I'm not sure where to put this so started another thread. Interestingly Danny Murphy highlighted something on MOTD last night which I thought was just Fulham all over. He was analysing the Leicester - Newcastle game and where Newcastle lost it. Apart from playing badly it was all to do with their system. He described the diamond system they played and how narrow it was. All too easy to play against with Leicesters wide men. Seeing it on the TV with diagrams and all made me understand better how teams have been able to play against us. Then there was the Villa game, where Villa played a diamond, and he described how it works. The middle 2 midfielders have to be the super fit to cover the sort of ground needed. We just didn't have the fitness levels to play the diamond. So not sure why Kit persevered with this system? I can see it working but you have to have the right players. You then need another system if one of those players is injured, a plan B. We never had this all season long. However, it must have worked partly as we did have a good run of games when he first took over. It just went to pieces when the opposition sussed how to play against us. Any thoughts?
I mentioned it before but there are very few bad formations, you can go back through history and find an example of a top successful team for most formations, it's all about finding a formation that fits your players or get in the players that fut the formation... It was obvious the diamond didn't fit our squad and we just persisted with it for so long. If Kit wants to play the diamond next season we will need qualit full backs with pace and a quality solid holding midfielder otherwise it has two change
http://www.football-lineups.com/team/Fulham/ Obviously I'm not sure how accurate these formation lineups are on this website, but generally it shows under kit if we've played 442 we've had better results.
While not wanting to be seen as a defender of Kit's diamond, I'd love to see the stats of points won with and without Christianson in the team. His run of injuries seemed to coincide with the end of Kit's good run of results, and I'm not at all sure that was a coincidence. I rather suspect that has been the most significant factor in our disappointing second half of the season. Then again, Kit had plenty of time to work out an alternative - you can't blame all our shortcomings on the absence of a single player.
Captain - I was thinking the same thing, so while awaiting a 5th WIndies wicket........ - With LVC under Kit: 9 wins; 6 draws; 8 losses. - Without LVC under Kit: 5 wins; 3 draws; 7 losses. - Total Kit: 14 wins; 9 draws; 15 losses. - Ignore Felix's: 0 wins; 1 draw; 7 losses. - Total 14 wins; 10 draws; 22 losses. LVC might be a co-incidence but I suspect there is a marginal correlation, and certainly in the QUALITY of play.
Great stats GS. LVC allowed Parker to sit and catch his breath. LVC ran his socks off every game but we need 2 of these guys to play the diamond well, apparently!
If one watches top flight games, commentators often say what is the most likely formation the team will be playing, often changing from week to week, or even during a match. Kit either cannot or will not adapt.
