| The new shape 13:28 - Aug 9 with 9919 views | dannyblue |
I was interested to see our new shape yesterday.
Without the ball it was 4141 with Burrell on the right and Smyth on the left, and Chair and Vale ahead of Madsen in the middle.
With the ball, Burrell tended to come a bit narrower, leaving space for Mbengue. Chair tended to go to overload the left. Vale tended to stay on the right centre and ahead of Madsen.
Some things worked. Millwall didn't pass through the midfield (except once)...but then perhaps that's not their game. And the fullbacks weren't exposed. We were able to bypass the press pretty well from goal kicks, although Millwall didn't commit many to the press. Once Burrell ran from out to in and was found by a good straight pass from Edwards, reminiscent of a goal we scored last year. There were also some straight forward (but not straightforward) passes from Vale and even Varane which were promising.
Some things didn't work so well. Burrrell was clearly not a winger, and if left one on one with a full back he didn't have much of a plan. This shape diminishes his game. Mbengue wasn't able to take advantage of the space we created for him. Kone was a little isolated. Chair didn't find much space in attacking positions. We didn't get enough good shots away.
I think the aim of the new shape is to learn from last year, and find a way to:
1) Have Kone and Burrell on the pitch together.
2) Have three in midfield.
3) Have Chair central.
I think there would be a better way of achieving this. If you want two strikers and three midfielders the classic approach is 352 which I think would actually better suit our squad.
JCS Dunne Edwards (with Mbengue and Morrison in reserve) would be strong defensively and a good platform for controlling possession, especially as either of the outside centre backs would be able to advance. You could use the work rate of Smyth as a wingback. Your midfield three picked from Madsen, Chair, Vale, Kamara, Varane, Morgan depending on opposition, form and availability.
You could also simply morph it back into the 4141 if the game demanded without making any subs.
And if chasing a game, it could become a 343 with the introduction of Poku, Saito, etc. for one of the midfielders or wing backs.
|  | | |  |
| The new shape on 13:58 - Aug 9 with 7032 views | dmm |
352 would be a very interesting experiment, particularly when Lamptey is fit to play.
Unfortunately, I don't think Stephan will try it because it wasn't used in preseason - according to Burrell 433 and 442 was - and it would seriously reduce the playing time of players the club has heavily invested in: Saito, Poku and Dembele. |  | | |
| The new shape on 10:37 - Aug 10 with 6343 views | Burnleyhoop |
Burrell is no winger and Kone is of no use whatsoever unless he plays in and around the box and has sufficient service to enable a shot or three. Providing he can manage to control the ball sufficiently to get a shot away in the first place.
Trying to shoehorn both into the team in positions they can’t play is pointless.
Play them up top on their own and rotate them. Suits them both and prevents over loading. |  | | |
| The new shape on 10:46 - Aug 10 with 6313 views | Stainrod |
| The new shape on 10:37 - Aug 10 by Burnleyhoop |
Burrell is no winger and Kone is of no use whatsoever unless he plays in and around the box and has sufficient service to enable a shot or three. Providing he can manage to control the ball sufficiently to get a shot away in the first place.
Trying to shoehorn both into the team in positions they can’t play is pointless.
Play them up top on their own and rotate them. Suits them both and prevents over loading. |
Reluctantly have come to the same conclusion. Burrell was terrible on the wing on Sat and assuming its not all down to fitness/ attitude it just doesn't work.
I would bench him for a bit, and sling him on against hopefully tiring defenders later in games.
Don't think we have the players for 3-5-2: Lampety, yes, but realistically how many games will he play?
And Kember looks more of an old-school, slightly agricultural left back, not a wing back.
If Burrell does come back to form I would like to see us trying him and Kone both up top in the centre, Chair left and one of Poku/ Vale/ Smyth right.
Then Madders and Varane in the middle.
Thought Varane one of the real positives on Saturday, albeit against very unadventurous opponents. Has he finally got the message that if he wants to get in the team it isn't good enough to knock a pass straight back to the centre half each time? He looked much more on the front foot which was great to see. Early days oc. | | | |
| The new shape on 11:16 - Aug 10 with 6240 views | wombat |
| The new shape on 10:46 - Aug 10 by Stainrod |
Reluctantly have come to the same conclusion. Burrell was terrible on the wing on Sat and assuming its not all down to fitness/ attitude it just doesn't work.
