best team

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
N

northenspursfan

Member
Aug 31, 2012
31
0
6
NULL
after some positive play against the goons in the 2nd half on Saturday do you think this is worth considering

......................Lloris......................

......caulker........dawson........vertonghan

...............parker.............sandro............

lennon...............dembele.................bale

..............ade.................defoe

obviously when kaboul is back he would slot into the back three

i believe it gives u good options defensively and allows our attack minded players to attack

maybe not in all games but i like the look of it and the balance feels right imo
 
I wouldn't complain at seeing a formation like that.

Solid in all areas with the right amount of attacking and defensive balance and it's miles better than the 4-5-1 with Dempsey behind the main striker crap we've seen too much of.

I reckon I'd still go for a 4-4-2 of:
Lloris,
Walker (providing he gets his arse into gear), Caulker (Kaboul when fit), Vertonghen, Ekotto (should be fit soon)
Lennon, Sandro, Dembele, Bale
Ade, Defoe

I think that just gives us a bit more attacking intent which I like as Walker and Ekotto are two good attacking full backs, two of the best in the league when on form in my opinion.

But as I said, if the 3-5-2 you mentioned gets a start, I certainly wouldn't be disappointed <ok>
 
I was considering making a thread about playing 3 at the back actually, I think it could be an option worth exploring.

Something along the lines of:

Lloris

Caulker - Kaboul - Vertonghen

Sandro - Parker(c)

Lennon - Dembele - Bale

Ade - Defoe

Trouble with this is that if we end up playing that sort of formation permanently we'd probably have to sell Walker and BAE as two fullbacks in their class won't want to hang around only playing the odd game when we revert back to 4 at the back. Those 3 centrebacks are more than capable of playing in this system but I'm not sure Dawson and Gallas are, at least definitely not together for me due to their lack of mobility.

I'm not necessarily advocating a switch to this system but IF we did and it was trained for and implemented properly then I think we could be extremely effective using it. The problem is that right now the squad isn't set up for it so we don't quite have the depth in the right areas. But looking at that lineup, if we trained the squad properly for it, it could be a very effective system for us IMO.
 
I'd like to see us continue with the 4-4-2, but we need to adjust the squad in January in order to do it.
We need back-up for Assou-Ekotto, which I've been saying for about 3 bloody years and we need options up front.
Given the apparent promise of our U21 midfield, I can see us sticking with the 4-5-1 or variations thereof.
 
................................................. Goalkeeper,s ok......................................................................................

Walker (lots of mistakes) ... Gallas (Chelsea/Arse secret agent)... Vert/Caulker (GOOD) ... Naughton (out of his depth on sat)

............ Livermore (sell him) ................................ Thudd (very fat but nice hair)

Lennon (fast but little product) .............. . Bale ( our true star on his day the best)

............................... Ziggy (crap but prefered diamond dogs)

. ............................. Dempsey (the new Ian Moores )

A very interesting line up
 
I wouldn't mind seeing something like that either NSF. And as SOS has said, it could well be better than the 4231 that we keep playing, based on the fact that we haven't got the players for it at the moment.

my only concern is the left and right CB's might get pulled wide leaving gaps, if Bale and Lennon weren't to defend in the correct manner.

But still, I think it'd be a better attacking option where we'd be much more of a threat. most teams could well be punished by that attacking presence.<ok>
 
Roo said:
I wouldn't mind seeing something like that either NSF. And as SOS has said, it could well be better than the 4231 that we keep playing, based on the fact that we haven't got the players for it at the moment.

my only concern is the left and right CB's might get pulled wide leaving gaps, if Bale and Lennon weren't to defend in the correct manner.

But still, I think it'd be a better attacking option where we'd be much more of a threat. most teams could well be punished by that attacking presence.<ok>
Click to expand...

They'd sh*t themselves at the attacking threat, then once they notice Sandro and Parker are behind all that waiting to beat the sh*t out of any of their attacking players - bye bye opposition :D

In all seriousness, the part you mentioned with the CB's being pulled wide, I can understand the concern, Lennon in fairness tracks back a lot more than Bale these days but with Sandro AND Parker, we've got two guys who run themselves into the ground each game and so I'd be comfortable knowing we've got great protection of the back 3 in those two.

