Does the chairman want us not to concede or does he want us to play attacking football and refuse to buy defenders? Contradicting yourself again...
Of course he is. That's why it's pointless listening to anything he says. Well, one of many reasons why.
Not wanting to concede over scoring is a very very old Italian system or shall I put it grinding out a 1-0 win , the cattenaccio system , the issue with this is you have to have a natural poacher goalscorer (Lambert) and a very very good defence (we dont) .
Yesterday we did neither , why am I contradicting myself ? We did not buy defenders when we should of , and we played a defensive systems yesterday . 4-6-0 .
They said it was 4 - 3 - 2 - 1 on Solent which is even weirder. If that was the case my 1 would have to be Lambo not Rodders.
True, they probably all have fantasies about having the Arsenal back four from the Invincibles in their team. It's a sound aspiration, but it takes YEARS to achieve. In the meantime, you have to make a realistic assessment of your current resources and how best to amass, say, 20 points by Christmas. In a way, having had money available in the summer was probably a double-edged sword. If you had had to face your first season back in the PL with only the player resources that got you there, there would have been less of a temptation to change tack. But anyway, I think you'll be OK -- hopefully not at our expense!
Looked like a 4-2-3-1 to me. --------------Boruc Clyne----Fonte----Hooiveld----Yoshida ------Schneiderlin-----Davis Puncheon-------Lallana------Guly -----------Rodriguez
We could play a team of 10 defenders and a goalkeeper and we would still concede. The simple fact is that none of the defenders at the club have proved that they are PL defenders. This leads me to the conclusion that, until January at least, we should approach games like Blackpool did when they were in the Prem. There is no point in us trying to sit back and keep a clean sheet because eventually we will concede either due to the quality of the opposition or from a stupid mistake, usually a combination of both. We should just go out to attack teams and take the approach that we can outscore the other team. Of course this would lead to some humbling results, but we may also get ourselves some wins.
It was effectively that, but Puncheon, Lallana and Guly did do a lot of moving around which is what made it confusing as to what we were actually playing. But our base formation was pretty much that.
I would go for it against Spurs. I do think we need to think about being as mobile as possible across midfield and play Rickie up front as a one man strike force. With Lallana and JWP in midfield they have the energy to get forward and help. Davis and Schneiderlin can mop up and then maybe try Mayuka in behind, depending on his ability to work back.
Get a new defensive coach - drill the back-four day in and out to improve their positional play, anticipation and wherabouts of their fellow defenders. Then drill into the midfielders that they need to defend as a unit when the opposition has the ball!! Change the formation away from home and play 4-1-4-1 and get Hammond back (because we don't have anybody else combative enough) to sit in front of the back four and take out by any means - he'd like the last bit - anyone comng through the middle and be there to cut out crosses from the wing and never to cross the halfway line for the whole game. Come the New Year - get out the cheque book - buy two central defenders and a strong defensive midfielder.
This guy talks sense. Lots of the goals being conceded are defensive slips caused by a lack of confidence rather than an obvious tactical fault. We're an attacking team and that's not going to change, so we just need to carry on doing what we're doing and wait for confidence issues to fix themselves. Getting points at home will help enormously
We laid out the most defensive tactical system on Saturday though . We are making consistent defensive errors as we are not good enough defensively , that will continue so our only hope is we score more than they do , that formation from Saturday won't do that , that was a disgrace and completely amatuer .
Barry mate....you know it wasn't 4-6-0 nobody has played that kind of system for about 50 years!!!!!!!! He was playing a 4-4-1-1 Which quite frankly is not our best stile at least with the players we have available to us at the moment.
Not sure it will make a massive amount of difference out of the options we have, but these are the defensive options that we have available: LB - Fox, Shaw, Dickson (With Clyne, Reeves, Yoshida and Seaborne able to play there if needs must) CB - Fonte, Hooiveld, Yoshida, Seaborne, Stephens (Cork if we are really desperate) RB - Clyne, Richardson, Butterfield, Stephens (Yoshida or Cork if needs must) Now if everyone is fit I think the general consensus is that the back four should be one of: Fox - Yoshida - Fonte - Clyne or Clyne - Yoshida - Fonte - Richardson As things stand: LB - Fox and Shaw are injured, Dickson is in no mans land. Leaving a choice between Reeves, Clyne, Seaborne or Yoshida CB - All available but dependent on FB positions. First choice appears to be Yoshida and Fonte with Hoovield on the bench RB - Richardson and Butterfield injured. Clyne first choice, but Stephens available if Clyne should be needed at LB Should all our currently injured FBs remain unavailable, who would make your back four for the Spurs game? I would like Yoshida to stay at CB alongside Fonte and try and build some consistency there. So for me the choice is between: Seaborne - Yoshida - Fonte - Clyne or Clyne - Yoshida - Fonte - Stephens
I'm going for the let's hope we get va couple back approach! Has Seaborne ever played a competitive match at LB?
