivery.
Playing out from the back seems to be a bigger part of things, with both players and McClaren in interviews referring to wanting players to be braver on the ball in defensive possession. On the limited evidence, this doesn't look like Lynch's strong suit and we've been using Furlong's ability to win everything in the air as an out ball on the right hand side if we do end up playing it longer. As expected, Kakay has been used as the like-for-like replacement for Furlong in the friendlies and he looks bright but as you'd expect for his age, still has some shaky elements to his game, gifting Hoffenheim a chance from a mis-placed pass in one example. I'm maybe reaching but it looks like that's a key part of the system for McClaren and we're going to have to be patient with a few hairy moments while we adapt to that.
Two other things (admittedly, less important to the shape) I've noticed is that we seem to be lining up Ingram for the number 1 slot (he's started in most if not all the games where first team players have featured pre-season) and that David Wheeler actually exists. He's going to be rusty at the moment but could end up feeling like a new signing for us once he's back up to speed.
In terms of the shape, I agree about the compromises, particularly in terms of worrying about Smith's ability to hold the ball up and feed it. I suppose another side of that is with such clearly attacking full-backs being used and with our attacking-midfielders' desire to cut-in and get the ball in and around the box, there should be more for him to feed on. Manning yesterday referred to McClaren's desire for midfielders to attack space in the area and pick up scraps, too.
Fundamentally, for all the pluses and minuses for the shape, we do seem to be developing a very definitive identity in terms of shape and passages of play which the players are being tasked with getting familiar with. One of the key criticisms last season was about how often we varied things up and perhaps adapted our shape and selection to who we were playing rather than setting up how we wanted to play and making teams adapt to us. Cynically, it also makes judgement of McClaren easier. He has a preferred manner of play, shape and formation. Like any transition, we have to be patient to see how we adapt to that and how it works out but it doesn't look like we are in for much experimentation here. Either it works for this group of players or it doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by Roller on Jul 22, 2018 15:09:04 GMT
Thanks for your observations Bow, they are, as ever, most appreciated.
I’d be very pleased if the formation has been designed around Eze. Scowen can clearly play the Derry role, if only we had a Faurlin. Perhaps it is best to park that analogy there……
Smyth would definitely be in my starting eleven, where as I’d be looking for BOS to come on as an impact sub. He was hardly a 6 stone weakling, if he has bulked up he must be quite a specimen.
It makes quite a change to be leaving out players worthy of starting as opposed to hoping that someone comes and takes them all away.
I’m not sure we’ve really got the defenders to play out from the back. I’ve not seen Leistner play yet so can’t comment on him, but despite Lynch believing that he is the next Beckenbauer, I’ve not seen anything in his game to agree with him. A few hairy moments might just be the understatement of the season.
I’d agree that it looks like Ingram will be starting the season as our No 1 which surprises me. From what I’ve seen of the pair of them, Lumley looks to be the better keeper.
Anyway, I’ll be better placed to comment this time next week after seeing what will presumably be McClaren’s initial starting eleven against Union Berlin.
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Jul 23, 2018 9:17:37 GMT
Thanks for your observations Bow, they are, as ever, most appreciated. I’d be very pleased if the formation has been designed around Eze. Scowen can clearly play the Derry role, if only we had a Faurlin. Perhaps it is best to park that analogy there…… Smyth would definitely be in my starting eleven, where as I’d be looking for BOS to come on as an impact sub. He was hardly a 6 stone weakling, if he has bulked up he must be quite a specimen. It makes quite a change to be leaving out players worthy of starting as opposed to hoping that someone comes and takes them all away. I’m not sure we’ve really got the defenders to play out from the back. I’ve not seen Leistner play yet so can’t comment on him, but despite Lynch believing that he is the next Beckenbauer, I’ve not seen anything in his game to agree with him. A few hairy moments might just be the understatement of the season. I’d agree that it looks like Ingram will be starting the season as our No 1 which surprises me. From what I’ve seen of the pair of them, Lumley looks to be the better keeper. Anyway, I’ll be better placed to comment this time next week after seeing what will presumably be McClaren’s initial starting eleven against Union Berlin. All good - sorry, it ends up getting a bit lengthy when it's a Sunday morning full of coffee... On paper, Smyth would be in my starting 11 too. I don't know if it's an expectation management thing where we are easing him in a little after last season - with how good he's been, it's easy to forget how much of a step-up in quality this is supposed to be for him! I'd agree with you at the moment in terms of playing out from the back, particularly if Lynch ends up starting. Leistner looks really solid but again, one of the few limitations that Bundesliga 2 expert on Twitter and LFW referred to was his ability to pass it out from the back. Luongo and Scowen could both drop back to fetch/carry and provide an easier out I suppose. The other side of that is that it could be about potential - our CBs don't look great at playing it out because they've not been developed in that direction, so they could improve if drilled at it. But i'd be sceptical. Surprised too on Ingram - I rate him and don't feel nervous about him being there but Lumley always looked the better long-term investment for me. I suppose it may be down to the issue with Smithies going and the knock-on effect. If Ingram, a first-teamer at Wycombe, doesn't get his shot then what does that do for his attitude and desire to stay? Could be easier for squad cohesion to say Ingram gets the nod and Lumley keeps developing as a key part of the first team squad and re-assess next summer. I suppose with how keepers tend to develop later and play longer, it's less of a risk. As you say, Union Berlin will be the better indication - could even be a new face or two by then.
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Jul 23, 2018 15:32:45 GMT
I too would like Paul Symth in my starting team.
However, I do wonder if the club feel he has an injury/fitness issue? He didn't seem to appear in more than two consectutive matches last seasson & I'm wondering if this is holding him back?
The emergence of Eze may have also contributed to his lack of start time. It is only possible to fit Scowen, Luongo, Freeman, Eze & Smyth into a 4-2-3-1 provided you are happy with Freeman playing (and staying) wider than he would be happy with. Personally, I think this is our strongest 2-3 & would be my preference with Eze in the middle of the three.
It is a bit late now, but I wouldn't have minded experimenting with Freeman or BOS as the one upfront. I wouldn't have expected that they could convert to the same degree as Reid did at Bristol City last season, but stranger things have happened! Also, Smyth & BOS in the side would greatly increase our pace. Not that they should be selected just because their quicker!
Whatever way you look at it, we appear to have a stong midfield & we will be reliant on those five/six players.
I would also like to see Manning as a regular, but who would he replace?
|
|