MATCHWATCH : Charlton Athletic (a)

[Snowflake Royal]

People putting far too much emphasis on the formation, rather than the system itself. Perhaps our pressing traps are wrong, or not being done correctly? Allowing teams to play percentage balls into awkward areas under little pressure, or maybe the midfielders don't work hard enough to cover the spaces left by full backs? That's not to say this is the case, more just an example of the point being made.

The formation is just short hand for the system.

They are not the same thing though, as every manager says. 4-4-2 or 4-2-2-2 you're talking a difference of 5 yards in terms of set up on paper, we could play a 4-4-2 which would make us no better whatsoever because that's not what the system is.

[Hound]

I get Ian’s point - whether it’s 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 the issue is that we are playing too narrow

I think that’s a reasonable assessment. It annoys me a bit when Twitter etc just keep ranting about 4-2-2-2 as though just changing to 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would make a world of difference. As you say YR it won’t. Not without changing the personnel and significantly their roles

Too much noise about the formation and not enough on why we can’t finish, can’t keep a clean sheet or crumble the minute we go one down

[WestYorksRoyal]

I get Ian’s point - whether it’s 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 the issue is that we are playing too narrow

I think that’s a reasonable assessment. It annoys me a bit when Twitter etc just keep ranting about 4-2-2-2 as though just changing to 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would make a world of difference. As you say YR it won’t. Not without changing the personnel and significantly their roles

Too much noise about the formation and not enough on why we can’t finish, can’t keep a clean sheet or crumble the minute we go one down

I get that 4231 will still be weak down the flanks if the wide men aren't trained to track back. But that's semantics; you can call it system or formation but it stems from Selles. And it's a big reason why we don't keep clean sheets. How many times do opening goals come from a cross we don't stop because we're asking too much of our full backs? Opener on Saturday, Cambridge's winner and the move that led to Blackpool's opening penalty for starters from my memory.

[Hound]

4-2-3-1 in itself is barely any different from 4-2-2-2. In fact when Vickers has played up too it’s been more like 4-2-3-1 anyway imo

But yeah too much stress on the FBs. If they were really good it may be ok, think Yiadom with his experience could cope. Maybe Mbengue due to his quality and pace as well. None of the others yet

[Royal_jimmy]

I get Ian’s point - whether it’s 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 the issue is that we are playing too narrow

I think that’s a reasonable assessment. It annoys me a bit when Twitter etc just keep ranting about 4-2-2-2 as though just changing to 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would make a world of difference. As you say YR it won’t. Not without changing the personnel and significantly their roles

Too much noise about the formation and not enough on why we can’t finish, can’t keep a clean sheet or crumble the minute we go one down

I get that 4231 will still be weak down the flanks if the wide men aren't trained to track back. But that's semantics; you can call it system or formation but it stems from Selles. And it's a big reason why we don't keep clean sheets. How many times do opening goals come from a cross we don't stop because we're asking too much of our full backs? Opener on Saturday, Cambridge's winner and the move that led to Blackpool's opening penalty for starters from my memory.

Port Vale's winner was another and Peterborough's goal at our place plus Bolton's opening goal came down the flank

[CountryRoyal]

I get Ian’s point - whether it’s 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 the issue is that we are playing too narrow

I think that’s a reasonable assessment. It annoys me a bit when Twitter etc just keep ranting about 4-2-2-2 as though just changing to 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would make a world of difference. As you say YR it won’t. Not without changing the personnel and significantly their roles

Too much noise about the formation and not enough on why we can’t finish, can’t keep a clean sheet or crumble the minute we go one down

I get that 4231 will still be weak down the flanks if the wide men aren't trained to track back. But that's semantics; you can call it system or formation but it stems from Selles. And it's a big reason why we don't keep clean sheets. How many times do opening goals come from a cross we don't stop because we're asking too much of our full backs? Opener on Saturday, Cambridge's winner and the move that led to Blackpool's opening penalty for starters from my memory.

Most goals in this league come from crosses which makes the whole reluctance to play with any width in attack or defence, all the more baffling.

[URZZZZ]

There's a reason that through the years 4-4-2 has been popular.

It's simple, it's fairly rigid and everyone's responsibilities and play is fairly clearly defined.

Unfortunately, we now have a generation of coaches who all want to play like Barcelona or Real Madrid and are incapable of recognising that to play any form of fluid total football, your players need to be excellent decision makers, fairly smart, and significantly better than most of your opposition, when this simply isn't the case outside the top 6 or 7 clubs in the country.

