Page 1 of 1
4-4-2
Posted:
Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:27 pmby shrimper
Is pretty much how we started last night (as a few suggested we might, when we signed Moss).
Reckon Sammy will try to be flexible but will this be the trend, particularly while Jimbo's injured?
Re: 4-4-2
Posted:
Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:44 pmby Smeggy
I much prefer 442 when you play with 2 wingers instead of 3 centre mids, 1 winger and a massive gap.
Re: 4-4-2
Posted:
Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:50 pmby Harry
agree with the above. If this is to be the plan for the start of the season, we'll have to add a winger to our shopping list. We saw at the start of last season how 1 winger and 3 centres doesn't work. Also our 352 provides cover and support for our frankly technically inferior central defence. We'll have to buck our ideas up if only playing 2 in the middle
Re: 4-4-2
Posted:
Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:52 pmby P/T Indie
Yeah we can't start playing it until Wainwright is back and then it would be my prefered line up.
However if we bring Hudson in will we play 5-3-2 with him in the middle with Drummond & Stanley.
Re: 4-4-2
Posted:
Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:16 pmby George Dawes
4-2-3-1
Re: 4-4-2
Posted:
Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:16 pmby marky
I maintain we don't have the personnel, even with the addition of Wilson, to be successful using 4-4-2. Nothing has changed when it comes to the heart of our formation (i.e. central defence and midfield) and I see no reason why the players we have in these positions will suddenly be able to play as a partnership of 2 when they clearly couldn't last season.
Re: 4-4-2
Posted:
Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:27 pmby The Red Knight
marky wrote:I maintain we don't have the personnel, even with the addition of Wilson, to be successful using 4-4-2. Nothing has changed when it comes to the heart of our formation (i.e. central defence and midfield) and I see no reason why the players we have in these positions will suddenly be able to play as a partnership of 2 when they clearly couldn't last season.
Agree 100%
Wilson and Moss as wing backs, Bentley Artell and Adams as centre backs with Fraser Drummy and Stanners in midfield.
Re: 4-4-2
Posted:
Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:57 pmby Abbo
Mcstay in for Artell, his reading of a game is not good, no pace, his passing is woefull, his only good atribute is his heading.
Re: 4-4-2
Posted:
Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:04 pmby james456
The problem we had last season with playing 4-4-2 is still there as some have already said. We don't have the pace/agility in the centre of defence to spread the defenders out like that.
Although you have to admit that Mark Duffy was fantastic playing further forward in the 4-4-2 and not at wing back where he would be forced to play in the 5-3-2.