Excellent article by Max Hicks putting forward the case for us playing with a Christmas tree formation; -------------------- Fabianski ---------------- ------------ Fernandez ---- Ash ------------ Naughton ---------------------------- Taylor ----------- Leon/Carroll -- Cork ------------ -------------------------- Ki -------------------- --------------- Shelvey -- Siggy ------------ ---------------------- Gomis ------------------ Makes a lot of sense actually. Some have stated on many occasions that our experiment at playing narrower was a mistake and wished for a return to width/wingers, but as Hicks points out we actually cross the ball less than any other team in the Prem. Both Montero and Emnes could play in behind the striker. Oliviera could play a role this season also. Routledge would be better in behind the striker these days IMO. Ki would have the opportunity to do more playmaking, which is his main strength. Dyer and Barrow would be the losers, but would be interesting options from the bench if we can't break down a team. Go wide for the last half an hour with fresh pace against a tiring defence. I've always fancied experimenting with 3-5-2 but this formation would suit our current personnel better I feel Article; http://www.espnfc.co.uk/club/swanse...lveys-strengths-to-collect-win-at-Southampton What do you all think?
At the moment I'd agree but when fit, Montero has to start as he gives us that blistering pace that we are missing with Routs and Dyer.
I think it would be a bold move, not too radical and certainly understandable with the limitations we currently have on both flanks. This would give the opposition something to think about and as you say we can bring on fresh legs out wide ,something which Montero may appreciate as he's missed a few games now and needs nursing back to match fitness .Barrow as I've posted previously isn't a starter for me ,he's an impact player imo but again someone to bring on if chasing the game who'll be up against hopefully, a tiring defence .The midfield now looks strong with plenty of options when all personnel are fit so plenty of variations there dependant on who the opposition are.
Agree, this makes a lot of sense, think we could try it against Sunderland....I know there's no Siggy, but Oliveira or Grimes could fill that slot...or even Dyer, he used to do quite well playing narrow....?
But atm Dyer can't beat a man so with a more congested middle of the pitch I can't see him having any more impact there than he does out wide .If you've copy somewhere of the 2nd leg play off v Forest, have a look, that for me that was when he was at his best .
How about Cork alongside Leon/Carroll and Ki in front of them until Gylfi comes back? Failing that, give young Grimes a go.
I'd play this against Sunderland as there are question marks over Barrow and Montero's fitness, I'd go; -------------------- Fabianski ---------------- ------------ Fernandez ---- Ash ------------ Naughton ---------------------------- Taylor ----------- Leon/Fulton -- Cork ------------ -----------------------Carroll-------------------- --------------- Oliviera -- Shelvey ---------- ---------------------- Gomis ------------------ Bench; Tremmell, Rangel, Amat, Tiendalli (Fulton if Leon is fit), Dyer, Montero (if fit) and Barrow (if fit). Waiting in the wings; Kenji Gorre, King and Grimes
It makes sense with the only decent winger in Monty struggling with injury, I do like his approach of playing to Shelvey's strength, but Shelvey does have a consistency problem so not sure how far this will go, but well worth a try though............
The only way you would naturally want to go that narrow is to provide channels down the line for wing backs. I'm not sure about Naughton but Taylor is not really in that mold. In any case, playing with two wing backs requires more of a back three ... doesn't it.
Sunderland play with one up top, meaning you'd have Ash & Fernandez against him with Britton/Cork/Carroll sweeping up in front. I'm really liking this idea, it may fail badly but nothing ventured and all that.
But then you'd be giving Adam Johnson all the wide areas to whip in crosses for Wickham and for him to cut in.
I reckon that system contains wingers better. The opposition winger is still up against our full-back and in theory should be under more pressure from a DM. As I see it, it's the opposition full-backs who are afforded more space....the danger is the overlap. However, if the midfield is working correctly and at least 1 of the AM works back when defending this threat could be managed. If worked on and perfected this formation should make us more compact and harder to break down. On the attack it should mean we outnumber the opposition through the middle. Their full-backs could get sucked in which would create space out wide for our full-backs to attack....if they were to cross early we should have more numbers in the box and just outside it also. Ideally the opposition would have to adjust to us...at which point you bring the pace off the bench, against tiring defenders, and go wide again (once they have made changes and don't have the best suitedl personnel on the pitch to deal with the wingers). Ideally.
Has Monk been reading Max Hicks and/or this forum do you reckon? The last 2 have seen us go narrower and become more solid as a result. Got to find a way to attack and create better with the new formation mind...maybe we keep the narrower game plan for away games and the big boys though?
Agree, we've looked very solid and hard to break down, but we have also looked very poor going forward, I actually feel the loss of Siggy has a lot to do with this as much as the system tbh...
I reckon our narrow play stems from the personnel and their condition, Monk has to work with. Montero, with Dyer, is the only other natural winger we have. He currently is nursing a hammy strain/tear, which will stay till end of season; same for Barrow I believe. Both still can play but both have lost the explosive quickness they need to consistently beat their man. Dyer, our only other winger; this is hear-say but I've heard it a couple of times, maybe someone can shed some light, has been semi-crocked all season, both knees, and requires key hole surgery. As injury wont get any worse he's opted to wait until summer to put right, just in case he's needed, even though its doubtful he'll be able to complete 90 minutes. So we're a very short on fit and healthy wide-out players it would seem and I don't see Routledge as a winger but a wide midfielder. Our crocked wingers aside, I think the main reason Monk will persevere with our claustrophobic narrow game is mainly because of his desire to play Shelvey and Siggy in the same team. Playing Shelvey with Siggy negates one side from wing play. Add Routledge cutting in most of the time to our play and we'll effectively see out the season playing with no wingers until Routledge or Siggy is subbed by Montero. So, more of the same from us with a few tweaks and distortions to justify selection I reckon.
Yeah, we really miss Siggy's creativity. Routledge has the ability to create opportunities for others also but isn't as consistent.