I would bench him for a bit, and sling him on against hopefully tiring defenders later in games.
Don't think we have the players for 3-5-2: Lampety, yes, but realistically how many games will he play?
And Kember looks more of an old-school, slightly agricultural left back, not a wing back.
If Burrell does come back to form I would like to see us trying him and Kone both up top in the centre, Chair left and one of Poku/ Vale/ Smyth right.
Then Madders and Varane in the middle.
Thought Varane one of the real positives on Saturday, albeit against very unadventurous opponents. Has he finally got the message that if he wants to get in the team it isn't good enough to knock a pass straight back to the centre half each time? He looked much more on the front foot which was great to see. Early days oc. |
id play burrell through the middle and stick Kone on the bench , we still have no idea obv why he his the deck twice in pre season with nobody near him , is he carrying a knock ?
burrell can keep teams deeper due to his pace and offers us more defensivly dropping back |  |
| |
| The new shape on 12:32 - Aug 10 with 6120 views | Stainrod |
| The new shape on 11:16 - Aug 10 by wombat |
id play burrell through the middle and stick Kone on the bench , we still have no idea obv why he his the deck twice in pre season with nobody near him , is he carrying a knock ?
burrell can keep teams deeper due to his pace and offers us more defensivly dropping back |
If it was pre-injury Burrell I would agree. But he needs to get up to speed a lot more. If he were alone up front I just don't think anything would stick, he would get bullied by centre halves. And at the moment he doesn't seem to trust himself to run in behind a defender which was the main point of him. Not to say he won't get that back. But Kone at least plays that Helguson role of bullying defenders and (sometimes, not enough) holding up the ball. | | | |
| The new shape on 12:37 - Aug 10 with 6094 views | Hunterhoop |
Everyone seems quite hot and heavy on playing 433/4231 after a few pre season games of stringing some passes together and looking tidy.
We had success last year with 442. Remember we started the season with 4231 and it was a disaster culminating in Coventry and then Stephan switched it to 442 for the Charlton home game and we were away.
Two of our biggest strengths are Kone and Burrell, who have proven they can play well together. 21 goals last season, and Burrell missed 3 months.
I’m with Gab Sutton here; I think it’s a big gamble to switch the shape and system. I’d stick with 442 for now. |  | | |
| The new shape on 12:38 - Aug 10 with 6099 views | dannyblue |
Rotation of Burrell and Kone as lone striker in a horses for course approach sounds sensible. But if none of our wingers or Ilias are delivering, then I'd prefer to have both of them on the pitch. Otherwise you're dropping one of them for a Saito or a Poku who don't look to be offering more yet.
@Stainrod - your suggestion is what we played last year. I think we were too open (2nd most goals conceded?), and another body in the middle is an answer to that which I'm glad to see.
Priority for me is 3 in the middle, and then arrange things around that to get the best balance of form, quality, strength, pace in the attack. 352 seems a more promising arrangement than 4141 considering relative effectiveness and preferred positions Kone/Burrell compared to Saito/Poku etc. (Smyth has been doing well and versatility and availability a real asset). But we won't do it unless things go badly wrong because we've spent pre-season on 4141. | | | |
| The new shape on 13:40 - Aug 10 with 5978 views | Burnleyhoop |
| The new shape on 12:32 - Aug 10 by Stainrod |
If it was pre-injury Burrell I would agree. But he needs to get up to speed a lot more. If he were alone up front I just don't think anything would stick, he would get bullied by centre halves. And at the moment he doesn't seem to trust himself to run in behind a defender which was the main point of him. Not to say he won't get that back. But Kone at least plays that Helguson role of bullying defenders and (sometimes, not enough) holding up the ball. |
Nothing sticks with Kone up front. Both he and Burrell both have a poor first touch in truth.
Now we have a keeper that looks to have tremendous distribution with both feet, hoofing it down the middle should be last resort anyway.
Chair, Madsen and Vale are all technically very good and our defence now looks capable of carrying the ball out from the back. Possession and quick interchanges of passing now looks very doable. There were definite signs of it on Saturday.
Poku is the answer on the right wing, just need to get him, and keep him, fit and consistent. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The new shape on 22:13 - Aug 10 with 5675 views | wombat |
| The new shape on 13:40 - Aug 10 by Burnleyhoop |
Nothing sticks with Kone up front. Both he and Burrell both have a poor first touch in truth.
