Courtyard Bear 41,357 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 42 minutes ago, graeme_4 said: So if not 3-5-2 or 4-3-3 what are you looking for? 4-4-2 exposes us even more, midfield is powderpuff with 3 CMs nevermind 2. Well if you could read, it would be obvious that I prefer 3-5-2 but until we get better players we won't see that formation at its best. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
VladimirWeiss69 802 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 Would much rather see a 3-5-2 than a 4-3-3 tbh, although we dont have the players to play either system funnily enough, 4-3-3 would work against the lesser teams but it wont against the better teams, it leaves us far too exposed especially with full backs who cant defend! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottyarf37 963 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 Don't have the players to implement a 3 -5- 2 We would include 5 defenders - a holding midfielder. Then leave three attacking players, neither of which have scored more than a handful of goals. It also leaves out our better wingers Mckay, MOH, out the team or out of position. We are then playing right through the middle as teams sit in and watch as we tap it around in front of them.Or have the "fullbacks" send in crosses to a packed penalty area with guys under 6 foot trying to score headers. Agreed we need two up front. But think we need flat back four and a commanding CDM. 4-1-3-2 Depending on opposition the 3 can include two wingers or keep compact and narrow with 2 cm and an Am. Where is Cathro with the laptop for diagrams. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMax399 3,698 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 Yes we should. We regularly get overrun in midfield when we go with 3 in there. I don't for a minute think that we have the ideal players to be totally successful with a 3-5-2, but I definitely feel it will be more beneficial than a 4-3-3. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theulstervolunteer 1,859 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 1 hour ago, In Dungeons Deep said: Maybe not for this season but in the future I could see a system like this working. Then for games in Europe and perhaps Old Firms switch to a 4 at the back formation. EDIT - It's deliberately wonky btw Like it but at the end of the day you need the players capable of playing in it with quality and consistency and the bottom line is we have very few who are capable of that ATM .... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boybluesy 3,708 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 1 hour ago, In Dungeons Deep said: Maybe not for this season but in the future I could see a system like this working. Then for games in Europe and perhaps Old Firms switch to a 4 at the back formation. EDIT - It's deliberately wonky btw Good to see Rossiter in there. Could be back by then. . Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Avenger 22,567 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 Need better quality all round before anything will get better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme_4 34,499 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 2 hours ago, Courtyard Bear said: Well if you could read, it would be obvious that I prefer 3-5-2 but until we get better players we won't see that formation at its best. Read this - DICK. Was just having a discussion about potential formations, but I won't bother in future. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMB 14,167 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 I've championed the 3-5-2 for a while now and I'm glad the manager is trying it. Our wingers/inside forwards have been shite all season. Two forwards up top is something most of our fans have been wanting and I'm certain our full-backs can create the width we need on their own. What we lack is creative attacking players, winners in the midfield, and physicality overall. Hopefully that'll be addressed this window and we'll look much better during the second half of the season. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MillwallLoyal 282 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 2 hours ago, plumbGER said: Your choices bemuse me more every time. Fair enough. Just an opinion, but would select Senderos over Kiernan at the moment , even just for a 2nd look. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Courtyard Bear 41,357 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 26 minutes ago, graeme_4 said: Read this - DICK. Was just having a discussion about potential formations, but I won't bother in future. No need to get angry because your an idiot. ?? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullies_bowly_legs 3,801 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 7 minutes ago, MillwallLoyal said: Fair enough. Just an opinion, but would select Senderos over Kiernan at the moment , even just for a 2nd look. I would like to see him tried again as although disasterous in that game he did ok down south at a far higher standard than here. He's not the first to have a meltdown in his first OF game - remember Fernando and what a great player he became for us. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graeme_4 34,499 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 35 minutes ago, Courtyard Bear said: No need to get angry because your an idiot. ?? If only you knew... And it's "you're". Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronniescu 2,970 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 4 hours ago, Sportingintegritymyarse said: Think it could work. Problem is we don't have 5 capable players to play in midfield. Do we have any? ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronniescu 2,970 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 4 hours ago, Courtyard Bear said: We don't have the players at the moment to implement it properly, but it's still better than 4-3-3. Of course it is. We were good for the first 20 mins in both the St Johnstone AND Celtic games. Even managing relatively early goals. The problem we need to eradicate is the implosion when we concede a goal. