Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Printable View

17-09-21, 17:15
tforturton

Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Why do we play 3-5-2?
If it's meant to flood the midfield, it doesn't work. If it's meant to get players forward, it doesn't work. Instead we get an out-numbered midfield, and our wing-backs get caught upfield and leave the three man defence exposed. Moore is on his own far too often. Let's go back to 4-4-2. Maybe..

Phillips - Ng, Morrison, Nelson, Bagan - Giles, Ralls, Pack, Colwill - Collins/Harris, Moore

The only issue is what to do with Aden Flint. What happens to him? Nobody in their right mind plays him in a two-man centre-back pairing. But he definitely adds height in defence, and is a goal-scoring presence up front. But everywhere else suffers. So is it Flint that's the problem? Is playing Aden Flint having a knock-on effect all across the team?
17-09-21, 17:20
G rangetown Blue

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

We need our 3 offensive midfielders back…and play like we did at Blackpool. Unfortunately Harris, Collins and Bowen have been disappointing so far.
17-09-21, 17:29
Hilts

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Is 442 the answer no. Unless we want to go down.
17-09-21, 17:29
life on mars

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tforturton

Why do we play 3-5-2?
If it's meant to flood the midfield, it doesn't work. If it's meant to get players forward, it doesn't work. Instead we get an out-numbered midfield, and our wing-backs get caught upfield and leave the three man defence exposed. Moore is on his own far too often. Let's go back to 4-4-2. Maybe..

Phillips - Ng, Morrison, Nelson, Bagan - Giles, Ralls, Pack, Colwill - Collins/Harris, Moore

The only issue is what to do with Aden Flint. What happens to him? Nobody in their right mind plays him in a two-man centre-back pairing. But he definitely adds height in defence, and is a goal-scoring presence up front. But everywhere else suffers. So is it Flint that's the problem? Is playing Aden Flint having a knock-on effect all across the team?

Flint can play the system the other two can't, it would be cruel to drop hi under MM he and Pack have greatly improved.

I wonder if we should drop Nelson and draft in one of our development centre backs Denham or Mcguinesss or both ,what we go to lose?
17-09-21, 17:32
WJ99mobile

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

We tried it loads of times

It was awful

Flint can’t deal with it
17-09-21, 17:32
G rangetown Blue

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

I guess we play 3-5-2 because we have 4/5 decent centre backs, and 3 very inexperienced full backs.
17-09-21, 18:01
Fine Lines

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

From what I’ve seen it’s more of a 3-4-3.

It seems to be our only way of scoring is getting crosses into the box. So therefore we need to increase the number of people in the box , so we should play 2 up front. Crucially we should also get players into wide areas and actually cross the ball. We seem to do neither.

I’d certainly be tempted to give 4-4-2 a go.
17-09-21, 18:08
J R Hartley

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

No
17-09-21, 18:48
the other bob wilson

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by G rangetown Blue

We need our 3 offensive midfielders back…and play like we did at Blackpool. Unfortunately Harris, Collins and Bowen have been disappointing so far.

Why has Bowen been disappointing?

Oh and my answer to the question in the thread title is no - the problems we have are not down to what the system is, they’d exist whatever formation we used.
17-09-21, 19:19
G rangetown Blue

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

Why has Bowen been disappointing?

Oh and my answer to the question in the thread title is no - the problems we have are not down to what the system is, they’d exist whatever formation we used.

Bowen seems a little ‘lightweight’ at present, hopefully he will improve. Not really made an impression yet.
17-09-21, 19:23
G rangetown Blue

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

In a nutshell, the ‘problem’ is injuries to Ralls, Bacuna and Giles, and letting Murphy go.

Fans can write all they like about formations, “hoofball”, McCarthy, commitment….blah blah blah…that’s all bollux.
18-09-21, 08:41
Trigger

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

On fifa and football manager I always revert to the 4231. I don't see why Mick can't see this.

2 cb, 2 fb with one being allowed to venture forward more than the other.

2 cdm for that stability in defence, when attacking, the more cultural one will go forward and provide options, defensive one sits.

Wide attackers can position narrower for tiki taka or go wide to spread play.

CAM will probably get most goals as he ghosts past the ST who will be a focal point but also swap positions with the Cam.

Fluid and style can be whatever is needed.

If CCFC want my full instructions and settings let me know.
18-09-21, 08:52
2b2bdoo

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

The more I look at the squad the more I think letting Murphy go out on loan was a huge mistake. Yes he was hit and miss but we literally have no width at all without Giles. Not many who can take a player on, I think Murphy has a goal threat in him as well. I'm not saying he would have started every game but something off the bench or if we wanted to mix it up.

I'll be honest I see little in Harris as a player upfront.