Now we have a keeper that looks to have tremendous distribution with both feet, hoofing it down the middle should be last resort anyway.
Chair, Madsen and Vale are all technically very good and our defence now looks capable of carrying the ball out from the back. Possession and quick interchanges of passing now looks very doable. There were definite signs of it on Saturday.
Poku is the answer on the right wing, just need to get him, and keep him, fit and consistent. |
Even before we knackered both his hamstrings I’m yet to see anything from poku to excite me and at my age I’m easily exited . Hopefully satwe chuck the extra man in the middle at Portsmouth , and we give Kamara the first half alongside madson
Vale drops to the bench for me with Burrell and kone up front chair and smyth on the wings | |
| |
| The new shape on 22:46 - Aug 10 with 5593 views | TK1 |
Feel like calls for 352 are the new "pay to play" and should go in the glossary.
We don't really have wingbacks. Gary Neville - quite a good attacking full back - said playing it almost sunk his international career. He was totally lost.
Not having wingbacks is one fairly huge drawback. You can't just convert a winger like Smyth to play wingback any more than he could convincingly play centre forward every week. Lamptey could play wing back, but might be a big ask having that workload so soon after injury. Working in tandem with Poku or Smyth down the right, however, is exciting.
Then we have several wingers and number 10s who would be redundant in 352. Saito, Poku and Dembele were expensive, for us. They can't play wingback. Would they be in the stand watching Smyth and Kember drown in no-man's land between full back and winger?
I like 433 for this squad, as we can own a midfield and have two for each position in that line-up. Rotate Kone and Burrell in the 9, stick them on together when needed. But Hunter's probably right: 442 might be safer as team knows it. 352 would sink us, though, and just as importantly wipe value from several money signings. We've signed different players. [Post edited 10 Aug 22:47]
| | | |
| The new shape on 23:01 - Aug 10 with 5540 views | dannyblue |
Well we’ll wipe value from Burrell playing him right wing. And from everyone with only two in the middle. And I quite like Mbengue but relying on him to play every game at right back is a value killer too (I think of Lamptey like Dembele, nice surprise if we get anything out of him).
None of these wingers have been increasing their value with their game time either.
Rotating Kone and Burrell as a front one I can get on board with. But our best moments with this squad have come with them playing together in the middle. | | | |
| The new shape on 23:08 - Aug 10 with 5525 views | Myke |
| The new shape on 22:46 - Aug 10 by TK1 |
Feel like calls for 352 are the new "pay to play" and should go in the glossary.
We don't really have wingbacks. Gary Neville - quite a good attacking full back - said playing it almost sunk his international career. He was totally lost.
Not having wingbacks is one fairly huge drawback. You can't just convert a winger like Smyth to play wingback any more than he could convincingly play centre forward every week. Lamptey could play wing back, but might be a big ask having that workload so soon after injury. Working in tandem with Poku or Smyth down the right, however, is exciting.
Then we have several wingers and number 10s who would be redundant in 352. Saito, Poku and Dembele were expensive, for us. They can't play wingback. Would they be in the stand watching Smyth and Kember drown in no-man's land between full back and winger?
I like 433 for this squad, as we can own a midfield and have two for each position in that line-up. Rotate Kone and Burrell in the 9, stick them on together when needed. But Hunter's probably right: 442 might be safer as team knows it. 352 would sink us, though, and just as importantly wipe value from several money signings. We've signed different players. [Post edited 10 Aug 22:47]
|
Yeah but those three ‘expensive’ players are either injured long term (Dembele) chronically out of form (Saito) of (slowly) returning to fitness (Poku). So in that context the argument re formations is somewhat academic. Likewise with Lamptey, we don’t know how much he will play. I think our focus has to be on getting and keeping our main players fit for as many games as possible, to at least give JS as many options as possible - the rest is up to him. As Roy Keane would say ‘that’s his job’. | | | |
| The new shape on 09:20 - Aug 11 with 5266 views | TK1 |
| The new shape on 23:01 - Aug 10 by dannyblue |
Well we’ll wipe value from Burrell playing him right wing. And from everyone with only two in the middle. And I quite like Mbengue but relying on him to play every game at right back is a value killer too (I think of Lamptey like Dembele, nice surprise if we get anything out of him).
None of these wingers have been increasing their value with their game time either.
