LightDN123 Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 (edited) 4 hours ago, hollandspies said: Until Raglan offered himself to the club, Rhino had his two centre halves set in stone, with Sutton as backup. We would have setup 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 depending on the opposition because he more or less said so at the fans forum and even alluded to the possibility that Sutton could play full back. Signing Raglan has changed the whole dynamic of his defensive mindset because, it would seem that he hasn’t got the bottle to bench one. Why does he feel the need to play the 3……in a 5? There’s not one player in our squad who should expect to have the god given right to start. Rhino needs to hammer that home. Indeed, Raglan is a great signing and our squad depth is significantly improved. We crave for depth in our squad but prefer quality over quantity. We will have that once a RB is added. That should allow for a starting 11 who are all specialists in the positions they play along with a strong bench which can offer like for like replacements when necessary. That said, we should never ever see the words ‘square pegs’ and ‘round holes’ mentioned again! Hogan should be dropped from the 3, though I have reservations about Hobson who seems a bit of a donkey in all honesty. Edited August 7, 2023 by LightDN123 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stainrod Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 England’s women play 352, it’s not really that difficult so long as your two wide men have both defensive and attacking qualities coupled with pace and stamina, if they don’t have those alongside an appetite to get up and down the pitch then you shouldn’t really play it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 10 minutes ago, Stainrod said: England’s women play 352, it’s not really that difficult so long as your two wide men have both defensive and attacking qualities coupled with pace and stamina, if they don’t have those alongside an appetite to get up and down the pitch then you shouldn’t really play it. women are far cleverer than men Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disjointed Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 7 minutes ago, Monty Burns said: women are far cleverer than men And they can play in 2 positions at the same time. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemel latic Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 532 (or 352) can clearly work as a formation as other posters have illustrated but it's never worked for us under Unsworth. Whether that's because of personnel, coaching, or a combination of the two I don't know. But whenever we play it, it is resolutely 532, rarely 352, and as a result we end up over run in midfield and frequently gift overloads to the opposition, which is what happened in the first half against Southend. Tbf, we were the better team in the second half until Sutton got sent off but I don't know if that was down to effort, or a tweaked system, difficult to tell from behind the goal. Our squad does look unbalanced with all the strikers and four centre halves but little in the way of full backs. Really hope we revert to 442 on Saturday or I fear another fruitless afternoon. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 8 minutes ago, disjointed said: And they can play in 2 positions at the same time. they never foget anything. team meetings could go for days but theyre also extremely efficient so they don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Worcester Owl Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 1 minute ago, Monty Burns said: they never foget anything. team meetings could go for days but theyre also extremely efficient so they don't. On the other hand, they're never wrong........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 6 minutes ago, Worcester Owl said: On the other hand, they're never wrong........ exactly. thats why theres no forums for womens Football bc there's nowt to discuss Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oafc1955 Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 15 minutes ago, Hemel latic said: 532 (or 352) can clearly work as a formation as other posters have illustrated but it's never worked for us under Unsworth. Whether that's because of personnel, coaching, or a combination of the two I don't know. But whenever we play it, it is resolutely 532, rarely 352, and as a result we end up over run in midfield and frequently gift overloads to the opposition, which is what happened in the first half against Southend. Tbf, we were the better team in the second half until Sutton got sent off but I don't know if that was down to effort, or a tweaked system, difficult to tell from behind the goal. Our squad does look unbalanced with all the strikers and four centre halves but little in the way of full backs. Really hope we revert to 442 on Saturday or I fear another fruitless afternoon. We’ve been waiting for change for almost a full season and close season under Unsworth. Saturdays performance shows that we’re still waiting. Thats almost a year so to expect anything different in a week is asking a lot….it’s not happening! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
League one forever Posted August 7, 2023 Author Share Posted August 7, 2023 2 hours ago, Hemel latic said: 532 (or 352) can clearly work as a formation as other posters have illustrated but it's never worked for us under Unsworth. Spot on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 2 hours ago, Hemel latic said: 532 (or 352) can clearly work as a formation as other posters have illustrated but it's never worked for us under Unsworth. Whether that's because of personnel, coaching, or a combination of the two I don't know. But whenever we play it, it is resolutely 532, rarely 352, and as a result we end up over run in midfield and frequently gift overloads to the opposition, which is what happened in the first half against Southend. Tbf, we were the better team in the second half until Sutton got sent off but I don't know if that was down to effort, or a tweaked system, difficult to tell from behind the goal. Our squad does look unbalanced with all the strikers and four centre halves but little in the way of full backs. Really hope we revert to 442 on Saturday or I fear another fruitless afternoon. It's not working for us as you need quick centre backs to cover for marauding wing backs..we have none of these. Yarney would have fitted in but he's gone. