Methven gives me Karl Oyston vibes
Summer transfer thread
- Thread starter Hudson92
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Okay you who have coaching experience
Is it best to find the playing position that is best to bring out an indivual players talents. Then fit the teams formation around them.
Or to get players to play in a formation that you think is best and players have to adapt.
For me Gooch is not a great winger or FB, but is okayish at WB.
Clarke is really a winger that can do some defensive duties
Cirkin is good defensive FB that can do a bit of attacking.
Alexander Arnold is great at attacking and putting crosses etc in, look at his assists!
Defensively he is average at best. Manure exploited that last night.
Often a team is stronger that the sum of it's parts - that comes down to the system and the tactics used. Right now, 3 at the back with Gooch and Clarke as WBs works best for us, as does having O9 and Cirkin as the wider CBs who can carry the ball out of defence. IMHO the main reason we are playing 3-5-2 is that it allows us to play 2 strikers without getting overloaded in midfield
I think it is worth taking the formation and thinking about it when out of possession and in possession. 442 is what you when out of possesion, probably even more a 4411. When in possession you would want to get to a 424 or a 4114. Like someone else said formations are written on paper they dont really tell a story of how a team will play.
I have a fundamental dislike of 3 centre backs. With a player like Cirkin in there I can live with, but ultimately I dont think it is the way to real success when the win is so highly rewarded. For me it is to easy to be pushed into a 5 at the back by the opposition, and we have seen that with ourselves this year I believe. I also suspect Alex Neil wants either a 433 or a 4231 formation. 433 is my idea of the most attacking formation. You should aim for one destructive player in your base 3, and 2 footballers. It gives you a natural 5,5 split. It also gives you the ability to make the pitch really wide, or play through the middle, if you get the right footballers in alongside the destructive 1. Man City have absolutely nailed this formation for me, mind you with De Bruyne it is a bit too easy. One of our challenges, I think, is getting Pritch into a 433, and he is too good not to play. I have faith in Alex Neil to get the balance spot on over the season.
Corrupt as f#ck, the EFL will turn a blind eye tho.
That is shocking. I have no doubt it is allowed, but it is clearly ignoring FFP. Isnt that just giving them an extra £13m top up in allowable losses?
For me players have to adapt, in the main. Some will be rigid in position, like Danny Baath. Others will always end up in a striker role, like Stewart, but you could see him doing a job as a 10 occassionally. When kids are coached these days they dont have a set position. That often doesnt come until mid teens. Everything is about creating technically good footballers, like Cirkin as we have discussed. It means you get players like Embleton who can roam. That versatility is key in players, otherwise how would you change formation in a game or a season - everybody would be pigeon holed into one slot. What it does mean, and it can be a challenge, is when young lads come into first team footy it is a massive learning curve and patience is needed because they are still learning some of the positional stuff and in game stuff. Coaches know this though, and wont panic about mistakes made, so long as the learning is evident.
Broken Clock
Yes, totally agree. One of the things I put in my reports is average positions in each third of the pitch and that shows how a team's formation fluctuates during the ebb and flow of a game.
I also agree about 433. In addition to everything else you've said about it, I think its a more natural formation than 3 at the back in terms of the areas of the pitch that each player is responsible for.
When was Cirkin really poor last season? Few games off the top of your head because I genuinely can’t think of any where I could point my finger and say he was to blame for a bad result. First 5-10 games I’d say he was getting used to playing football regularly, he was a bit off the pace and naive then after that he was one of our most consistent performers?
Getting all their players in just in time to play us
On Sky aswell....won't be the first time we've upset the script for the useless ****ers!The £13m profit in 6 months whilst keeping the player also means they can afford to keep Ismaila Sarr as well. It's astounding "business". It's almost as if Watford being in the Premier League is much more rewarding than Udinese being in Serie A.
I dunno, it might go the way of 2-3-5 given the lack of defenders who can actually defend these days
Bring back the Viennese Whirl, I say!
What do you reckon to Man City's formation against Newcastle? They played two v three at the back for most of the game and swamped the midfield with a five. It works most games but the were a bit fortunate against Newcastle to get back into the game.