Rotating Kone and Burrell as a front one I can get on board with. But our best moments with this squad have come with them playing together in the middle. |
Will we wipe more value from Burrell playing in a three than from Kone playing as a 10, as we have been? Kone definitely has the higher retail value. We have a pretty small sample here of a couple of friendlies and a creditable 1-1 v Millwall. Burrell's form may never return post-hammy, that may be a bigger factor. We'll see.
Just the idea that we're going to drastically change the shape of the team to play a 352 formation that we haven't since Warburton, let alone any of the preseason games, when we've been signing players equipped to expressly play "some kind of 4231 or 433, mid-block" over the last four years seems far-fetched.
Imagine JS turning up at Pompey with a 352. Masterstroke if he wins, but should he lose having not played it all preseason... | | | |
| The new shape on 09:26 - Aug 11 with 5216 views | 1JD |
| The new shape on 09:20 - Aug 11 by TK1 |
Will we wipe more value from Burrell playing in a three than from Kone playing as a 10, as we have been? Kone definitely has the higher retail value. We have a pretty small sample here of a couple of friendlies and a creditable 1-1 v Millwall. Burrell's form may never return post-hammy, that may be a bigger factor. We'll see.
Just the idea that we're going to drastically change the shape of the team to play a 352 formation that we haven't since Warburton, let alone any of the preseason games, when we've been signing players equipped to expressly play "some kind of 4231 or 433, mid-block" over the last four years seems far-fetched.
Imagine JS turning up at Pompey with a 352. Masterstroke if he wins, but should he lose having not played it all preseason... |
Good couple of posts TK1.
The reality is no formation is ideal for the group of players we have, and/or for the players the clubs wants to start games.
The current shoe-horning of Burrell as a right winger is very much square pegs round holes. Value will obliterate if he is forced there. And the team will suffer, as he ain’t no winger, and we have numerous other better options there.
Hard choices need to be made. | | | |
| The new shape on 09:45 - Aug 11 with 5169 views | dmm |
After entertaining the idea of 352, I've come to the same conclusion as those above that it wouldn't work with the players we've got.
Perhaps 433 with Burrell on one side of Kone might be an answer if Burrell is given licence to come inside. That would leave the back three a bit exposed on Burrell's side though.
4312 with Chair behind the two strikers maybe?
Whatever the new shape is, it looks to me that our mini wingers will have fewer slots. That would be around £6m investment underused. | | | |
| The new shape on 10:06 - Aug 11 with 5111 views | Dorse |
I think we've missed a trick here. The new shape should be based on sacred geometry. I propose the Tree of Life.
As you can see, with three at the back and a moveable pivot in the 6 role, we can gain midfield control, whilst remaining self-supporting in both the press and transitions. It also has the side benefit of unlocking hitherto unknown knowledge of the Divine. |  |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
| The new shape on 10:13 - Aug 11 with 5061 views | PhilmyRs |
| The new shape on 22:46 - Aug 10 by TK1 |
Feel like calls for 352 are the new "pay to play" and should go in the glossary.
We don't really have wingbacks. Gary Neville - quite a good attacking full back - said playing it almost sunk his international career. He was totally lost.
Not having wingbacks is one fairly huge drawback. You can't just convert a winger like Smyth to play wingback any more than he could convincingly play centre forward every week. Lamptey could play wing back, but might be a big ask having that workload so soon after injury. Working in tandem with Poku or Smyth down the right, however, is exciting.
Then we have several wingers and number 10s who would be redundant in 352. Saito, Poku and Dembele were expensive, for us. They can't play wingback. Would they be in the stand watching Smyth and Kember drown in no-man's land between full back and winger?
I like 433 for this squad, as we can own a midfield and have two for each position in that line-up. Rotate Kone and Burrell in the 9, stick them on together when needed. But Hunter's probably right: 442 might be safer as team knows it. 352 would sink us, though, and just as importantly wipe value from several money signings. We've signed different players. [Post edited 10 Aug 22:47]
|
'Gary Neville, quite a good attacking full back?'
While I agree it’s not really an option now. End of last season it would have been quite easy to have set the team up to pay a 3-5-2 with some basic recruitment.
