Formation

[plymouthranger 4,323]

What is it with managers (seemingly always ones we employ), being completely unwilling to change formation to adapt to the squad we have. 
 

Persisting with a 4-2-3-1 is madness when we have one CF who has no link up play and no fit wide players with any pace. It screams of shoehorning players into positions, because of a stubbornness to change formation to react to injuries or how an opposition will line up.

Even Graham fucking Murty changed to a diamond in the middle when we had injuries and a lack of wide options. If we’d looked at this or a 3-5-2, it solves a lot of our problems…

CF who can’t play up top by himself? Give him another CF to play with.

No wide players barring the fullbacks? Pack the midfield and free Jefte and Tav to focus on attacking rather than being a back 4.

No control of the midfield? Drop a 10 and compensate for the fact we don’t have a CDM by adding another runner in there. 
 

Am I being too simplistic here? Sunday League managers would spot the above, why can’t Clement?  

[.Williamson. 88,020]

Didn’t read. Need new manager 

[JackAlex93 12,864]

Formation isn't working. The idiot in the dugout keeps persisting with it though. 

[Laudrupsleftfoot 12,475]

We play with three at the back when building possession, Barron continually drops between the two centre halves.

And we play or have played 4-4-2 out of possession.

4-2-3-1 in of itself is so far down the list of issues, it’s how we’re coached within that formation and generally that’s the far bigger problem.

He talks a lot about players getting used to the ‘automation’ but we’re not seeing any consistent automated patterns of play. Not good ones anyway.

 

[Colin Traive 24,022]

Formation irrelevant when players appear to have no idea what their job is.

Killie effectively played 4-2-4 with Kennedy and Armstrong making it 4-4-2 when threatened. Structured yet flexible.

The formation didn’t win the game - it was the organisation, the clarity of purpose and the superior mentality.

In our current state, no formation can help us.

[Blues Brother 1,150]

When you think back to our most successful years, we’ve played with 2 strikers.

McCoist & Fleck

McCoist & Drinkell

Johnston & Hateley

McCoist & Hateley

Wallace & Amato

Novo & Prso

Boyd & Miller 

Now we have Dessers, who can’t hold the ball up and can’t run the channels. He must see that Dessers does not have the attributes to play up on his own. 
I’m sure he won’t change it. Looking at the game yesterday, I can’t believe he didn’t change it.

[NeoGeo7 11,375]

1 minute ago, Blues Brother said:

When you think back to our most successful years, we’ve played with 2 strikers.

McCoist & Fleck

McCoist & Drinkell

Johnston & Hateley

McCoist & Hateley

Wallace & Amato

Novo & Prso

Boyd & Miller 

Now we have Dessers, who can’t hold the ball up and can’t run the channels. He must see that Dessers does not have the attributes to play up on his own. 
I’m sure he won’t change it. Looking at the game yesterday, I can’t believe he didn’t change it.

Modern football is obsessed with the 4-2-3-1 but clement didn’t even want to go to 2 up top in the game yesterday. Does my fucking nut in when managers refuse to move from their system especially when their system is horseshit and doesn’t work.

[Laudrupsleftfoot 12,475]

4 minutes ago, Blues Brother said:

When you think back to our most successful years, we’ve played with 2 strikers.

McCoist & Fleck

McCoist & Drinkell

Johnston & Hateley

McCoist & Hateley

Wallace & Amato

Novo & Prso

Boyd & Miller 

Now we have Dessers, who can’t hold the ball up and can’t run the channels. He must see that Dessers does not have the attributes to play up on his own. 
I’m sure he won’t change it. Looking at the game yesterday, I can’t believe he didn’t change it.

It’s mental to me that people keep harking back to 4-4-2.

Nearly every team used to play 4-4-2 - the game’s moved on.

[NeoGeo7 11,375]

5 minutes ago, Laudrupsleftfoot said:

It’s mental to me that people keep harking back to 4-4-2.

Nearly every team used to play 4-4-2 - the game’s moved on.

He said two up top. That could be a 3-5-2 or a 5-3-2 or 4-1-3-2, of 4–4-2 diamond….its not just 4-4-2 it’s having a striking partner for Dessers because he’s not a good lone striker.

[Blues Brother 1,150]

9 minutes ago, Laudrupsleftfoot said:

It’s mental to me that people keep harking back to 4-4-2.

Nearly every team used to play 4-4-2 - the game’s moved on.

The team we lost to yesterday played 442. 

[Laudrupsleftfoot 12,475]

2 minutes ago, Blues Brother said:

The team we lost to yesterday played 442. 

You can’t be using them and that approach to football as the benchmark for a club like us.

[Blues Brother 1,150]

1 minute ago, Laudrupsleftfoot said:

You can’t be using them and that approach to football as the benchmark for a club like us.

Of course not. But if we matched up against them I’m sure we would have caused them more problems than we did. 

