Stitch_KTF Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I would implement a change of formation tonight and trial a genuine 433. ________Fleming Lee Hazell Gregan Lomax __Eardley Maher Taylor __Davies Windass Hughes Subs – Bell, Stambo, Whittaker, Liddell, Allessandra I think it’s fair to say that 2 combative players are required in a midfield 3 lacking wingbacks, therefore in Ratters absence Eards steps up to the midfield. This is hardly a square peg in a round hole….I reckon he would remind a few what a good player he can be, after all, playing here he is likely to be too high up the pitch to be ‘hoofing’ it long all the time! I have never seen Lee at fullback but by many accounts he can play there. I’d have Lee on the right as he is more likely to get forward then Lomax who I prefer behind the attack minded Chris Taylor, who is naturally keeping Whittaker out of the side. Despite Taylor's energy and work-rate maybe he and Lee on the left side would be a little gung-ho whilst Eards and Lomax together on the right a little defensive. Maher doesn’t cross halfway. Windass becomes the focal point of the attack, I’d instruct the midfield to be hitting him as directly and as often as possible whilst Taylor in particular runs on to join in. I believe the pace of Davies gives the defence a variety of worries and I hope that his attitude approach will have improved vastly (maybe playing with 2 significantly better players, and after being farmed out on loan, he might give up trying to do it all himself and actually move the ball on). Hughesy I want roaming, dropping off and dragging defenders around like he does. However Hughesy and Windass ought to be changing around throughout, playing off each other and taking advantage of the pace of Davies constantly pushing their defence deep. Actually, I think I’d want all three interchanging and asking different questions right across their back 4. Another option would be to include Alless for Davies. He’d probably slot in just behind the front 2 changing the shape slightly. That could be better and allows for Alless to drop back and make it a midfield 4 with Eardley and Taylor wide when required. I think ultimately my choice would be based on Hartlepool personal and tactics which I know little about. Above all we need a change of approach tonight whatever that may be. Hartlepool will be coming expecting the same 442 and confident of being the latest team to spoil our play and take home a point. An attacking 4-3-3, albeit with a ‘direct’ approach, could be just the ticket for us. We want to be playing our nice football in the final third – that’s how to score goals at home! Of course it would have to be hammered home to not just hit long aimless balls up to Deano – this isn’t Alan Shearer. Hopefully our ‘footballing’ defenders wouldn’t do this anyway but past evidence suggest otherwise. The ball needs to be zipped into his feet and chest from the midfield, same goes for Hughesy. There lies the key. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beag_teeets Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I'd keep Eardley at right back and put Lee in the middle. If we are going to change formation I would rather it be built on as solid a back 5 as we can manage and have the "experiment" in front of that. No point having Hazell having to coax Lee through a game at right back when we have a player more used to playing there on the pitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kellysheroes Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I would implement a change of formation tonight and trial a genuine 433. ________Fleming Lee Hazell Gregan Lomax __Eardley Maher Taylor __Davies Windass Hughes Subs – Bell, Stambo, Whittaker, Liddell, Allessandra I think it’s fair to say that 2 combative players are required in a midfield 3 lacking wingbacks, therefore in Ratters absence Eards steps up to the midfield. This is hardly a square peg in a round hole….I reckon he would remind a few what a good player he can be, after all, playing here he is likely to be too high up the pitch to be ‘hoofing’ it long all the time! I have never seen Lee at fullback but by many accounts he can play there. I’d have Lee on the right as he is more likely to get forward then Lomax who I prefer behind the attack minded Chris Taylor, who is naturally keeping Whittaker out of the side. Despite Taylor's energy and work-rate maybe he and Lee on the left side would be a little gung-ho whilst Eards and Lomax together on the right a little defensive. Maher doesn’t cross halfway. Windass becomes the focal point of the attack, I’d instruct the midfield to be hitting him as directly and as often as possible whilst Taylor in particular runs on to join in. I believe the pace of Davies gives the defence a variety of worries and I hope that his attitude approach will have improved vastly (maybe playing with 2 significantly better players, and after being farmed out on loan, he might give up trying to do it all himself and actually move the ball on). Hughesy I want roaming, dropping off and dragging defenders around like he does. However Hughesy and Windass ought to be changing around throughout, playing off each other and taking advantage of the pace of Davies constantly pushing their defence deep. Actually, I think I’d want all three interchanging and asking different questions right across their back 4. Another option would be to include Alless for Davies. He’d probably slot in just behind the front 2 changing the shape slightly. That could be better and allows for Alless to drop back and make it a midfield 4 with Eardley and Taylor wide when required. I think ultimately my choice would be based on Hartlepool personal and tactics which I know little about. Above all we need a change of approach tonight whatever that may be. Hartlepool will be coming expecting the same 442 and confident of being the latest team to spoil our play and take home a point. An attacking 4-3-3, albeit with a ‘direct’ approach, could be just the ticket for us. We want to be playing our nice football in the final third – that’s how to score goals at home! Of course it would have to be hammered home to not just hit long aimless balls up to Deano – this isn’t Alan Shearer. Hopefully our ‘footballing’ defenders wouldn’t do this anyway but past evidence suggest otherwise. The ball needs to be zipped into his feet and chest from the midfield, same goes for Hughesy. There lies the key. like it, but if davies is dropped AGAIN then id like to see what his attitude would be like in the future Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Not sure on the validity of the claim but the Evening News reckoned on Friday that Shez would go Byfield,Hughes and Davies up front. If true it's just replacing Byfield with Windass. If it is true Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daznathe Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 wont work, hughes is too slow for the double job he would be doing there. flemming eardley stam ruuuuuuuuuuuuuubes lomax lee maher whittaker taylor hughes davies bench windass deano greegs liddell stephens Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch_KTF Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) I'd keep Eardley at right back and put Lee in the middle. If we are going to change formation I would rather it be built on as solid a back 5 as we can manage and have the "experiment" in front of that. No point having Hazell having to coax Lee through a game at right back when we have a player more used to playing there on the pitch. Can certainly see your reasoning I just think Lee, Maher and Taylor could