First off, great result yesterday and credit to Adkins and the players. However up to about the hour mark we were poor and not playing well. From my seat it looked like we had Barnard and Lambert either side of Guly in a 4-3-3 formation. Lallana was fairly isolated and couldn't make as many surging runs as normal, and Lambert was adrift out wider. Forte and Stephens came on for Guly and Chaplow and we then had the more traditional two wingers, and we scored three goals. Do you think Adkins was right to change the formation? or do you prefer our standard 4-4-2 formation with Lallana on the ball more? Hoping to revert back to our tried and tested formation versus Charlton and would love to see Stephens start in the middle, he looks a decent player. Same goes for Forte, yesterday showed the pace he has shown before but also good touch, dribbling and an eye for the goal.
NA was saying on his post-match interview that it was a 4-4-2 diamond, I guess with Guly up top in the middle. I wasn't at the match so I cannot comment on how it actually turned out. I think becuase of Oxo being out it kind of scuppered our 'winger' opportunities so NA had to change it up a little bit. In the end it worked out okay I guess, although the subs really did make the impact yesterday.
Have never played football, so never really get to grips with formations. I know who plays where, but I'll have to bow to your superior knowledge in the finer points of the game. But all I know is WE WON.
Looked more 4-3-3, with Gult playing slightly ahead of Hammond and Chaplow... Lambert needs to get in the middle more. Lallana got drawn inside to much in the first half. His best position is the left wing...
We don't seem to play as well in a diamond and lallana is deffo better on the left wing,think we should just stick to 4-4-2 to be honest,width is one of the most important things in football so i don't believe we should not have it.
The system was not working in the first half, I lost count of the number crosses from the left to the far post and there was no one there.
A lot of our corners and crosses seem to be over hit......going into no mans land......However The fact was that a lot of crosses went astray from the left on Saturday. Although this is nothing unusual. Guly was playing far too much in field as he does. We are no better at picking up the left sided crosses when Chamberlain is playing either. Some of Butterfield's crosses from deep were spot on either Lallana or Harding benefiting a lot from them.
Forget the fact that the crosses were going to far. Why when we could all see what was happening, couldn't one of the players pull out wide to send it back in. Simple enough for me to work out so why can't they?
It's not the first time NA has used the diamond. Lambert and Barnard were pulling wider than normal, in a bid to give Guly more space in the middle and pull defenders away from him. I'm not hugely keen on the formation but with Chamberlain missing it's hard to come up with a better option. I think when it's been previously used Morgan has had the 'holding' role instead of Hammond and he seems to reveal in it. I also think the formation doesn't bring the best out of Chaplow as I think he was chasing shadows in the first half, trying to help Butterfield defend the right but also patrol the centre. I hate footballing clichés but 'what a game of two halves'
Looked like 4-3-3 to me too. It wasn't working, no-one seemed to know where they should be playing and we looked awful. Am glad NA made the changes to give us a more orthodox 4-4-2 and the goals then came, however why did it take so long? It was clear after about 20 mins it wasn't working: Lambert too wide, Lallana out of the play, lots of crosses from Harding with no-one there to attack them. So why didn't the change come at half-time before we were 2-0 down? I don't think we need to use 4-3-3 despite Oxo not being about - we have plenty of players who can play wide on the right and leave Lallana on the left: Guly (not my first choice though), Richardson, even Chaplow (and with Stephens in the squad, we can play him wide despite Spiderman being injured). Could even play Dickson on the left and Lallana right if we had to... Positives to take from the game however: - we can come back from playing badly and being behind to win; - we have more depth to the squad than I thought before (who would have back Forte to score 2 let alone so quickly after coming on? Stephens looked useful and gave us more bite in midfield) - we probably won't risk that formation again this season! Anyway, bring on Charlton
Good win in the end for you, but i dont think it shows depth in the squad........... I think the turning point was the injury to the bloke who scored 2 for them....more than the substituation...... I think you will beat charlton tomorrow but then the next two are the big test for you.
Welcome to NOT606 - Make u you spread the word about this site and invite more Saints Fans! Any problems drop me or Beddytare a message as we are MOD's for the board. Happy to help!
Welcome to the Saints site Workshy........workshy by name but not by nature I hope........ We look forward to your contribution..........Any problems or questions just give Kingsland or myself a PM.......and above all Don't forget to tell your mates...........
I can't decide which point is more factually incorrect. Bringing a player off the bench who goes on to score two goals shows pretty decent depth in the squad. The fact that Chamberlain (arguably one of our best three players this season so far) is missing will of course throw up some issues of how to play without him but that doesn't show lack of depth as noted above several players could have filled in but perhaps not of been first choice had he been fit. As for "the bloke who scored 2 for them" Gary McKenzie scored the first. Sam Baldock scored the second.
You mean Baldock I presume hardly a prolific goal scorer his 6Th of the season? True he has had a run of goals lately but do you really think that made the difference. I would say it was more to do with their defence. After the substitutions their defence went into panic mode. From when our first goal went in until the final whistle we only had one moment that was of worry. That was caused by a needless free kick on the edge of our area, giving them a free shot on goal. Could of been a costly defensive error on our part, but hey .....thats football. More to the point bp1234 when are you going to start supporting Saints?
