In Stan's column this week, he suggests we should switch to 4-4-2, to better utilise the strikers that we've got. I suspect there's a fair few who will agree with him, I'm one of them... http://kissermag.com/ As a side issue, this months bird is called Amber(but she's not black). Edit: My comment wasn't very clear, I didn't mean I'd necessarily change the starting formation, I'd just like to see us switching to a 4-4-2 in the latter part of games like the Brighton one, where we're dominating, but not managing to get the ball in the net.
never heard of the mag before , had a quick flick through the pages and it looks quite good , ill give it a proper look over later when im having something to eat !
I don't agree with him. We aren't strong enough or creative enough to play 4-4-2. Where would Koren play? Wasted out wide, not strong enough in midfield. The vast majority of successful teams both internationally, in the Premiership and now in the Championship, play 4-2-3-1. If we play 4-4-2 we would never see the ball. If you play 2 strikers it means you play one less midfielder. Unless you have a MASSIVE quality advantage, 4 midfielders against 5 midfielders will lose you the game. Our structure is fine, we have EVERYTHING we need in terms of pegs in holes except the lone striker. It's not broke, don't fix it.
I don't agree either as above. A lot of teams now go for 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3 or a mixture of the two (higher wide player and diamonds) The way the game is changing attacking midfielders are being utilised more using CDM's to mop up. Man City use this system well even playing two strikers but dropping one in behind to play a "number 10" role usually Aguero with Dzeko/Ballotelli ahead. We could go for a forward in Koren's place should he get injured, this formation allows teams to get more direct attacking players in the mix rather than the 4-4-2 with wingers being there mainly to whip balls in. Also gives more cover for the defence as the middle two in a 4-4-2 will counter leaving space in behind whereas in the 4-2-3-1 that job is taken on by the 3 leaving support deeper.
It wouldn't necessarily really be a traditional 4-4-2, more of a 4-1-3-2. Rosie Chester Hobbs Dawson ---------McKenna Brady-----Koren----Stewart -----Mclean----Fryatt Though it would give McKenna a hell of a lot of work to do.
Im with you on this one Lamby, as you say not for the start but for the last 20 to 30 mins when we need a goal, Ive been saying this for a long time now
i dont know about this, i would normally tend to agree that our strikers arent good enough to play a one up top, but then you look at games like donny and brighton and the number of chances we created, and it wasnt nothing to do with them been up top on there own, it was just woeful finishing... i do agree that in certian games tho, we could go with mckenna or evans ( or oli) alongside koren in a 4-4-2....sometimes having 2 sitting is unnecessary against the teams who come and sit for a point at the kc.
I agree with you in saying latter part of the game switch to that if we are dominating to try nick a goal. As Mckenna could handle it for 20 mins, but he couldn't do that role for 90, although Chelsea (when they were winning leagues) played a diamond 4-4-2 as above with Essien in the Mckenna role. I just think 4-4-2 has been phased out with the quicker passing game that is becoming more predominant requiring a stronger presence in the middle.
That's what happened against Brighton. How long would McKenna (at the age of 36) last if he was the only holding midfielder for 90 minutes? Thought this thread was about McEwans belief we should start 442. Not how the structure should be changed when the game gets stretched in the last 20 mins.
We have had more success with Nick's formation than NP's 4-4-2. I dont think the formation is the problem, I just think it is the quality of our finishing.
McKenna was blowing out his a**e at the end of the Brighton game. Corry Evans plays a vital, if not sometimes un-noticed/unappreciated role.
Really gets on my tets when idiots spout off about how Evans "never seems to do much". That's because they haven't got a clue about what they are watching! Our defensive success is down to two factors: we have two quality centrebacks and we have two quality holding midfielder sat just in front of them, protecting them from the opposing midfielders so they only have to deal with the striker(s). Evans sacrifices his natural inclination to get forward and attack the opposing penalty area in order to make us the tightest defence in the league. For that he gets numpties moaning that he does nothing!
I agree and actually think Evans is better in a more defensive role as his passing is not his best asset.
I've been calling for 4-4-2 since before Christmas, (or at least for us to change late on to get that much-needed winner) and everyone's been telling me to **** off!
I have been, I just find it very irritating that everybody disagrees with the 'small fish' for months but as soon as someone like OLM says it everyone suddenly agrees I just wish certain people had their own minds rather than volunteering as background singers. PS This isn't a pop at you OLM, it's not your fault you're so loved
