The Real Sandhurst Royal 4-4-2 is required if we are going to continue to play the long ball.
Meeko Finally have an account here having viewed the topics and conversations over the last 4 or 5 years, always some interesting opinions so glad to finally be involved in some chat and banter, and i am sure to get the famous welcome as a newbie!
I just wondered if anyone else thinks a main difference from our play last season to this is the support from the full backs for the wingers? With Tabb and Howard last year being more holding midfielders it allowed us to attack in serious numbers, Betrand and Griffin were getting right up there with Kebe and McAnuff so even if one of the wingers was double marked the full back was up their supporting on the overlap. It appears this season that Williams doesnt offer this anywhere near as much, I saw glimpses of him supporting at Portsmouth and the same on saturday which did result in him getting a shot off, but to me we need to get the full backs bombing on in support once again, especially at home- even Griffin hasnt done this anywhere near like he did last season.We dont seem to attack in numbers from what I have seen this season which to me is why not only have we only scored a couple of v scrappy goals (sig's aside) but we dont seem to be creating v much at all! Time and time again the balls are thrown up to the striker amoungst 3 or 4 big defenders and its just pumped back! Last season when it clicked a lot of play was on the floor, using the pace we had. So the formation from last season works in my opinion, we just arn't for some reason trying it the same way with the full backs supporting!
You're actually one of few posters I can actually tolerate.2 world wars, 1 world cup I took a massive helping of humble pie after Brian did so well for us last season.
I know it's early this season and as ever Madejski is being as helpful as a haemorrhoid so we can't judge Brian too harshly just yet
but..
WTF was Brian doing starting 4-5-1*** at home with the almighty Long leading our attack in the first place. And then if that wasn't bad enough, 1-1 at home with 20 mins to go WTF was he doing sticking with the tried and utterly-failed (in this match) and totally inappropriate (when trying to clinch a win) 4-5-1*** formation????? As far as I could see it certainly wasn't 4-3-3 as the wingers were sitting too deep and Siggy never got forward enough to provide anything in the hole so it seemed like we were trying to stick with a point.
Feds' blunder of course gifted them the point but we didn't deserve any more than a draw with our gutless, toothless 4-5-1*** to the death. Much as I disliked BR, at least he would have the balls to change formation mid-game when it was needed.
Brian - you may have had an extended honeymoon half-a-season but playing 4-5-1 with 1-1 at home will NOT get you my vote of confidence. SORT IT OUT.
***for the clueless members of Mensa who miss the point: if it makes you happier calling the setup of 5 (yes five) midfielders and one (yes ONE, UNO, EIN, BIR, ICHI, JEDAN) striker something other than 4-5-1 I'm not going to bicker about terminology. Those with half a brain cell will understand the point is the number of strikers that's the issue.
Elmer Park Firstly let's not forget that we have been having a fairly decent season with these players and that system so we don't have a terrible team or Manager.
I wasn't at all surprised that we started with the 4-2-3-1 system. We have been successful playing that way, last season when we played Swansea we had to change to that system half way through the match because we got overrun in midfield when we played with two strikers and last but by no means least we haven't played particularly well this season on the small number of occasions we have tried to play 4-4-2. By matching up the Manager left it up to our players to try to show they were better than Swansea's and unfortunately on the day we had too many players who didn't perform to their usual standards. Once it was clear we were being outplayed the Manager changed to 4-4-2 and that seemed to make Swansea sit back and let's be honest we had the chances to have got something from the game even though Swansea should have been out of sight long before. Maybe he could have made the change at half time.
Very few of our players came out of the game with much credit on the day but when our players perform we have a reasonable sort of above mid table team. As everybody knows we have a lack of pace at the back which will be shown up from time to time and we do have a big problem having no one who can play the attacking midfield role which can leave our lone striker isolated. I think we will have to accept the defensive shortcomings and trust the experience of our defenders and I am hoping the return of Tabby might help with the central midfield and maybe give the Manager the confidence in his midfield pairing to play 4-4-2. If we really can't get a player in on loan I think we can just about get away with Hunt and either Long or Church up front if we play 4-4-2. If we play with only one striker the attacking midfielder must support the lone striker much better than McAnuff does.
SLAMMED Yawn
2 world wars, 1 world cupSLAMMED Yawn
Yes it is indeed boring to have to point out the bleeding obvious over and over.
Apologies.
Billy The Fish2 world wars, 1 world cupSLAMMED Yawn
Yes it is indeed boring to have to point out the bleeding obvious over and over.
Apologies.
No need to apologise. I quite agree. How many times do we have to experiment with somebody "filling the Sigurdsson role" behind 1 striker. The latest to fail there being McAnuff yesterday. Nobody can fill this role because Sigurdsson is an exceptional player, but Sigurdsson is GONE.
Now I think we have 3 very good wingers, so why on earth are we not playing 442? Start with Kebe and McAnuff (with Antonio to come on for the last 20 minutes against tiring defenders) and Long and Hunt up front. Simples.
Users browsing this forum: Sutekh and 259 guests