This all over

We were the better side on Saturday up until their first but what did that translate to? A few pot shots and a couple of set plays. For all the intricate passing in and around the box, Charlton scored with one pass out wide, being direct out wide and a simple cross and header

Football is a very simple game and yet we have manager after manager who try and overcomplicate it. Have any of our managers since Adkins ventured back into English football (as manager) since leaving here? Reason for that perhaps

[URZZZZ]

4-2-3-1 in itself is barely any different from 4-2-2-2. In fact when Vickers has played up too it’s been more like 4-2-3-1 anyway imo

But yeah too much stress on the FBs. If they were really good it may be ok, think Yiadom with his experience could cope. Maybe Mbengue due to his quality and pace as well. None of the others yet

Our FB’s/WB’s have been a weak point for years. Don’t contribute offensively and part of a back line that can’t keep a clean sheet to save their life

It makes the continuing “philosophy” of trying to play narrow with the width solely coming from the fullbacks even more ridiculous

[Hound]

There's a reason that through the years 4-4-2 has been popular.

It's simple, it's fairly rigid and everyone's responsibilities and play is fairly clearly defined.

Unfortunately, we now have a generation of coaches who all want to play like Barcelona or Real Madrid and are incapable of recognising that to play any form of fluid total football, your players need to be excellent decision makers, fairly smart, and significantly better than most of your opposition, when this simply isn't the case outside the top 6 or 7 clubs in the country.

This all over

We were the better side on Saturday up until their first but what did that translate to? A few pot shots and a couple of set plays. For all the intricate passing in and around the box, Charlton scored with one pass out wide, being direct out wide and a simple cross and header

Football is a very simple game and yet we have manager after manager who try and overcomplicate it. Have any of our managers since Adkins ventured back into English football (as manager) since leaving here? Reason for that perhaps

Could have an interesting* discussion on this

Found myself having the same argument in youth football where coaches were confusing kids with funky formations to seemingly strike their own ego rather than keep it simple

But really professional footballers should be able to deal with different formations than 4-4-2. It is simple but then its rigidity also makes it pretty simple to counter and defend against . You can overload the centre by playing 3 in there or a diamond when in possession - you need to have some flexibility

Not saying Selles system is correct but don’t think football is quite as simple as that at that level.

Anyway as mentioned really don’t buy a lot into whether the formation itself is correct, it’s the personnel having the quality and making least mistakes that makes the most difference. And we’re making tons

[Sutekh]

There's a reason that through the years 4-4-2 has been popular.

It's simple, it's fairly rigid and everyone's responsibilities and play is fairly clearly defined.

Unfortunately, we now have a generation of coaches who all want to play like Barcelona or Real Madrid and are incapable of recognising that to play any form of fluid total football, your players need to be excellent decision makers, fairly smart, and significantly better than most of your opposition, when this simply isn't the case outside the top 6 or 7 clubs in the country.

This all over

We were the better side on Saturday up until their first but what did that translate to? A few pot shots and a couple of set plays. For all the intricate passing in and around the box, Charlton scored with one pass out wide, being direct out wide and a simple cross and header

Football is a very simple game and yet we have manager after manager who try and overcomplicate it. Have any of our managers since Adkins ventured back into English football (as manager) since leaving here? Reason for that perhaps

Absolutely agree. It's a simple game so PLEASE STOP EMPLOYING THESE "HEAD COACH" TYPES WHO ALL WANT TO TRY AND RE-INVENT THE GAME IN PLAYING TEDIOUS OVER COMPLICATED CONTINENTAL CR@P, JUST BECAUSE THEY WANT TO MAKE A NAME FOR THEMSELVES, AND RETURN TO GOOD OLD FASHIONED UNCOMPLICATED FOOTBALL.

[Hound]

There's a reason that through the years 4-4-2 has been popular.

It's simple, it's fairly rigid and everyone's responsibilities and play is fairly clearly defined.

Unfortunately, we now have a generation of coaches who all want to play like Barcelona or Real Madrid and are incapable of recognising that to play any form of fluid total football, your players need to be excellent decision makers, fairly smart, and significantly better than most of your opposition, when this simply isn't the case outside the top 6 or 7 clubs in the country.

This all over

We were the better side on Saturday up until their first but what did that translate to? A few pot shots and a couple of set plays. For all the intricate passing in and around the box, Charlton scored with one pass out wide, being direct out wide and a simple cross and header

Football is a very simple game and yet we have manager after manager who try and overcomplicate it. Have any of our managers since Adkins ventured back into English football (as manager) since leaving here? Reason for that perhaps

Absolutely agree. It's a simple game so PLEASE STOP EMPLOYING THESE "HEAD COACH" TYPES WHO ALL WANT TO TRY AND RE-INVENT THE GAME IN PLAYING TEDIOUS OVER COMPLICATED CONTINENTAL CR@P, JUST BECAUSE THEY WANT TO MAKE A NAME FOR THEMSELVES, AND RETURN TO GOOD OLD FASHIONED UNCOMPLICATED FOOTBALL.

