4-5-1

[royalswans]

If we are committed to 4-5-1 we need a better number 10 than guthrie. Not enough of a goal threat. Also think Harte may have run his race as a premier ship footballer from set pieces

It would be the perfect time to bring Gylfi back to the club. The money is there as displayed by the bid for ince

[MouldyRoyal]

[royalswans]

tick tock

[royalswans]

sad to see no one picked up on the clear hint that we were bidding for gylfi. add that o the tom ince and zaha posts which were both pulled by the moderators.

[SPARTA]

Re-post from the prediction thread:

4-5-1 is not working out for us on the offensive. Dress it up all you like in that it supposedly makes us tougher to break down, but we are still conceding far too many goals, and worst still we rarely get a shot on goal. It's only when we are losing late on and go to 4-4-2 do we start looking a threat.

We can't keep sneaking late wins and draws like we have been, and if we stick to 4-5-1 then it's only a matter of time before we see those results turn into frustrating defeats and we start falling behind the pack.

[Ian Royal]

Re-post from the prediction thread:

4-5-1 is not working out for us on the offensive. Dress it up all you like in that it supposedly makes us tougher to break down, but we are still conceding far too many goals, and worst still we rarely get a shot on goal. It's only when we are losing late on and go to 4-4-2 do we start looking a threat.

We can't keep sneaking late wins and draws like we have been, and if we stick to 4-5-1 then it's only a matter of time before we see those results turn into frustrating defeats and we start falling behind the pack.

Because starting with 4-4-2 was soooooooooo effective. At least this way is currently working. That way never worked.

[Snowball]

Although the extra midfielder should make us harder to beat,
being harder to beat is not only about formation.

It's also about risk-taking.

Do the full-backs bomb forward or stay in their own half? (For example.)


I don't think it's as much about 4-4-2 versus 4-5-1 but whether we play it tight and nullify
the opposition, or "go for it". The points we have thrown away have been more about throwing
caution to the wind and getting caught on the break

[Royal91]

We have to continue with 4-5-1 as 4-4-2 leaves us too open.

As Carrico and Akpan get more minutes they may start to move Karacan out of the picture.

Its a bit out there but playing Pog as a number 10 could be an idea. The guy can link play and make a pass but he can also throw in a tackle as well. Doesn't need pace in that position either. Play Alf off the last man

For now I would have

===========Federici============

Kelly====Pearce==Mariappa====Harte


=========L,wood===Guthrie=========


Kebe======================McCleary

===============Pog====================

===============Alf================


Taylor, Morrison, Gunter, Carrico, Akpan, Blackman, McAnuff

[SPARTA]

Re-post from the prediction thread:

4-5-1 is not working out for us on the offensive. Dress it up all you like in that it supposedly makes us tougher to break down, but we are still conceding far too many goals, and worst still we rarely get a shot on goal. It's only when we are losing late on and go to 4-4-2 do we start looking a threat.

We can't keep sneaking late wins and draws like we have been, and if we stick to 4-5-1 then it's only a matter of time before we see those results turn into frustrating defeats and we start falling behind the pack.

Because starting with 4-4-2 was soooooooooo effective. At least this way is currently working. That way never worked.

You miss the point. 4-5-1 might keep us in the game, but we still concede far too many goals with it; so apart from the obvious thrashing's we were getting, we're not a great deal better defensively and offensively we aren't even in the game.

My main point though was that these recent comebacks all come when we throw everything at it and go back to 4-4-2. So you saying the current system is working isn't really the case; it's the old system that's getting these results after the new system has us staring at a defeat.

I expect us to stick with 4-5-1, of course, but we can't keep coming back from the dead every week. Sooner or later the luck will run out and these wins and draws will turn back into defeats.

Did we have a shot on target before going to 4-4-2 against Chelsea? I don't remember one. It's been that way for the last 3-4 PL games at least. Offensively we are a bunch of powder-puffs, until we go all out to get something from the game and switch back to 4-4-2.

[Cobi]

Re-post from the prediction thread:

4-5-1 is not working out for us on the offensive. Dress it up all you like in that it supposedly makes us tougher to break down, but we are still conceding far too many goals, and worst still we rarely get a shot on goal. It's only when we are losing late on and go to 4-4-2 do we start looking a threat.

We can't keep sneaking late wins and draws like we have been, and if we stick to 4-5-1 then it's only a matter of time before we see those results turn into frustrating defeats and we start falling behind the pack.

Because starting with 4-4-2 was soooooooooo effective. At least this way is currently working. That way never worked.

You miss the point. 4-5-1 might keep us in the game, but we still concede far too many goals with it; so apart from the obvious thrashing's we were getting, we're not a great deal better defensively and offensively we aren't even in the game.

My main point though was that these recent comebacks all come when we throw everything at it and go back to 4-4-2. So you saying the current system is working isn't really the case; it's the old system that's getting these results after the new system has us staring at a defeat.

I expect us to stick with 4-5-1, of course, but we can't keep coming back from the dead every week. Sooner or later the luck will run out and these wins and draws will turn back into defeats.

Did we have a shot on target before going to 4-4-2 against Chelsea? I don't remember one. It's been that way for the last 3-4 PL games at least. Offensively we are a bunch of powder-puffs, until we go all out to get something from the game and switch back to 4-4-2.