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctor evil Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 We played 352 because that's what Southend play..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 (edited) 38 minutes ago, doctor evil said: We played 352 because that's what Southend play..... As I said, they had quick players who knew how to use it. As the Governess once said on The Chase..Oldham Athletic doesn't fit. Edited August 7, 2023 by BP1960 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Branston Pickle Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 3-5-2 can work if you have the right players. Two proper wing backs, with a playmaker in the hole and a CDM and ball playing midfielder in the middle. That on Saturday was so negative it was practically a back 7, with absolutely no thought as to how to provide the strikers (including our marquee signing) with service. It felt like the only consideration given to that formation was to not lose. Which went well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Branston Pickle Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 1 minute ago, BP1960 said: As I said, they had quick players who knew how to use it. As the Governess once said on The Chase..Oldham Athletic is a palindrome. Oxymoron. Racecar is a Palindrome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LightDN123 Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 If we play 352 on Saturday, Frank should sack him regardless of the result. Arrogant twat if he persists with it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Guy Branston Pickle said: Oxymoron. Racecar is a Palindrome Sorry, got them mixed up. Wish the players were as sharp as you. Edited August 7, 2023 by BP1960 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigfatjoe1 Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 15 hours ago, Wardie said: He will persist with it because he believes he is right, that it is the way to go with these players and he won't lose his job over it. I thought he ideally wanted to set-up as 4-3-3 or am I dreaming that? Has anyone noticed that he says things e.g. formation will be 433, we're not in for Willoughby, we'll sign a couple on loan, and then the opposite happens. Is he doing this deliberately or is he just changing his mind all the time? Perhaps he's just clueless... I hate playing five at the back. We've rarely had success with it. It's very boring and negative. The only time it looked ok for a while was when Tony Henry played as a sweeper (what an underrated player he was). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Branston Pickle Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 4 minutes ago, BP1960 said: Sorry, got them mixed up. Wish the players were as sharp as you. If they aren't even as sharp as me we've got big problems 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BP1960 Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 2 minutes ago, bigfatjoe1 said: Has anyone noticed that he says things e.g. formation will be 433, we're not in for Willoughby, we'll sign a couple on loan, and then the opposite happens. Is he doing this deliberately or is he just changing his mind all the time? Perhaps he's just clueless... I hate playing five at the back. We've rarely had success with it. It's very boring and negative. The only time it looked ok for a while was when Tony Henry played as a sweeper (what an underrated player he was). Good player Tony Henry, not quick, but had vision and could certainly pass a ball. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Londonboy Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 14 hours ago, oafc1955 said: Can’t argue with most of that tbh….Just imagine what Harry Kewell, ( the exact opposite of Unsworth ) could get out of this lot!! Yep....we certainly scored goals and conceded them under Harry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
League one forever Posted August 7, 2023 Author Share Posted August 7, 2023 51 minutes ago, Guy Branston Pickle said: 3-5-2 can work if you have the right players Whether it can work or is a good formation is moot really to the central point. The results when he plays 352 are dreadful, the results when he plays 442 are much better. I don’t care how we do it- I just want to win. It’s absolutely nonsensical to persist with a system that doesn’t generate results. We are not his vanity project, we are football club desperate for some progress and success - however it comes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Branston Pickle Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 9 minutes ago, League one forever said: Whether it can work or is a good formation is moot really to the central point. The results when he plays 352 are dreadful, the results when he plays 442 are much better. I don’t care how we do it- I just want to win. It’s absolutely nonsensical to persist with a system that doesn’t generate results. We are not his vanity project, we are football club desperate for some progress and success - however it comes. That was the point of the rest of my post which you've decided to remove. We don't have the players for that formation, so i don't understand why he persists with it... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty Burns Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 1 hour ago, Guy Branston Pickle said: Oxymoron. Racecar is a Palindrome do you know l didn't even know what a Palindrone was until now!!! thats the type of education nonsense l thought l didnt need and wasnt for me when l dropped out at 14!! what an idiot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave_Og Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 1 hour ago, Guy Branston Pickle said: Oxymoron. Racecar is a Palindrome As is Ryanair, but only phonetically. Just thought I'd mention it 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.