We desperately need Howson back, the Tettey-Fer-Howson midfield is the only formation where we've looked good for long spells, and we've only seen it twice. I don't see why 4-5-1 should be any more negative, we've scored 5 in 10 anyway, it can't hurt to try it! Hopefully any new midfield signing will be able to challenge/cover Howson in that role, and we can begin to settle into that formation.
You're right, but I'd like to see Pilkington play off the striker in a 4-5-1. That means bringing on Redmond on the left, Snodgrass on the right and Pilks in the centre, ahead of Fer and Tettey. I think that could work very well, actually. The one thing I have noticed is that, even though Redmond has a lot of faults and is a long way from the finished article, he is the one player we have who relieves pressure on our defence because of his pace. He pushes the opposition back. In order to do that you either need: (a) a tall, strong target man, (b) sharp, swift passing or (c) pacey winger/striker to threaten in behind. As we lack (a) or (b) at the moment, we sort of need (c)
Our attacking tempo certainly increased when Redmond came on. You are right and despite his faults he does excite me.
We've seen the Tettey/Howson/Fer combo start 4 matches (all of them Prem games) this season: Stoke 0-1 City City 1-3 Chelsea Arsenal 4-1 City City 0-0 Cardiff
why the stupid response? i was only having a laugh - hence the smiley as it happens, rob has stollen my thunder as i too would play redmond wide left, snodgrass wide right and pilkington in a free role behind hooper with tettey and fer sweeping up behind. jk highlights: "We've seen the Tettey/Howson/Fer combo start 4 matches (all of them Prem games) this season: Stoke 0-1 City City 1-3 Chelsea Arsenal 4-1 City City 0-0 Cardiff" arguably our four most cohesive and free-flowing performances all season, even if the results didn't always make it look that way
Agreed. The only thing missing from the last three of those matches was a bit of luck and some fit strikers (I believe all of those were where we were missing a fit Hooper or RvW or both?) Norwich-Cardiff was a far, far, more one-sided 0-0 than yesterday's match, despite what the Geordie-loving (or is it just Norwich-ignorant?) newspapers will have you believe. Yesterday's match, in fact, bizzarely given how badly we played, was actually relatively even in terms of real out-and-out chances. Yes, we got a bit of luck, but when I see the list of matches above, we sure deserved it.
seriously yarco? do you really need me to explain what the 'diamond formation' is??? no - you're just being petulant - god knows why but something has obviously upset you. anyway, i'm outta here
No - I see a diamond as very narrow, with a defensive midfielder and two strikers. I envisaged just one striker, some width in what is best described as a 4-4-1-1 formation. Yes - I'm pretty sure Hughton used it last year. Also, I agree he wouldn't if he had the choice, but such is our lack of midfield options and the obvious shortcomings of 4-4-2, combined with it being an away match, I almost think he'll be obliged.
didn't he play 442 against both Everton and Palace away? my assumption is that will continue vs cardiff. pretty sure they play only 1 up front
No Johnson is all the excuse Hughton needs to go 4-4-2 again, which fails to get the most out of Fer and RvW, gets us over-run in midfield and impotent going forwards. I just hope we've signed a new midfielder who can go straight in! Otherwise, I'd say 4-2-3-1 with Snodgrass behind Hooper, Pilks left and Redmond right. Snodgrass is the best at getting back out of our wingers, so might give Fer or Tettey the confidence to go forwards a little bit. Whether Snodgrass can be disciplined enough to hold back when they do is another question. I can see the point in putting Pilks behind Hooper, but he supports a striker well enough from wide positions to me, whilst Snodgrass is more creative and having him in the middle would at least vary our attacking threat a little, rather than the ball always going wide to him at the first opportunity. Redmond on the right hopefully forces him to create more than shoot wildly, but I'd hope the wingers would be able to interchange a bit too. It's a very demanding formation for Snodgrass though. He's got to drop back to cover marauding DM's, and be prepared to offer width either side should Pilks or Redmond cut in.
Not seen enough of him in a City shirt to say whether he'd be any better than any of our other wingers. On their day Redmond, Pilks and Snodgrass can be excellent, not sure Gutierrez has that left in him. As an option from the bench he's nice though, and it means we could start 3 wingers without worrying about replacing one through injury/tiredness.
For the Cardiff game: Ruddy Whittaker - R.Bennett - Bassong - Olsson Tettey - Fer Snodgrass - Pilks - Gutierrez Hooper