You just really needed a left sided wingback to go with the Lampety acquisition, and rather than Kemper, a left sided centre back. The Gary Neville example is interesting because never in a million years would you play him as a wing back – either right side of the 3 (as Glenn Hoddle used to do), or not in the team, never wing back. A combination of Lampety, Smyth and Morgan on the Right I think is ok.
There were valid arguments for going with 3 over the summer. We had one of the worst records for goals conceded last season so clearly something has to change, and we love to give a set piece goal away too. A three from JCS, Edwards, Dunne, Mbengue, plus a signing, would be decent at this level and I think would have improved our defensive shape. But a major reason for making the move would have been to get Kone and Burrell playing as a pair and have a decent Kolli as backup to get some minutes as well. Although I appreciate things have moved on there. Chair would also be more central.
But I agree the recruitment of Poku, Dembele and Saito was clearly not with a back 3 in mind but, all 3 struggled last season for various reasons, and Burrell leapt above them making him difficult to leave out so I think it wouldn’t have been the worst idea in the world had we considered moving to that shape over the summer. | | | |
| The new shape on 10:16 - Aug 11 with 5046 views | dmm |
Dorse, it could work if a Spirograph is allowed to be used pitchside. | | | |
| The new shape on 10:30 - Aug 11 with 4961 views | Hunterhoop |
| The new shape on 09:26 - Aug 11 by 1JD |
Good couple of posts TK1.
The reality is no formation is ideal for the group of players we have, and/or for the players the clubs wants to start games.
The current shoe-horning of Burrell as a right winger is very much square pegs round holes. Value will obliterate if he is forced there. And the team will suffer, as he ain’t no winger, and we have numerous other better options there.
Hard choices need to be made. |
Yeah, this is point.
The signings we have made for the last 3 summers is for a 4231. No doubt about that. Tons of wingers, full backs, “10s”. 4231 is the game model. Playing out from the back is the game model. Possession based is the game model.
Kone was signed to the be the starter. I have a lot more faith in him than you, JD, but regardless we spent “starter” money on him.
Burrell was signed to be his cover and bench replacement against tiring legs. It was more of a punt.
The Coventry debacle forced Stephan’s hand. No matter how much people want to gloss over it or talk about the game model being some sort of vibe and nothing more, it’s not; it’s a lot more than that. It’s documented into a massive pack, which was shared with Stephan when he joined. So when Stephan stepped away from it in that moment of strength, it threw the cat amongst the pigeons, especially with his 442 working so well (for a while).
It also really suited Burrell. His goals, and subsequent skyrocketing in value (assuming his hammy is fully recovered), was a blessing for a player trading club (who’d had a few duds the summer before), but it presents a problem this season.
Return to the game model, and what do you do with Burrell (or Kone)? Revert one to back up and you erode their value. Shoehorn both in and your 4231 won’t work as well. 442 actually suits the squad fairly well, IMO, but it means only two of Varane, Kamara, Chair, Vale, Saito (or Smyth) can start. Again, not ideal given the money invested in Saito, the potential of Chair, and the future sale hope on Varane, plus the salaries spent on the others (all arguable starters at this level).
4231/433 solves a lot of this, but it means hurting the value of Burrell or Kone.
Personally, being the philistine I am, I think possession is overrated and football is changing. Pace, power, strength, physicality is on the rise. Burrell and Kone have the highest resale value in this squad, IMO, given how they tick those boxes and their age. They are also strikers, for which there is a premium. I’d set up to their strengths, be direct, and play 442, with one of Chair, Vale or Saito on the left. I’d play Kamara or Varane alongside Madsen (would have preferred us to sign a more progressive player), and have Poku or Smyth on the right.
Oppo teams, I’m convinced of this, would least like to play against Kone AND Burrell as a front 2, so do that. In a 4231, you leave Kone up against 2, sometimes 3 centre backs. You’re making it harder for him, and he doesn’t have the pace to run the channels.
It’s 4231 and one of Kone/Burrell does not start.
Or it’s 442.
The squad is not built for 352…too few centre halves to get through the season with that shape, only one real wing back who has barely played in years, and way too many wide forwards who’ll never play or play out of position. | | | |
| The new shape on 10:42 - Aug 11 with 4926 views | Hunterhoop |
I should add another point.
The Championship is a tight, tough league of small margins.
Having an identity, everyone knowing their roles, where to be in different situations, and where their teammates will be is underrated. Familiarity, repetition, this is how teams function better.
