|
Post by gladstoneparkranger on Oct 5, 2018 14:43:30 GMT
McClaren wants to play both which means others are out of position! .. what’s our best formation as Eze as I’ve been informed is not able to play wide.
Would you go 4-3-3. 4-1-3-2. 4-3-1-2
That’s if you agree 2 upfront or are we better playing one upfront and bringing one of them off the bench?
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Oct 5, 2018 15:05:57 GMT
The one thing I don't think we can do is play all four of Wells, Hemed, Eze & Freeman.
That is akin to selecting your best players even though they can't fit into the playing system.
I also don't think we are solid enough to play a front two unless a minimum of the remaining seven players are defensively minded.
As 75 stated, we should not automatically be looking to play exactly the same against club A as against club B & we're not good enough to impose our syatem against all of our opponents.
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Oct 5, 2018 18:55:15 GMT
I think you could play them all together with everyone in a position they are comfortable and produce in - just not with Hemed and Wells as a straight-up centre forward pairing. Generally though, the knock on affects for other players are more significant when they're both on.
For example, you can do a 4-2-3-1 with Hemed as the 1, with a 3 of Freeman, Eze and Wells left to right. Keeps Eze as a 10, puts Freeman on the left without isolating him as a winger and has Wells in a right attacking position which he used to play at Huddersfield. Not necessarily the right thing to do, but that's the only shape I can think of where all four play and they're not out of position. I don't think we've looked much good as a 4-4-2 and you can't play 4-3-3 without dropping one of the four mentioned. Though as 75 points out, it's good to have those options in our locker because of injuries and suspensions etc. I think it's good to have a preferred system, just because you can then drill that throughout the squad and make it easier for players to come in and out. But it shouldn't be rigid.
As others have said, we don't seem to be at a point where we can consistently force our shape on other sides and we'll have to make adaptations depending on who we're up against. For what it's worth, I think we've played far and away our best football with Wells leading the line with Eze slotted as a 10 behind him - Wells' movement and intelligent running seem to bring the best out of Freeman and Eze. Meanwhile Hemed can add a different dimension off the bench. In other games, Hemed may make more sense to lead the line if we're needing to play a bit more basic and need a focal point up there.
|
|
|
Post by terryb on Oct 5, 2018 21:57:37 GMT
I think you could play them all together with everyone in a position they are comfortable and produce in - just not with Hemed and Wells as a straight-up centre forward pairing. Generally though, the knock on affects for other players are more significant when they're both on. For example, you can do a 4-2-3-1 with Hemed as the 1, with a 3 of Freeman, Eze and Wells left to right. Keeps Eze as a 10, puts Freeman on the left without isolating him as a winger and has Wells in a right attacking position which he used to play at Huddersfield. Not necessarily the right thing to do, but that's the only shape I can think of where all four play and they're not out of position. I don't think we've looked much good as a 4-4-2 and you can't play 4-3-3 without dropping one of the four mentioned. Though as 75 points out, it's good to have those options in our locker because of injuries and suspensions etc. I think it's good to have a preferred system, just because you can then drill that throughout the squad and make it easier for players to come in and out. But it shouldn't be rigid. As others have said, we don't seem to be at a point where we can consistently force our shape on other sides and we'll have to make adaptations depending on who we're up against. For what it's worth, I think we've played far and away our best football with Wells leading the line with Eze slotted as a 10 behind him - Wells' movement and intelligent running seem to bring the best out of Freeman and Eze. Meanwhile Hemed can add a different dimension off the bench. In other games, Hemed may make more sense to lead the line if we're needing to play a bit more basic and need a focal point up there. I hadn't considered playing Wells as part of a 3 in a 4-2-3-1 & that is a possibility. That could place a lot of pressure on the other 6 outfield players though, as I don't think any of those 3 can help too much defensively. What it all comes down to is balance. Thankfully, I'm not employed to provise us with that!
|
|
|
Post by bowranger on Oct 6, 2018 10:54:19 GMT
I think you could play them all together with everyone in a position they are comfortable and produce in - just not with Hemed and Wells as a straight-up centre forward pairing. Generally though, the knock on affects for other players are more significant when they're both on. For example, you can do a 4-2-3-1 with Hemed as the 1, with a 3 of Freeman, Eze and Wells left to right. Keeps Eze as a 10, puts Freeman on the left without isolating him as a winger and has Wells in a right attacking position which he used to play at Huddersfield. Not necessarily the right thing to do, but that's the only shape I can think of where all four play and they're not out of position. I don't think we've looked much good as a 4-4-2 and you can't play 4-3-3 without dropping one of the four mentioned. Though as 75 points out, it's good to have those options in our locker because of injuries and suspensions etc. I think it's good to have a preferred system, just because you can then drill that throughout the squad and make it easier for players to come in and out. But it shouldn't be rigid. As others have said, we don't seem to be at a point where we can consistently force our shape on other sides and we'll have to make adaptations depending on who we're up against. For what it's worth, I think we've played far and away our best football with Wells leading the line with Eze slotted as a 10 behind him - Wells' movement and intelligent running seem to bring the best out of Freeman and Eze. Meanwhile Hemed can add a different dimension off the bench. In other games, Hemed may make more sense to lead the line if we're needing to play a bit more basic and need a focal point up there. I hadn't considered playing Wells as part of a 3 in a 4-2-3-1 & that is a possibility. That could place a lot of pressure on the other 6 outfield players though, as I don't think any of those 3 can help too much defensively. What it all comes down to is balance. Thankfully, I'm not employed to provise us with that! Yeah I think you're right on that - lot of pressure on the defensive midfield two, even with Scowen and Luongo's engines and it would pin our full backs back if the opposition had pace on the wings. The current 4-4-1-1 isn't my 'ideal' shape but it does keep most of our players in their proper roles and it gives us extra bodies in midfield at the expense of maybe making us sit back too much when we're defending leads/away points. But considering our start, I can kinda see why that's the case.
|
|