You can't really argue with any of that, Ian. We'll stick with the current system and kitchen sink for the last 20, but we can't rely on that to get us points. 4-5-1 leaves Pog isolated and we aren't keeping sides quiet at the other end either.

[Divvy]

Re-post from the prediction thread:

4-5-1 is not working out for us on the offensive. Dress it up all you like in that it supposedly makes us tougher to break down, but we are still conceding far too many goals, and worst still we rarely get a shot on goal. It's only when we are losing late on and go to 4-4-2 do we start looking a threat.

We can't keep sneaking late wins and draws like we have been, and if we stick to 4-5-1 then it's only a matter of time before we see those results turn into frustrating defeats and we start falling behind the pack.

Because starting with 4-4-2 was soooooooooo effective. At least this way is currently working. That way never worked.

You miss the point. 4-5-1 might keep us in the game, but we still concede far too many goals with it; so apart from the obvious thrashing's we were getting, we're not a great deal better defensively and offensively we aren't even in the game.

My main point though was that these recent comebacks all come when we throw everything at it and go back to 4-4-2. So you saying the current system is working isn't really the case; it's the old system that's getting these results after the new system has us staring at a defeat.

I expect us to stick with 4-5-1, of course, but we can't keep coming back from the dead every week. Sooner or later the luck will run out and these wins and draws will turn back into defeats.

Did we have a shot on target before going to 4-4-2 against Chelsea? I don't remember one. It's been that way for the last 3-4 PL games at least. Offensively we are a bunch of powder-puffs, until we go all out to get something from the game and switch back to 4-4-2.

Agreed, but we wont change it while we're sneaking these results.

[Jay o/]

I think SPARTA has hit the nail on the head tbf.

Other teams play 4-5-1 but us their wingers as forwards on the break. We don't or don't get the chance too. We prefer to suck it up and hope we can hit on the break, and we're not getting those chances until we change it to 4-4-2 and then we throw everything at them. You can't use that as a tactic long-term.

[Platypuss]

sad to see no one picked up on the clear hint that we were bidding for gylfi. add that o the tom ince and zaha posts which were both pulled by the moderators.

Errr, say what again?

[robb the royal]

To be fair...Chelsea only had 2 shots on target when we were playing 4-5-1...it just so happens they scored both.
We were never going to have many chances on Wednesday...it was all about sit back, get men behind the ball, don't lose our shape...and (on the whole) it worked. Sunderland will be a different matter, more attacking (slightly) and we will have shots...we did against West Brom and Newcastle.

[Ian Royal]

Re-post from the prediction thread:

4-5-1 is not working out for us on the offensive. Dress it up all you like in that it supposedly makes us tougher to break down, but we are still conceding far too many goals, and worst still we rarely get a shot on goal. It's only when we are losing late on and go to 4-4-2 do we start looking a threat.

We can't keep sneaking late wins and draws like we have been, and if we stick to 4-5-1 then it's only a matter of time before we see those results turn into frustrating defeats and we start falling behind the pack.

Because starting with 4-4-2 was soooooooooo effective. At least this way is currently working. That way never worked.

You miss the point. 4-5-1 might keep us in the game, but we still concede far too many goals with it; so apart from the obvious thrashing's we were getting, we're not a great deal better defensively and offensively we aren't even in the game.

My main point though was that these recent comebacks all come when we throw everything at it and go back to 4-4-2. So you saying the current system is working isn't really the case; it's the old system that's getting these results after the new system has us staring at a defeat.

I expect us to stick with 4-5-1, of course, but we can't keep coming back from the dead every week. Sooner or later the luck will run out and these wins and draws will turn back into defeats.

Did we have a shot on target before going to 4-4-2 against Chelsea? I don't remember one. It's been that way for the last 3-4 PL games at least. Offensively we are a bunch of powder-puffs, until we go all out to get something from the game and switch back to 4-4-2.

So you want to switch from a system that has seen us pick up 11 points in 7 games to a system that saw us pick up 3 points in the last 7 games we used it in and where we conceeded almost double the goals? You've just proclaimed yourself an idiot.

This system of 4-5-1 into 4-4-2 works. It worked last time we were struggling with relegation under McDermott as well. Big wow, we had no shots against Chelsea in one game. We've had shots and chances against Newcastle and West Brom. We could do with improving in midfield and defence a little more. But it's absolutely ludicrous to start saying we've got a big problem just because we're getting ourselves out of jail a bit at times. We're in the best form we've had all season.

We've scored just as many goals in the last 7 games, as we did playing the last 7 games 4-4-2 from the start. And we were getting majorly fooked over. So either you want us to go back to having exciting defeats, or you need to propose something different.

[Snowball]

Ian, we don't know how much of our improved form id due to

Pearce-Marriappa forging a partnership

Harte working relatively well

Kelly steadying the ship

Federici's form improving

Elwood regaining form

Alfie's purple patch


NONE of these are to do with 451 versus 442, IMO (not saying we should or shouldn't play any particular system)
but rather I am pointing out that players are getting better at their job, getting more used to the Prem and so on.



I also think we've had some luck. Everton was "lucky" as was WBA, as was Newcastle, as was Chelsea.


By that I mean, "kudos" to the boys but we EASILY could have lost all four and would now be rock-bottom.

We were also slaughtered at Swansea but pinched a point.



I think, in truth we are still out of our class, but somehow hanging in there, freaking some results, and quite likely to go down 451 or 442

[Ian Royal]

4-5-1 doesn't work. We don't score enough goals.