Would actually be interesting if AVB gave that a go sometime.
 
The more I think about it the more I wonder why more teams don't try this. So long as our wingers tracked back to a reasonable extent and Sandro/Parker covered the CBs if they're pulled out wide then this could be a very effective formation.

I think the reason most don't try it is because its seen as quite an outlandish system, players and coaches aren't used to using it so they're reluctant to try and implement it, its a far bigger change from moving from a 4-4-2 to a 4-5-1 for example. If we trained properly for it and the players seemed to take to it well in training then we could do some serious damage using it IMO, that front 5 looks tasty.
 
Absolutely Huddlefro, the front 5 would be up there with the best in the league.

We've got the right players to make it the formation work, from a speedy agile keeper - tall, strong and techinally good CBs - tenacious DM's - lighting fast wingers - skill and creativity and finally potency in attack.
 
Did anyone else watch the Chelsea-Juve game tonight with one eye on how a system similar to the one proposed on this thread works against a team with the attacking guile of Chelsea? The answer - very well IMO. It would certainly be interesting to see us use this system properly.
 
I would like to see this, Caulker, Gallas, Kaboul and Vert are definitely suited to this. Daws too slow maybe. Its always possible to switch to 442 with one change aswell.
 
Juve perfected that formation.

Bonucci, Barzaghli, Chiellini were great in that 3 man defence, neither of them are blessed with pace either so for people to say how Gallas is suited more than Dawson because he offers a little more speed can now be shown that it's not a neccessity.The attacking threat from their whole team, instigated by Vidal and Pirlo was sheer class. By the time they had a two goal lead, they brought Caceres on to shore up the defence and make it a 4-4-2 and still looked dominant.

After seeing that performance, it's just made me want us to try it even more, especially while Ekotto remains out - I'd be more than happy to see Walker dropped.

So for us, based on the current fit squad, here's how I'd line up currently (added Ade though, I know he's still suspended but hey-ho):

Lloris (Buffon)
Caulker (Barzaghli), Bonucci (Dawson), Vertonghen (Chiellini)
Sandro (Marchisio), Dembele (Pirlo)
Lennon (Lichstensteiner SP?), Carroll (Vidal), Bale (Asamoah)
Defoe (Vucinic), Adebayor (Quagliarella)

Obviously when Parker returns fully, he'd replace Carroll with Dembele moving forward. Kaboul would replace Dawson.
 
It's interesting to see how teams and formations are adapting to the dominance of the use of one striker, isn't it?
I still think that we can cause sides a hell of a lot of trouble with a fully fit side playing 4-4-2, despite the apparent consensus that it's outdated.
The physicality of Sandro and Dembele in the middle of the park should mitigate the supposed numerical disadvantage and nobody's going to want to face a break from us if the right team's selected.
How do you deal with Defoe, Adebayor, Bale, Lennon and Dembele running at your defence when they're not all perfectly in position? Badly, in all likelyhood.
Add the option of overlaps from Assou-Ekotto and Walker, plus the footballing ability of Kaboul and Vertonghen and I think we'd scare the **** out of a lot of sides.

The 3-5-2 (or whatever it is) is an interesting option, but it might be a bit too outlandish to try and adjust to in the middle of the season.
Then again, Martinez did it to save Wigan's campaign last time out, so I guess it's possible.
 
northenspursfan said:
after some positive play against the goons in the 2nd half on Saturday do you think this is worth considering

......................Lloris......................

......caulker........dawson........vertonghan

...............parker.............sandro............

lennon...............dembele.................bale

..............ade.................defoe

obviously when kaboul is back he would slot into the back three

i believe it gives u good options defensively and allows our attack minded players to attack

maybe not in all games but i like the look of it and the balance feels right imo
Click to expand...

I think that team and formation would be fine against almost anyone - but is suffers from the same issue as Harry's 442 - the back-up is weak in almost every position - as now without Dembele, Ade and Parker it would be a lot weaker and the same is even more true if Lennon or Bale are out. I think the best formation takes the back up players into account too.
 
Lloris

Dawson Caulker

Sandro Vertonghen Parker

Lennon Walker Adebayor Carroll Bale


There you are a 'proper' line up. <ok> 2 3 5
 
From the days of now-dead positions, like the inside forward. You old bastard! <laugh>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back