Very thought out post however despite saying 442 is outdated it sounds like you then pretty much say we should play 442 disguised as 4231. Alot of the time when we've played 442 in the past we've had a striker which drops deeper than the other.
For me, Burgess comes back, he's a head for heights, and as much as we all like Toto, he has a howler in him.
I'm not sure, I'm more saying that is Klopp a good tactical manager or like Cook does he have only a plan A to play 'Rock and roll' football but it means players know exactly what they are doing and it's a consistent message and due to his personality they players would run through a brick wall for him. It seems that is also Cook's approach. In terms of the midfield 3 for me you'd have Morsey and Fraser in there plus 1 other but haven't determined who that would be yet. Evans has been reasonably consistent but feel we may have another midfielder who could rip it up a bit more but they haven't shown it yet such as Carrol
All the games I've watched where Burgess has played he's looked like a very good CB infact on those occasions he's looked better than Edmunson but I appreciate for some of the match reports that's not generally what has happened. Nsiala still petrifies me
ha! no, not exactly. im aware Cook won't budge from 1) his formation and 2) his style/approach/system (i.e. advanced wingers, overlapping full backs etc etc). and its the two things combined that i was trying to fit to the team sheet Spanish proposed. if you had a 442 but said, right lads, i want the wingers to stay high in the attacking phase of play, and i want the second striker to play behind the no 9, then that is 4231, right? I'd just love to see Piggot used more so he'd have to be the 10, and fraser was ace from an attacking midfield position last season. the trouble with 442 against an effective 4231 is the overload in attack whilst retaining a solid defence and the idea that the wingers are more than just fast guys that can get to the byline and cross. without opening that debate up again(!), the value of crossing is only one aspect to getting goals so with wingers that are also able to come inside as additional strikers, pass and move etc etc its a powerful formation and system, as far as i understand it anyway, with players that can make use of it. which we're not quite doing yet... Also, i was wrong to say a 90's 442-that was whenthe formation started to evolve and style/approach got really interesting as long ball faded away following the arrival of some top quality no 10.s in the division and, most significantly of all, the abolition of the back pass. it killed Des Walkers career but it created defenders that could pass and sweeper keepers as that all emerge in response to that major rule change. What i should have said is the 1980's type of 442 and style of play, when the FA and the league both bought into the idea that the best way to score was to kick the ball long and avoid any more than 3 passes.Charles Hughe's pushed this idea from the FA and some teams with ltd ability did ok with it-watford and Wimbledon for example. but it was never going to win the league or in europe where greater technical ability meant you could out manoeuvre the opponent once you defended their long ball. of course our team made by SBR is a great example of a technical side that bucked the trend-and the best technicians were the two dutchmen, and lo and behold, it carried to us within a knats dick of the league (even Villa acknowledged we were better than them that season) and made us european champions.
One of the biggest criticisms of Cook at his previous clubs was the fact that he was so wedded to his 4-2-3-1 formation and system, even during the dips in form. Overall, it's worked well for him in the past, but I do wonder if the way we're set up to play is just so commonplace now that it's become easier to play against. We clearly do not have a 'Plan B', despite having last season's third top scorer on the bench week-in, week-out, which is frustrating. I know there's a clamour for 4-4-2 on here, and in parts of the wider fanbase, but I'm not entirely sure we've got the wide players for a flat 4-4-2. Our wide players (Edwards, Celina, Aluko, Louie Barry) are all wingers/wide attackers, so it makes sense to use them in a formation that has them as high up the pitch as possible. I think a 4-4-2 for us, in practice, would be so unbalanced it'd be essentially a 4-2-4 and we'd be even more vulnerable down the flanks. On the flip side, a 3-5-2 with Donacien and Coulson as rampaging wing-backs and perhaps Morsy as an auxiliary third centre back - pushing forwards - could be an effective solution to defensive issues and would allow us to incorporate players like Pigott and Fraser, but where would you fit those talented wide players that we've bought in over the summer? Where would Chaplin play? Plus, this is a manager and a coaching staff that are comfortable with 4-2-3-1, the time for experimenting with alternative formations and systems is not when we're approaching the festive fixture run-in. I think with the current set-up and formation, we're looking fairly solid defensively of late and we're definitely creating an abundance of chances in most our league games. I just think we need to be a bit better at the back, a bit more penetrating down the wings, and to take our chances effectively. I think Walton/Donacien/Edmondson/Burgess/Coulson is our best defensive line-up, although I think a new centre-back and left-back in the January transfer window would not be bad shouts. Morsy in central midfield has been a strong addition, but it's becoming clear that Evans is inconsistent. I'd be inclined to give Harper a chance alongside Morsy. Burns, when he's fit, is a nailed on starter down the right. The left flank is a little more difficult - Edwards is a talented player, but appears to lack end product. Celina is inconsistent. Fraser is not a winger and struggled when played there earlier this season. So I'd put Celina or Aluko down the left. The central attacking midfield slot should be Chaplin's. I'm not entirely sure how he lost his first team spot in the first place. As for up front, I'd give Pigott a go and drop/rest Bonne, as his recent form has not been brilliant.
If you went 352 Nuggets, (which is the other formation i mentioned) i would go.... Walton Donacien Edmundson Burgess Burns Fraser Morsy Evans Coulson Bonne Chaplin
2 good posts, 3 -5-2 with those players would be a strong team. Not sure about Evans. And I am an Aloko fan. But as Nuggets says, might be a bit late for the festive run in. Either way, we aint seen a Plan B in PCs strategic thinking, and woeful sub decisions. I am anxious we are going to get walloped tomorrow, but thats another thread.