Even with time on the training ground, chopping and changing systems is not easy. It takes time for players to adjust and be able to execute quickly and accurately.
Some of the teams who over perform their budget the best do so with a clear, well drilled identity.
Ours could absolutely be a well drilled, direct (not long ball) side who progresses the ball back to front quickly, and tries to transition at pace. If we have 42% possession but win most weeks, who really cares? If we create more chances and score more goals, who cares?
I know some will say 442 left us too open. I would disagree. Our league position for chances against wasn’t that bad. Joe Walsh had a goals conceded versus xGc of -8. If he was at par, that’s probably 5 more points minimum, which sees us finish on 61 points, and a foundation to push on from. Why gamble and change shape. Just do it better. Stability, clarity, familiarity…not to be underrated in this mad league. | | | |
| The new shape on 10:48 - Aug 11 with 4920 views | PhilmyRs |
| The new shape on 10:30 - Aug 11 by Hunterhoop |
Yeah, this is point.
The signings we have made for the last 3 summers is for a 4231. No doubt about that. Tons of wingers, full backs, “10s”. 4231 is the game model. Playing out from the back is the game model. Possession based is the game model.
Kone was signed to the be the starter. I have a lot more faith in him than you, JD, but regardless we spent “starter” money on him.
Burrell was signed to be his cover and bench replacement against tiring legs. It was more of a punt.
The Coventry debacle forced Stephan’s hand. No matter how much people want to gloss over it or talk about the game model being some sort of vibe and nothing more, it’s not; it’s a lot more than that. It’s documented into a massive pack, which was shared with Stephan when he joined. So when Stephan stepped away from it in that moment of strength, it threw the cat amongst the pigeons, especially with his 442 working so well (for a while).
It also really suited Burrell. His goals, and subsequent skyrocketing in value (assuming his hammy is fully recovered), was a blessing for a player trading club (who’d had a few duds the summer before), but it presents a problem this season.
Return to the game model, and what do you do with Burrell (or Kone)? Revert one to back up and you erode their value. Shoehorn both in and your 4231 won’t work as well. 442 actually suits the squad fairly well, IMO, but it means only two of Varane, Kamara, Chair, Vale, Saito (or Smyth) can start. Again, not ideal given the money invested in Saito, the potential of Chair, and the future sale hope on Varane, plus the salaries spent on the others (all arguable starters at this level).
4231/433 solves a lot of this, but it means hurting the value of Burrell or Kone.
Personally, being the philistine I am, I think possession is overrated and football is changing. Pace, power, strength, physicality is on the rise. Burrell and Kone have the highest resale value in this squad, IMO, given how they tick those boxes and their age. They are also strikers, for which there is a premium. I’d set up to their strengths, be direct, and play 442, with one of Chair, Vale or Saito on the left. I’d play Kamara or Varane alongside Madsen (would have preferred us to sign a more progressive player), and have Poku or Smyth on the right.
Oppo teams, I’m convinced of this, would least like to play against Kone AND Burrell as a front 2, so do that. In a 4231, you leave Kone up against 2, sometimes 3 centre backs. You’re making it harder for him, and he doesn’t have the pace to run the channels.
It’s 4231 and one of Kone/Burrell does not start.
Or it’s 442.
The squad is not built for 352…too few centre halves to get through the season with that shape, only one real wing back who has barely played in years, and way too many wide forwards who’ll never play or play out of position. |
We let in more goals than pretty much every other team last season, granted 7 of those were in one game playing the 'game model system', but even over the course of the season, we always seemed vulnerable when teams passed it through us as we were just too open and could be easily cut through. We were disappointing defensively. How much was keeper/how much was the system, I'm not sure.
A 4-4-2 playing it how we did for much of last season clearly hampered Kone, he wasn't as effective, Burrell playing wide like the weekend, not effective. Poku, playing in a 4--4-2, I don't think will be anywhere near as effective, Saito, poor last season, worse I think because he was playing in a 4-4-2, which doesn't help him.
Playing 4-4-2 feels like its being done to get the best from Burrell. A lot of the others don't benefit so much. I'm not sure how good Burrell is, and whether he warrants the faith. I like him, but not sure I like him to base a lot of my team and system around. | | | |
| The new shape on 11:00 - Aug 11 with 4866 views | Hunterhoop |
| The new shape on 10:48 - Aug 11 by PhilmyRs |
We let in more goals than pretty much every other team last season, granted 7 of those were in one game playing the 'game model system', but even over the course of the season, we always seemed vulnerable when teams passed it through us as we were just too open and could be easily cut through. We were disappointing defensively. How much was keeper/how much was the system, I'm not sure.