Urgh ‘Good old fashioned’. Awful phrase

Remember when English teams first went back into Europe and got destroyed tactically by anyone half decent?

That’s what would happen if teams went ‘good old fashioned’ again.

Wasn’t Ince playing ‘good old fashioned’ 4-4-2 last season? And that was fun

[Sutekh]

4-2-3-1 in itself is barely any different from 4-2-2-2. In fact when Vickers has played up too it’s been more like 4-2-3-1 anyway imo

But yeah too much stress on the FBs. If they were really good it may be ok, think Yiadom with his experience could cope. Maybe Mbengue due to his quality and pace as well. None of the others yet

Our FB’s/WB’s have been a weak point for years. Don’t contribute offensively and part of a back line that can’t keep a clean sheet to save their life

It makes the continuing “philosophy” of trying to play narrow with the width solely coming from the fullbacks even more ridiculous

Would agree, I actually like full backs to be wing/full backs and be on the pitch to primarily defend and sneakily appear supporting an attack on occasion not become the "everything" that a team needs to be, to be effective. Fine to try if you're a top division team able to bring in some of the fittest and very best talent around the planet but really stupid to do with a load of kids and "lesser" players in the lower divisions.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

I get Ian’s point - whether it’s 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 the issue is that we are playing too narrow

I think that’s a reasonable assessment. It annoys me a bit when Twitter etc just keep ranting about 4-2-2-2 as though just changing to 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would make a world of difference. As you say YR it won’t. Not without changing the personnel and significantly their roles

Too much noise about the formation and not enough on why we can’t finish, can’t keep a clean sheet or crumble the minute we go one down

We are so narrow because we have 2 wide players who like to play/cut inside onto their stronger foot, it effectively bottlenecks 4 players (including the 2 strikers) into a tight area where the opposition can just sit 4-6 players in and keep it tight, it plays into a defensive teams' hand.

A lot of demand on the full backs to cover far too much ground, their starting position is too far away for them to get up and down. I'd like to know what their "running" stats have been for the season e.g. distance run, sprints etc, or probably more importantly what Selles wants them to be.

[WestYorksRoyal]

I get Ian’s point - whether it’s 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 the issue is that we are playing too narrow

I think that’s a reasonable assessment. It annoys me a bit when Twitter etc just keep ranting about 4-2-2-2 as though just changing to 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would make a world of difference. As you say YR it won’t. Not without changing the personnel and significantly their roles

Too much noise about the formation and not enough on why we can’t finish, can’t keep a clean sheet or crumble the minute we go one down

We are so narrow because we have 2 wide players who like to play/cut inside onto their stronger foot, it effectively bottlenecks 4 players (including the 2 strikers) into a tight area where the opposition can just sit 4-6 players in and keep it tight, it plays into a defensive teams' hand.

A lot of demand on the full backs to cover far too much ground, their starting position is too far away for them to get up and down. I'd like to know what their "running" stats have been for the season e.g. distance run, sprints etc, or probably more importantly what Selles wants them to be.

I don't watch closely enough; how do teams like Liverpool make inverted wingers work? Trent in particular is not one you'd want exposed against top class wingers. I think the top clubs demand more work from their wingers to cover.

We're not getting that, meaning either the players aren't being asked to do it, or they're not following instructions. Given they keep getting picked, I'm assuming the former.

[YorkshireRoyal99]

I get Ian’s point - whether it’s 4-2-2-2 or 4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1 the issue is that we are playing too narrow

I think that’s a reasonable assessment. It annoys me a bit when Twitter etc just keep ranting about 4-2-2-2 as though just changing to 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 would make a world of difference. As you say YR it won’t. Not without changing the personnel and significantly their roles

Too much noise about the formation and not enough on why we can’t finish, can’t keep a clean sheet or crumble the minute we go one down

We are so narrow because we have 2 wide players who like to play/cut inside onto their stronger foot, it effectively bottlenecks 4 players (including the 2 strikers) into a tight area where the opposition can just sit 4-6 players in and keep it tight, it plays into a defensive teams' hand.

A lot of demand on the full backs to cover far too much ground, their starting position is too far away for them to get up and down. I'd like to know what their "running" stats have been for the season e.g. distance run, sprints etc, or probably more importantly what Selles wants them to be.

I don't watch closely enough; how do teams like Liverpool make inverted wingers work? Trent in particular is not one you'd want exposed against top class wingers. I think the top clubs demand more work from their wingers to cover.

We're not getting that, meaning either the players aren't being asked to do it, or they're not following instructions. Given they keep getting picked, I'm assuming the former.