MM has made the squad very limited in how we can play formation wise.
18-09-21, 09:21
Mr Shhh

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tforturton

Why do we play 3-5-2?
If it's meant to flood the midfield, it doesn't work. If it's meant to get players forward, it doesn't work. Instead we get an out-numbered midfield, and our wing-backs get caught upfield and leave the three man defence exposed. Moore is on his own far too often. Let's go back to 4-4-2. Maybe..

Phillips - Ng, Morrison, Nelson, Bagan - Giles, Ralls, Pack, Colwill - Collins/Harris, Moore

The only issue is what to do with Aden Flint. What happens to him? Nobody in their right mind plays him in a two-man centre-back pairing. But he definitely adds height in defence and is a goal-scoring presence up front. But everywhere else suffers. So is it Flint that's the problem? Is playing Aden Flint having a knock-on effect all across the team?

But surely we are getting players forward as we're the 5th highest team in the league for shots per game (well joint fourth with QPR).
18-09-21, 11:51
Citizen's Nephew

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by J R Hartley

No

I'd just like to add the word 'f*ck' to the beginning of No.
If anyone's thinking about formations with our squad then think shifting deckchairs on the Titanic.
18-09-21, 15:59
dembethewarrior

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

We don't have wingers.
18-09-21, 16:00
dembethewarrior

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by life on mars

Flint can play the system the other two can't, it would be cruel to drop hi under MM he and Pack have greatly improved.

I wonder if we should drop Nelson and draft in one of our development centre backs Denham or Mcguinesss or both ,what we go to lose?

We didn't develop McGuinness
18-09-21, 16:09
dembethewarrior

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fine Lines

From what I’ve seen it’s more of a 3-4-3.

It seems to be our only way of scoring is getting crosses into the box. So therefore we need to increase the number of people in the box , so we should play 2 up front. Crucially we should also get players into wide areas and actually cross the ball. We seem to do neither.

I’d certainly be tempted to give 4-4-2 a go.

We don't have wingers.
19-09-21, 15:34
tforturton

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Interesting to see that we played the last twenty minutes yesterday with a basic four-four-two formation, and probably looked the most effective we had all game (though that's not saying much). Mick must read my threads....
19-09-21, 15:35
dembethewarrior

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by tforturton

Interesting to see that we played the last twenty minutes yesterday with a basic four-four-two formation, and probably looked the most effective we had all game (though that's not saying much). Mick must read my threads....

We've done it more than once with year.
Players like Colwill and Harris are not natural wide players.
19-09-21, 15:48
life on mars

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by dembethewarrior

We've done it more than once with year.
Players like Colwill and Harris are not natural wide players.

We have very little options, if the set is changed its going to effect the Micks dreams and plans.

Cancel Tomlins / Vassell's worthless contract free up wages and get a free agent in on short term contract preferably with pace to supplement Giles when he returns?
19-09-21, 16:00
LeningradCowboy

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by life on mars

We have very little options, if the set is changed its going to effect the Micks dreams and plans.

Cancel Tomlins / Vassell's worthless contract free up wages and get a free agent in on short term contract preferably with pace to supplement Giles when he returns?

Why would Tomlin or Vassell agree to cancel their contracts? They aren't going to get better deals anywhere else.
19-09-21, 16:03
surge

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by life on mars

We have very little options, if the set is changed its going to effect the Micks dreams and plans.

Cancel Tomlins / Vassell's worthless contract free up wages and get a free agent in on short term contract preferably with pace to supplement Giles when he returns?

While no expert I presume we don't save money from cancelling contracts unless we can show they've breached terms or come to an agreement which they wouldn't be inclined to do. Just means we pay up front rather than monthly so no additional funds.

The problem we have still is that Warnock left us with a squad that he thought he could get promoted but ultimately he couldn't and no one else can either because it just quite fit together. Flint's strengths, for example, makes him one of our best performers each week but his weaknesses makes it more difficult to win the game partly because his presence makes Morrison a worse player than if he was playing next to someone else. We should try not to judge these players as individuals and need to look at how they fit into an XI.
19-09-21, 16:16
Rhiwbina Blues

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Mick has his favourite like everyone else but Morrison is struggling with his ankle and Nelson came back from his op without any pre season.

If mcguiness hadn't got injury as well then he may had a few more games.

The midfield was dreadful yday and that was done to tactics. Vaulks seem to be shadowing Pearson and Pack mark Lerma leaving Billing totally free. Flint seem to mark Solanki so either nelson or morrison should have pick up Billing
19-09-21, 16:49
Llandaff Blue

Re: Is 4-4-2 the answer?

Quote:

Originally Posted by life on mars

We have very little options, if the set is changed its going to effect the Micks dreams and plans.

Cancel Tomlins / Vassell's worthless contract free up wages and get a free agent in on short term contract preferably with pace to supplement Giles when he returns?

Cancelling contracts is expensive business. Both are gone next summer anyway so we're stuck with them until then

All times are GMT. The time now is 22:42.