A 4-4-2 playing it how we did for much of last season clearly hampered Kone, he wasn't as effective, Burrell playing wide like the weekend, not effective. Poku, playing in a 4--4-2, I don't think will be anywhere near as effective, Saito, poor last season, worse I think because he was playing in a 4-4-2, which doesn't help him.
Playing 4-4-2 feels like its being done to get the best from Burrell. A lot of the others don't benefit so much. I'm not sure how good Burrell is, and whether he warrants the faith. I like him, but not sure I like him to base a lot of my team and system around. |
You may be right on Burrell. It may have been an outlier as a season for him. But it’s still a big call to move away from a system that suits him and bench him, when, had he not been injured, he would likely have reached 15-18 goals and been our highest valued asset.
Equally, I disagree that 442 didn’t suit Kone. It did, and I think it will suit him more than 4231 (would gladly be proved wrong if we play that and he’s in the goals). Kone, as the target man, and Burrell as the pacey channel runner, meant Kone would often “go short” to get in front of the centre forward to receive to feet/chest, turn and pass or lay it off. He looks like he’s playing deeper but it’s the reality of how a target man and shoulder man play with each other. Kone doesn’t have the pace to play on the shoulder. Kone is not yet great at the hold up stuff. I wouldn’t say he’s bad either. He gets us up the pitch, as Clive often points out, albeit sometimes it’s a bit ugly, and in a number of situations a better touch and turn would have set up a dangerous attack. His struggles last year (not that there were loads of - he had a decent season) were down to him needing to be better technically, not the shape. In a 4231, he’ll have both centre halves to occupy, not one, as in a 442. It’ll put his hold up and aerially game under more pressure.
And on the goals conceded/goalkeeper thing, it’s not an opinion, it’s statistics. Over the course of the season, we conceded 8 more goals when Joe Walsh was playing than the xG conceded was based on the shots taken. In any one of match, I agree the xG type stats can be hugely misleading, but, as Andy Belk has said himself in interview, over a whole season they are highly indicative. It’s why he’s no longer our goal keeper. He was statistically one of the worst 2 or 3 in the league. Statistically we were broadly mid table for chances conceded. We weren’t as open as people think because of the goals conceded number. And you can still improve on that by everyone knowing their roles better and signing an upgrade on Varane (or him playing better). Edwards was also only with us for half the season, and we see him as an upgrade, don’t we? | | | |
| The new shape on 11:21 - Aug 11 with 4817 views | PlanetHonneywood |
We have had this discussion elsewhere.
My contribution was: if Chair has to play, then 4312...and tell him not to hold on to the ball for too long! The threat of Vale chomping at the bit will surely motivate the diminutive Moroccan.
Assorted diddymen can come on to cause havoc when fit, and if needed.
The defenders, midfielders, and strikers pick themselves. Injuries permitting.
NEXT!! |  |
| |
| The new shape on 11:35 - Aug 11 with 4771 views | DavieQPR |
Why 3-5-2? No player has trained for it, no player has played it hardly ever, it's rarely seen in this division and when we or other teams have tried it's been quickly abandoned. Yet it is quoted as the golden fix to all our problems, The problem is how to fit Kone and Burrell in the same team without weakening the midfield. |  | | |
| The new shape on 11:58 - Aug 11 with 4725 views | PhilmyRs |
| The new shape on 11:35 - Aug 11 by DavieQPR |
Why 3-5-2? No player has trained for it, no player has played it hardly ever, it's rarely seen in this division and when we or other teams have tried it's been quickly abandoned. Yet it is quoted as the golden fix to all our problems, The problem is how to fit Kone and Burrell in the same team without weakening the midfield. |
Since we were relegated from the Premier league, we've played about 11 consecutive seasons in the championship and our highest ever league finish has been when we've played 3-5-2.
I agree we're not setup for it now and I think in answer to the "Kone/Burrell" problem and fitting them both into the side. I think rotation and keeping them fresh is the right way, as I don't think we can get them into the side unless we go for the 4-4-2. I'd like it to work, but I think to take the team to the next level, we need to move away from that. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.