Liverpool press more aggressively up the pitch and they (used to) have the likes of Henderson and Wijnaldum who used to cover the spaces left by Robertson and TAA, where both full backs would regularly cover ridiculous amounts of distances per game as well.

[Hound]

Not sure how much to actually read into this but flicked back through the heat maps on all our games this season as they basically look identical to the opposition. Ie majority of possession down the flanks when attacking

A couple of games we have more possession centrally than tbe opposition going forward but these we games we were fairly dominant in so to be expected

Again just think the whole formation thing really is overblown, and this makes me think more so

[Hound]

We are so narrow because we have 2 wide players who like to play/cut inside onto their stronger foot, it effectively bottlenecks 4 players (including the 2 strikers) into a tight area where the opposition can just sit 4-6 players in and keep it tight, it plays into a defensive teams' hand.

A lot of demand on the full backs to cover far too much ground, their starting position is too far away for them to get up and down. I'd like to know what their "running" stats have been for the season e.g. distance run, sprints etc, or probably more importantly what Selles wants them to be.

I don't watch closely enough; how do teams like Liverpool make inverted wingers work? Trent in particular is not one you'd want exposed against top class wingers. I think the top clubs demand more work from their wingers to cover.

We're not getting that, meaning either the players aren't being asked to do it, or they're not following instructions. Given they keep getting picked, I'm assuming the former.

Liverpool press more aggressively up the pitch and they (used to) have the likes of Henderson and Wijnaldum who used to cover the spaces left by Robertson and TAA, where both full backs would regularly cover ridiculous amounts of distances per game as well.

Wasn’t that one of the main issues Liverpool had last year - Trent being left one on one against a winger? Think they solved it by basically moving him to midfield and putting a better defender at RB

[Wycombe Royal]

I think in League 1 "good old fashioned" can and does work. We have conceded so many goals to teams who get the ball out wide and then get it into the box. Our full backs are quite often no where to be seen, either still up on the halfway line or playing too centrally. We are so open to counter attacks.

Our best season of football we have ever seen was a good old fashioned 442. It relied on having two central midfillders who worked tirelessy, two excellent wide players, full back who could do the overlap and still get back to defend, and two strikers who were a pertnership. The beauty of it also was that we had back ups who could fill in seamlessly.

Unfortuntely we don't have the players to do this.

[WestYorksRoyal]

Not sure how much to actually read into this but flicked back through the heat maps on all our games this season as they basically look identical to the opposition. Ie majority of possession down the flanks when attacking

A couple of games we have more possession centrally than tbe opposition going forward but these we games we were fairly dominant in so to be expected

Again just think the whole formation thing really is overblown, and this makes me think more so

Maybe I'm coming round to this. Most of our away losses have big misses at 0-0 or 1-0 down that could change the game. Knibbs' free header at Charlton on Saturday at 0-0. Knibbs' 1 on 1 at Orient at 1-1. Knibbs' last minute miss at Cambridge.

Moving on to other culprits, Azeez hitting the post against Exeter at 1-1, the save from Vickers at Northampton when 1-0 down. The winner we conceded at Orient was a goalkeeping howler.

Of course, contriving to find a new way to lose every week and collapsing when things go against us is infinitely harder to solve than tactical issues.

[URZZZZ]

This all over

We were the better side on Saturday up until their first but what did that translate to? A few pot shots and a couple of set plays. For all the intricate passing in and around the box, Charlton scored with one pass out wide, being direct out wide and a simple cross and header

Football is a very simple game and yet we have manager after manager who try and overcomplicate it. Have any of our managers since Adkins ventured back into English football (as manager) since leaving here? Reason for that perhaps

Absolutely agree. It's a simple game so PLEASE STOP EMPLOYING THESE "HEAD COACH" TYPES WHO ALL WANT TO TRY AND RE-INVENT THE GAME IN PLAYING TEDIOUS OVER COMPLICATED CONTINENTAL CR@P, JUST BECAUSE THEY WANT TO MAKE A NAME FOR THEMSELVES, AND RETURN TO GOOD OLD FASHIONED UNCOMPLICATED FOOTBALL.

Urgh ‘Good old fashioned’. Awful phrase

Remember when English teams first went back into Europe and got destroyed tactically by anyone half decent?

That’s what would happen if teams went ‘good old fashioned’ again.

Wasn’t Ince playing ‘good old fashioned’ 4-4-2 last season? And that was fun

Don’t recall Ince using 4-4-2. Was that turgid 5-3-2

Anyway, think your point is somewhat moot in terms of where we are. We’re not in Europe trying to compete with the elite. We’re playing Fleetwood and Carlisle