| Not changing shape 19:09 - Aug 8 with 2514 views | DubaiR |
Play one way and work on it, 2nd game in and looks like a 442 to me |  | | |  |
| Not changing shape on 22:18 - Aug 8 with 2330 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
It was never a 442 Quedgeley. It was more like a 111 after Chair came on! Excellent debut. |  |
| |
| Not changing shape on 22:23 - Aug 8 with 2296 views | Dorse |
The Offish said it was 352. All Hail The Offish!
I've been banging on about 352 for so long that I am beginning to think that the club actually read some of my badly spelled, potato-print letters. I even sent a fax. At least I think it was a fax. I was very drunk at the time. |  |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
| Not changing shape on 00:55 - Aug 9 with 2141 views | francisbowles |
Well it was definitely four at the back tonight. It may have been a 433 or a diamond at the start which became a 442 later. |  | | |
| Not changing shape on 01:05 - Aug 9 with 2132 views | TacticalR |
Beware of shapeshifters. |  |
| |
| Not changing shape on 08:07 - Aug 9 with 1939 views | daveB |
started with 3 at the back, Robinson was in the 3 and Manning left wing back. It didn't really work so he switched to a 4-3-3 after about 20 minutes and we were a lot better |  | | |
| Not changing shape on 08:11 - Aug 9 with 1923 views | Northernr |
It started with 3-5-2, Northampton were wise to it and took us apart for the first 15 minutes, so we changed it to 4-4-2. I didn't like Holloway chopping and changing the team so much last season but honestly what did you want him to do last night, sit there and get absolutely thrashed by Northampton Town? That would have gone down well. He was proactive, he made the switch early, we won the game, well done Holloway. |  | | |
| Not changing shape on 09:58 - Aug 9 with 1756 views | DubaiR |
Don't get me wrong I was not having a dig. Just pointing out the fact that we have been hearing we will play one shape and stick to it, 15 minutes in against Northampton in our second game we change it. Similar to old bad knees in the prem. | | | |
| Not changing shape on 11:06 - Aug 9 with 1679 views | Blue_Castello |
| Not changing shape on 08:11 - Aug 9 by Northernr |
It started with 3-5-2, Northampton were wise to it and took us apart for the first 15 minutes, so we changed it to 4-4-2. I didn't like Holloway chopping and changing the team so much last season but honestly what did you want him to do last night, sit there and get absolutely thrashed by Northampton Town? That would have gone down well. He was proactive, he made the switch early, we won the game, well done Holloway. |
Agreed it's a relief to know that we have a manager who can read the game and be proactive when the opposition are dominating play, actually being able to change formation during games can win you points or just protect a winning position.
As Dubai says there appeared too many different playing formations last year but hopefully that was Ollie getting to know his squad. My personal opinion is that with Hall injured and Caulker on his way out I'm not convinced we have three centre backs good enough against the better teams, Reading were very poor on Saturday and not a true test. The sooner Hall gets fit the better he's a calming influence, it has to be said a back three of Hall, Caulker and the Chief could be a very strong combination.
That said very happy with Saturday's win it was massively unexpected and a good team performance. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Not changing shape on 11:35 - Aug 9 with 1620 views | BklynRanger |
It looked like a 433 on paper anyway.
Hmmmm, don't think I have anything else to say about that.
Although....
No, it's gone. |  | | |
| Not changing shape on 13:11 - Aug 9 with 1517 views | R_from_afar |
| Not changing shape on 09:58 - Aug 9 by DubaiR |
Don't get me wrong I was not having a dig. Just pointing out the fact that we have been hearing we will play one shape and stick to it, 15 minutes in against Northampton in our second game we change it. Similar to old bad knees in the prem. |
Ugh your post had me shuddering as it reminded me of some of Redknapp's old tricks. Given that we are in the transfer window, HR would probably have put two 'keepers on the bench to prove that we were "down to the bare bones".
I hope that since that offensive and puerile incident, the club has inserted a clause in every manager's contract since stating that anyone who picks a matchday squad with three 'keepers will be fined a month's wages.
RFA |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| Not changing shape on 13:35 - Aug 9 with 1462 views | daveB |
| Not changing shape on 09:58 - Aug 9 by DubaiR |
Don't get me wrong I was not having a dig. Just pointing out the fact that we have been hearing we will play one shape and stick to it, 15 minutes in against Northampton in our second game we change it. Similar to old bad knees in the prem. |
I think if he abandons 3 at the back altogether after a poor start last night then he'll deserve stick but i'm not sure that will be the case, he's tried a few formations in pre season so that if he needs to change it during a game the players are comfortable with it and I think thats the right thing to do | | | |
| Not changing shape on 14:40 - Aug 9 with 1350 views | SimonJames |
| Not changing shape on 08:11 - Aug 9 by Northernr |
It started with 3-5-2, Northampton were wise to it and took us apart for the first 15 minutes, so we changed it to 4-4-2. I didn't like Holloway chopping and changing the team so much last season but honestly what did you want him to do last night, sit there and get absolutely thrashed by Northampton Town? That would have gone down well. He was proactive, he made the switch early, we won the game, well done Holloway. |
If Northampton threatened to thrash us playing 3-5-2 is there any reason to play that system against better teams?
Since our defence has more leaks than a hedgehog's raincoat, is there any justification for only playing 3 at the back?
I'm a great believer in modelling excellence, so surely if top teams like Real, Bayern, Barcelona, Juventus and Atletico are playing 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 (and 4-4-2 without the ball), shouldn't we try get good at that first? |  |
| 100% of people who drink water will die. |
| |
| Not changing shape on 17:58 - Aug 9 with 1217 views | smegma |
| Not changing shape on 08:07 - Aug 9 by daveB |
started with 3 at the back, Robinson was in the 3 and Manning left wing back. It didn't really work so he switched to a 4-3-3 after about 20 minutes and we were a lot better |
Is the correct answer | | | |
| Not changing shape on 18:28 - Aug 9 with 1188 views | Northernr |
| Not changing shape on 14:40 - Aug 9 by SimonJames |
If Northampton threatened to thrash us playing 3-5-2 is there any reason to play that system against better teams?
Since our defence has more leaks than a hedgehog's raincoat, is there any justification for only playing 3 at the back?
I'm a great believer in modelling excellence, so surely if top teams like Real, Bayern, Barcelona, Juventus and Atletico are playing 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 (and 4-4-2 without the ball), shouldn't we try get good at that first? |
Looked alright four days ago. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