[Loyal72 14,230]

1 hour ago, .Williamson. said:

Didn’t read. Need new manager 

This. What's the fucking point?

Bin BBB and try again.

[kris1984 1,591]

1 hour ago, Colin Traive said:

Formation irrelevant when players appear to have no idea what their job is.

Killie effectively played 4-2-4 with Kennedy and Armstrong making it 4-4-2 when threatened. Structured yet flexible.

The formation didn’t win the game - it was the organisation, the clarity of purpose and the superior mentality.

In our current state, no formation can help us.

This is it, we appear 4-4-2 out of possession. The only other team I see doing this is Man Utd, who are also shite.

Were so easy to play around. It’s like the press isn’t by instructions/ training. It’s like players just decide on fly. It’s all over the shop, we get stretched way too easy.

We also sometimes invert the wide players but don’t appear setup for full backs bombing on. Just Barron to sometimes cover. 
 

All over the place and don’t have players to do whatever it’s supposed to be. Eye bleeding to watch.

[MayboleLoyal_atb 4,138]

Raskin for Barron on the hour mark when chasing a goal was a real game changing sub 

[Super Ally Scores Again! 531]

2 minutes ago, MayboleLoyal_atb said:

Raskin for Barron on the hour mark when chasing a goal was a real game changing sub 

The bench yesterday was awful

Wasnt one game changer that could have come on

I’d have started Raskin over Diomande

[MayboleLoyal_atb 4,138]

Just now, Super Ally Scores Again! said:

The bench yesterday was awful

Wasnt one game changer that could have come on

I’d have started Raskin over Diomande

I can see him starting Raskin over Barron on Thursday tbh

[Ivybank 4,909]

3 minutes ago, MayboleLoyal_atb said:

Raskin for Barron on the hour mark when chasing a goal was a real game changing sub 

I detest raskin with a passion ,his 10 ft pass to the opposition sums him up 

2 years of wasted wages 

[bluenoz 32,789]

Barron is quite often deeper than the CHs. We have deployed this tactic for years with different managers. It's boring, tippy-tappy stuff out of defence only for Clement to state stats where we have all the possession. But the fact is, we virtually do nothing and go nowhere.

He is not a creative manager and is unable to change formations that would better complement the players available to him.

[Ross-Gazza genius 2,065]

I think he needs to try something different as well. We have no width or anyone capable of actually being effective wide. Going by what we have I'd go to a 3-5-2, but even when i started typing a team out it was depressing as fuck. 

[NixonRFC 1,641]

4 hours ago, plymouthranger said:

What is it with managers (seemingly always ones we employ), being completely unwilling to change formation to adapt to the squad we have. 
 

Persisting with a 4-2-3-1 is madness when we have one CF who has no link up play and no fit wide players with any pace. It screams of shoehorning players into positions, because of a stubbornness to change formation to react to injuries or how an opposition will line up.

Even Graham fucking Murty changed to a diamond in the middle when we had injuries and a lack of wide options. If we’d looked at this or a 3-5-2, it solves a lot of our problems…

CF who can’t play up top by himself? Give him another CF to play with.

No wide players barring the fullbacks? Pack the midfield and free Jefte and Tav to focus on attacking rather than being a back 4.

No control of the midfield? Drop a 10 and compensate for the fact we don’t have a CDM by adding another runner in there. 
 

Am I being too simplistic here? Sunday League managers would spot the above, why can’t Clement?  

Nope, you're spot on, the problem is modern coaches, they've been taught never to compromise their beliefs, it's not just Clement or any other guys we hire, it seems to be everyone.

There'll always be an exception to the rule somewhere, Gio was quite good at changing it mid game, but he came through the Dutch system where every player had to learn multiple positions, so that was coached into him from a very young age, but on the whole, modern managers just never deviate from their preferred system, which seems to be a carbon copy of everyone elses all over Europe.

[SIRB_72 4,177]

To be fair we dont even have enough strikers to play this

[NeoGeo7 11,375]

14 minutes ago, Ross-Gazza genius said:

I think he needs to try something different as well. We have no width or anyone capable of actually being effective wide. Going by what we have I'd go to a 3-5-2, but even when i started typing a team out it was depressing as fuck. 

right footer on the right, left footer on the left, hit the byeline cross for 3 in the box and winger at the far post.

Danillo comes back and put him up top with Igmane.

[born a blue nose 93,162]

Formation means nothing if you're no drilled into the with n without possession of it. 

Best football we've played in recent times and the best weve been against them was the 433 with inverted forwards, tav and borna overlapping. But the forwards all knew when to press, no just press high. 

A seen cerny run round dessers yesterday and chase the ball all the way over to the left wing at one point  it's so disjointed it's laughable. Its all jargon but it feels like theres nae triggers or second press or fuck all, we just chase the baw a bit n if we dont get it hope for the best. 

Thats before you even start on build up play, it's non existent. 

[ForeverAndEver 74,173]

Any formation or team that has Dessers starting should be laughed at