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderpig 176 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 We keep talking about bringing players in...but this is what we have and we just don't have the money; maybe with european footy Warbs will get more. With the players we have right now and not injured i would play: 352 Wes Keirnan Hill Wilson Wallace Waggy Windass Halliday Mackay MOH Miller I realise it is a bit ambitious but Wallace could be tried as the holding mid role giving Halliday a chance to see if he can stake a place as an attacking mid....Wallace would supply alot of energy in the position and is quick, i think Waggy is better coming on the ball and not as a target man so if we haven't got the players for target man (Garner) play with pace and movement up front. For me we are easily the second best team in the league and if Warbs does get money he needs to recruit players for the first team and not for the rotating squad system. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesRFC__ 172 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 3 hours ago, DMax399 said: We regularly get overrun in midfield when we go with 3 in there. We'll still have 3 (the same 3 players) in the middle of the park in a 3-5-2 so it's not going to make any difference. 32 minutes ago, Spiderpig said: Wes Keirnan Hill Wilson Wallace Waggy Windass Halliday Mackay MOH Miller The midfield might be bad NOW but fuck me I'd dread to see the state of it with Wallace in there. Literally no point shoehorning a full back in the middle of a park. It was already bad enough watching Tav in there. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMax399 3,698 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 16 minutes ago, JamesRFC__ said: We'll still have 3 (the same 3 players) in the middle of the park in a 3-5-2 so it's not going to make any difference. The midfield might be bad NOW but fuck me I'd dread to see the state of it with Wallace in there. Literally no point shoehorning a full back in the middle of a park. It was already bad enough watching Tav in there. Agreed - our 3 do struggle in the middle. That's why we need to pack it out with 5 to compensate for this. I would also imagine that Wallace would be part of the back 3 mate when fit. This is just my opinion. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
He's blue he's white 717 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 Including everyone assuming fitness. Fod New CB. Hill. Wilson. New RWB. Rossiter. New DM. Wallace. Niko. Mckay. New Striker. Fuck we are really short on quality. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderpig 176 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 45 minutes ago, JamesRFC__ said: We'll still have 3 (the same 3 players) in the middle of the park in a 3-5-2 so it's not going to make any difference. The midfield might be bad NOW but fuck me I'd dread to see the state of it with Wallace in there. Literally no point shoehorning a full back in the middle of a park. It was already bad enough watching Tav in there. TBH i think Tav is better in midfield with Hodson behind him ...he is another that is lacking confidence, most fans are complaining about Halliday but the way we play puts pressure on the defensive players and a lot of 1v1's at the back. Rossiter will be like Crooks and not match fit, so if he isn't playing well fans will just get on his back instead of giving him time, so he will be a sub or one for next year. So for me a defender in that holding spot is better than an attacking mid. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanzmeanzheinz 4,312 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 7 hours ago, bluchoo said: Ok i know we got beat v them and at St Johnstone we drew but for periods in both games i felt we played some of our best stuff this season. The 4-3-3 has been exposed and we are struggleing to break teams down so is it time for a permanent change? Worked wonders for Chelsea since they switched...i know we are not Chelsea but could the change help us 3-5-2:??? Aye, a 3m, 5m and 2m player that still leaves the mendacious man with 20m change Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddybear123 215 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 6 hours ago, In Dungeons Deep said: Maybe not for this season but in the future I could see a system like this working. Then for games in Europe and perhaps Old Firms switch to a 4 at the back formation. EDIT - It's deliberately wonky btw Tbh I'm not sure Wallace would be able to play there in that system. He makes some good attacking runs and has a decent end product but in that system the wide men have to be able to beat a man Imo. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIRB_72 4,000 Posted January 4, 2017 Share Posted January 4, 2017 Yes, or 343. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billythebear77 10,386 Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 7 hours ago, MillwallLoyal said: As a plan A.. Yes. Would like to see this line-up.. FODERINGHAM SENDEROS - HILL - WALLACE ROSSITER/CROOKS TAVERNIER - WINDASS - FORRESTER - MCKAY WAGHORN - GARNER Senderos Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thewhitesettler 2,711 Posted January 5, 2017 Share Posted January 5, 2017 12 hours ago, ForeverAndEver said: I'd rather shit in my hands and clap than see Senderos play for us again. I'd like to see him given another chance. If Hill gets injured, and Kiernan gets a 3-5 match ban, we'll need to play him. Just to see if he can redeem himself within the club. If I was him I'd be desperate for a chance to show everyone that I'm not the bottler that performed against the Tims. I'd hope that he'd be picked, because of what he's shown in training, rather than because he's our only choice.? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.