Nice idea with Donacien on the right of a three-man central defence and Burns at right-wing back. I like that a lot. Looks like a balanced team, although I wonder if we can swap out Evans for Chaplin (with a licence to roam forwards) and have somebody like Pigott up top alongside Bonne to provide a bit more bite.
If I was the Chief Exec I would happily appoint you guys as an exciting new management team and coaches!
Yes doesn't seem like he'll budge from it, although I seem to recall the first game of the season he had Norwood and Bonne on at the end of the game. Agree about using Pigott or Chaplin more in the 10, they offer much more of a constant threat than Celina in that position. In regards to 442, I'd imagine it'll come in fashion again, there are drawbacks to every formation and a fair few successful teams still play 2 upfront. And let's not forget before we consign 442 to the bin saying its direct non technical stuff, one of the best technical teams I've ever seen played 442....Arsenal invincibles. I've just never seen an Ipswich team convince with 1 striker upfront. I've seen us do well in an odd game but it seems to me in particular the formation we play at the moment we have to be on it to create chances and score, when we have a bad game just nothing is created whereas I feel with a 442 or 532 you have more direct options. I seem to recall we used to play quite high wingers/wide players when Magilton was manager with Walters and Roberts (in what was probably the last Town team I enjoyed watching)
I think we've got the players for lots of formations including 442. If you're talking about a flat 442, Burns and Coulson could be solid wingers and to be fair for all I've said not sure why Edwards is in the team, his tracking back and defensive work has improved a hell of alot in recent times. Plus as I've said before bar Aluko from what I've seen this season Edwards, Celina and Burns look at their most dangerous when they stay wide, they all seem to run 100miles an hour into trouble in the centre. We've also got the players for a 532. I'd use Burns as a wing back. Bring Woolfenden back in the fold to bring the ball out from the back. Morsey, Fraser and another dependant on the game in the 3. Then up front it's finding the best combination from Pigott, Bonne and Chaplin....although I have to say if Norwoods head was in the right place as a defender facing Norwood and Bonne in the same team would petrify me, you'd know you were in for a tough afternoon.
But at the end of the day formation change isn't going to happen, let's just stop playing so many inconsistent wingers (wingers are always inconsistent) and get a bit more presence up top and that means we need to see more of in particular Chaplin in the 10 or one of the wide forward positions, he does look dangers cutting inside, plus Pigott and lets see more of Fraser in a central position.
Yup 442 isn’t ‘bad’ it’s just the type of players and the system, style etc has changed making it harder to beat technically good 4231’s.. I wrote a view on that arsenal team you mention in the tactics thread because I completely agree; it was a truly great team but with petit and viera sitting, overmars high on the left, bergkamp in the 10 behind Anelka and parlour given license to advance on the right, it was a 4231 in the attacking phase, and also a 433 when parlour bolstered the midfield and overmars came central from the left, as per their famous win against Utd.
There must be a good reason why it's gone out of fashion although I've seen somewhere that it's actually coming back in Spain with the majority of La Liga playing 2 strikers. The little man in a big man, little man combo upfront seems to have disappeared in recent years. Makes you wonder if a player like Michael Owen would've come through these days or he would've been moved to a wide forward abit like what we saw happen to Freddie Sear here. There's so many strikers you wonder if they would've made it in this era as they'd really struggle as a lone striker but also couldn't play as a wide forward. I was more referencing the Arsenal Team which went the season unbeaten ala Pires, Ljunberg, Viera, Silva, Bergkamp and Henry etc. Given some of the matches I've seen this season I think we certainly have the quality to hurt people and given the lack of quality at League 1 we could get away with playing 442 without teams hurting us. It worked for us under Lambert at the start in League 1, where the team weren't playing particularly well but we had a strong partnership upfront in Norwood and Jackson.
Formations are always going to evolve. Somebody will change their formation or tactics to gain advantage, then if it’s successful it gets widely adopted and so to counter that or gain an advantage a different formation or tactic needs to be adopted. The current game has been adopted from Barcelona’s and Spain’s ridiculously successful tippy tappy style.
Michael Owen is an interesting one. His whole game was quite predictable and he admits in his book that when keegan suggested he needed to be better at more things he ignored it ‘cos I could score right so what else do I need?’ But he admitted on reflection he didn’t see the game changing and how strikers had to have more qualities to beat ever better defenders. As such when he left Real Madrid No one wanted him. Not a single champions league club in Europe wanted his services. He was so out of demand his mgt team had to put a dvd together to show what he could do and Fergie took him on as a super sub for impact in the last minutes but nothing more. After than he got a game or two at Stoke…so definitely I think he’s have struggled to make it the game over the last few years. Same goes for Jeffers. what I don’t understand about our tactics is a 4231 is either possession based (like Spain Barca Swansea under Rodgers) where you often win by only 1-0 and the possession is your defence as they can’t score if they don’t have it. Or you do what klopp developed to beat that system which is a high pressing game to win the ball 30 yards from goal and where u have 4 guys up there and ready to attack a disoriented de fence (which u can’t in 442 cos the wingers are ore withdrawn). but we dont keep possession for more than a millisecond and we don’t really press as a foursome. We just do the wing back overlap and cross to a short bloke at no9 who wins nothing with his bonce and doesn’t hold the ball up to play others in. So I’m confused how cook expects to get results in his system and formation. Guess we’ll find out more later tonight…
