And I don't mean get a proper haircut and go on a diet. There are obviously problems. Whether they're caused by the 5-3-2 or individual players I don't know, but a solution needs to be found. Chester has probably made more mistakes at the start of this season than he made throughout 2011/12 - Is he having trouble adapting to this system?. Alex Bruce seems to have come through the early abuse storm to show he deserves a place in Hobbs absence, but is he at fault for the current problems? Faye is scoring a lot, but is his pace / fitness an issue? Both Dudgeon and Elmo have been revelations so far, but are they going forward too much at the expense of the defence? Is it just a case of all of the above still learning how to gel in this formation to minimise its weaknesses? The way City have played as a team using this formation has produced the most exciting and successful results since Brown took us to joint top of the Prem with his own cavalier style of football. Unfortunately Brown didn't have the nerve to stick with it and fix the problems once the weaknesses were exposed. We had two or three bad results, then he went to one up front and that was when the decline began. I hope SB perseveres because when this system works City play like a promotion team and we haven't had many glimpses of that in the last few years. Edit; Sorry - Didn't see the 'What City should do?' thread. Merge if you think they're too similar.
I would sit down with a cup of tea and biscuits, get pro zone out, see who does the most running, drop who does the least running, and go 4-5-1 with Quinn as the lone striker.
Sometimes there needs to be an alternative as we saw with Barmby last year, I think 3 in the middle is a strong midfield but then the attacks come down the wings, in this system from what I get when reading reports & this board, it seems to be dropping in behind the wingers, if SB changes things to 4 at the back, this would incorporate Rosenior & Dawson if Dudgeon gets any injuries or drops form, so then do you stick with 3 in the middle or go with 4? If 3 then you could have say Koren or Aluko playing behind the front 2 in a 4-3-1-2. But 4 in the middle could go 2 ways, straight across or into the diamond formation, the problem then becomes that the midfield gets over run. I'm sure SB is working on alternatives & also changing personnel, Elmo is one player he will want to keep in the team as he seems to think a lot of him, also when Stewart returns I'd think that he would go on the left, as if he sticks with the current system, I don't really see any future for him.
I'd go 4-4-2 Amos Rose Bruce(Chezzy?) Faye Dudgeon Elmo Mckenna(Oli?) Quinn Aluko Simpson Proschwitz Been over run with the back 3 so for me it has to change, I am assuming Oli and Chezzy are out overwise they would be were I have put them on the team, after Korens performances in the last two games I do not feel he has a right to be starting. I would also play Mckenna over Evans also due to Evans performances while Oli was out, think I would give Proschwitz ago tomorrow.
id stick with the formation, just work on ways to give more cover to the defence on the break.. maybe evans coming in for oli ...or bring mckenna in to just sit .. id tell aluko to pass the simple ball more and not try to score goal of the season everytime he has the ball..
Peterbrough didn't overrun us or 'suss us out' or anything. We were the better team but we ****ed up in both boxes. There's absolutely no reason to change the system or the way we play based on one unfortunate result. Losing Chester however means we don't have many options in the back 3 so it might be worth considering. Personally I'd rather see Cooper come in as a straight swap but we know that isn't going to happen.
Well Chester's out. Other than that; we've had 2 bad games. I say leave things as they are for Tuesday and if things get bad half way through; change to 4-4-2. We have the players with the quality to beat Blackpool. Anyone can beat anyone on their day; let's not look to the past and look to the future. To start against Blackpool I'd go Amos (although his kicking has been god awful) Cooper (won't happen) Faye Bruce Elmo McKenna Koren Quinn Dudgeon Aluko Simpson Bench: Oxley, Rosie, McShambles, Evans, Oli, Proschwitz, McLean
They held us at arm's length for long stretches of the game resticting us to harmless lateral passing phases. They sussed we were very vulnerable at the back against pace and muscle. Apart from that, they didn't suss us at all.
If Quinn didn't **** his tackle up or we'd scored one of our early chances, we'd have won 3 or 4 nil and no one would be going on about the formation or them figuring our tactics out. It's a load of bollocks that people are so wise to come out with things like that after we lose a game, but strangely no one said anything negative until they scored a freak goal and then it was all ''same old City' and other such crap. Real football isn't like FIFA or FM. Peterborough took their chances, we didn't, that's why they won. If we play like that again we'll win 9 times out of 10, unfortunately this weekend was the 1 time out of 10. Leicester beat us because we were ****, and playing like that we'll hardly ever win. If we pass the ball properly and take our chances (essentially play like we did against Milwall, Bolton and Leeds) then there's nothing to suss. Putting everything down to formations is just silly, there are so many more important factors.
I don't think anyone's blaming Saturday on the formation, but against Leicester it was completely exposed and only a fool couldn't see that. Their first 2 goals came from attacks in the open space on the flanks behind the wingbacks, had we had full backs there the chances are they'd never have got them (not the way they did anyway) and they had plenty of other dangerous attacks from those positions which they could and probably should have scored from. By your reckoning we could play a 1-1-8 and not blame the formation when we let 20 or 30 goals in from 4 or 5 players breaking at a lone centre back. Formations make a lot of difference, and have done since the dawn of time. Wars have been won and lost from tactical thinking and positioning of men, as have football matches and many other sports for that matter.
Yes if we played a 1-1-8 it might well be down to that, but I think people are just looking for an easy thing to blame and a very slightly different formation seems to be providing that. Like I keep saying, the single most important thing that cost us at Leicester was that we couldn't keep the ball. No matter what formation you play, if your team play **** and pass the ball to the opposition constantly you will lose and that is what happened. If we played 4-4-2 or any other formation and played like we did we'd still have lost because we were ****.
Upfront- We're creatign alot of chances, but not taking them. But, you can't work on being more clinical infront of goal- it just comes through experience and confidence. Defensively- What City can do is not leave so few back from corners and free kicks. We're open to the counter attack by the pacy striker/ winger, and our defenders can't keep up.
As I said the other day, the best option would be 4-4-2 or 4-5-1. The sooner Bruce Jnr is out of the team the better, but with Chez and Hobbs both out now that's looking increasingly unlikely. I think we'll get raped against Blackpool. A comfortable win for the Tangerines is the only foreseeable outcome. City 2-5 Blackpool
Yes I thought we send too many up, infact when posh got their first I was saying what's the point dudgeon running all the way up to offer a short option, he should be back to cover as we'd be too easy to counter against, lo and behold bang it went. Minutes later same scenario but from a free kick wasn't it and bang. I'd leave dudge quinn and aluko back, all fast enough to cover a quick break but too small to challenge in the box. Also they are composed on the ball to set up another attack straight away or in aluko and quinns case have the ability to knock one off from range and either score, force another corner or a parry into the path of fryatt to scuff into the middle of the goal or McLean to power it into one of the corners.
Maybe not real football but real City football sure is. I hardly ever win unless I am playing someone whom I should lose to.
Just about sums up last saturday. Steve Bruce cannot be blamed for player error of which there was many in that game. Its got nowt to do with system - formations or tactics. Player errors at both ends of the pitch cost us. Its no good trying to moan about Chester and possibly Olifinjana missing as Blackpool are missing there best 2 players in Ince and G.Taylor-Flecther sio i can live with that. IMO, Rosenoir has to come in for Chester and Evans or maybe Mckenna(with a point to prove to SB) for Oli. City are playing well even on saturday. Just cut out the errors and we shall be fine. 3 - 5 - 2 is working well. No need to panic despite what some knee-jerkers on here say. imo. What utter rubbish. You must be related to Mike Burgess. 2-5 indeed. Who do you think plays for Blackpool at the moment.?