be a bit lightweight for a 3. Plus I'm keen to see Eards back in the midfield. If I was to keep Eardley at rightback I'd maybe prefer Whitts (or even the all action Stephens?) to Lee in a 3. like it, but if davies is dropped AGAIN then id like to see what his attitude would be like in the future Craig needs to regain his place before he can be dropped again. wont work, hughes is too slow for the double job he would be doing there. Huh? Edited January 12, 2009 by Stitch_KTF Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldhamSheridan Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 When I watched them at Fleetwood they had one basic problem. They couldn't defend the long aimless punts upfield. I predict a 15-0 win with Windass our leading scorer after one game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davegtt Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I think it lacks width personally. If you look at Eardley and Taylor to push wide then we will get run over through the middle, Lomax is hardly the type of Full Back I see getting forward often enough, he prefers someone infront of him to hoof it over his head when they pass it back. Still not seen Lee play so Im not going to comment but from my understanding of his game Id agree with swapping him for Eardley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) When I watched them at Fleetwood they had one basic problem. They couldn't defend the long aimless punts upfield. I predict a 15-0 win with Windass our leading scorer after one game. IS Allott banned for this one? Team will include Davies out wide right with Deano and Hughes up front. please... Edited January 12, 2009 by TheBigDog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daznathe Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 playing on either side of a front three, you have to fill in in midfield when the other team have the ball. you also have to be a winger, so its actually three jobs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davegtt Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 playing on either side of a front three, you have to fill in in midfield when the other team have the ball. you also have to be a winger, so its actually three jobs. Exactly, and we dont want Hughes or Windass to be wasted in that position, theyre here to score goals. Imagine the space we are going to create with the movement these two alone upfront will make. someone like Allot making the runs through the centre to expose them to will create havoc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) Troublel is many of you are forgetting one thing, he has hardly played at all this season, about 90 minsutes since August 08. So needs to get match fit Off the subs bench, I think Edited January 12, 2009 by singe Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldhamSheridan Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Trouble is many of you are forgetting one thing, he has hardly played at all this season, about 90 minutes since August 08. So needs to get match fit Off the subs bench, I think Nah, starts and scores fourteen goals before breaking the land speed record on his bicycle on his way home is how it will go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch_KTF Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 playing on either side of a front three, you have to fill in in midfield when the other team have the ball. you also have to be a winger, so its actually three jobs. I'm not sure you do whilst playing 'all out attack' at home in an effort to finally break a team down. Hughes isn't playing as a winger - we aren't using them. If they want to commit the men forward to exploit this then, in my opinion, they have played into our hands. The width argument is fair enough, although a lack of width is a limitation of the system as a whole. In this system the attacking focus comes elsewhere. Different systems, different pros, different cons! If you want width play a different system, maybe a 451, not a GENUINE 433 as I suggested. Still, I appreciate and value your contributions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daznathe Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 thank you. its the aim of this board afterall. ill therefore add that i reckon we'd be overrun, if i was doing it id go for my same team but line them up as so flemming eardley stam ruuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuubes lomax lee maher whittaker davies hughes taylor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kellys_discopants Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Fleming Eards Lomax Hazell Gregan Davies (rm) Taylor (lm) Maher Lee Windass Hughes Subs: Stam Liddell Whitts Lewi Smalley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dkenyonqfc2 Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Fleming Eards Lomax Hazell Gregan Davies (rm) Taylor (lm) Maher Lee Windass Hughes Subs: Stam Liddell Whitts Lewi Smalley. looks good i would love to see lee in centre mid,or possibly as a full back as posted earlier but he not mentioned in the squad on os anyone know why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 Nah, starts and scores fourteen goals before breaking the land speed record on his bicycle on his way home is how it will go. I reckon he could get a fair speed up on the downhill bits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
singe Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I reckon he could get a fair speed up on the downhill bits. Yeah, but it's the three pushing him to start with that we haven't got spare..! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flytrap Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 wont work, hughes is too slow for the double job he would be doing there. flemming eardley stam ruuuuuuuuuuuuuubes lomax lee maher whittaker taylor hughes davies bench windass deano greegs liddell stephens I don't know how anyone could pick Stam over Gregan after the Huddersfield game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shefflatic Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 (edited) my 4-4-2 if all fit and available: fleming eardley hazell gregan lomax smalley lee allott taylor hughes windass get smalley and taylor interchanging and get lee bombing through the middle to create. 433 that shez seems keen on (tonights line up: fleming eardley hazell gregan lomax smalley lee taylor alessandra hughes windass Edited January 12, 2009 by shefflatic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch_KTF Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 smalley lee taylor alessandra hughes windass Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shefflatic Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 yes its called playing lads with pace to win the ball then get us going forward, we do need it you know... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macca Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 yes its called playing lads with pace to win the ball then get us going forward, we do need it you know... but what about when they have the ball and just walk through our midfield with ease? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch_KTF Posted January 12, 2009 Author Share Posted January 12, 2009 yes its called playing lads with pace to win the ball then get us going forward, we do need it you know... Fast players = ball winners? I think it’s fair to say that 2 combative players are required in a midfield 3 lacking wingbacks Still, I appreciate and value your contributions. Quote Link to comment 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.