4-4-2 or 4-3-3?

[P/T Indie]

It was good to hear Jim doesn't like 4-5-1 and wants to try and play a more attacking and exciting type of football.

He seems to favour 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 personally I would go 4-4-2 at home 4-3-3 away hitting the home team on the counter with fast wingers.

Will it depend how lucky we are in getting our targets do we need to get a target man and two wingers in for 4-3-3 and if we miss out on say a winger and target man will it just be 4-4-2.

[black morse]

It was good to hear Jim doesn't like 4-5-1 and wants to try and play a more attacking and exciting type of football.

He seems to favour 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 personally I would go 4-4-2 at home 4-3-3 away hitting the home team on the counter with fast wingers.

Will it depend how lucky we are in getting our targets do we need to get a target man and two wingers in for 4-3-3 and if we miss out on say a winger and target man will it just be 4-4-2.

Last sentence exactly right. Any formation is less likely to succeed without the players in the right positions but assuming that we can get the right players I'd liketosee 4-4-2. The midfield needs to be strong in order to support the forwards.

[shrimpinho]

I am a traditionalist. I like 4-4-2. but I'd like one the strikers to have an almost free role behind his partner.

but in today's game I'd play 4-3-3 (as long as we had the right players to accommodate).
this is because if we need to tight'en it up or we are being over-run in the midfield, it can easily change into a 4-5-1. its not a fans favourite but its successful if deployed correctly.

[The Marksman]

It was good to hear Jim doesn't like 4-5-1 and wants to try and play a more attacking and exciting type of football.

He seems to favour 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 personally I would go 4-4-2 at home 4-3-3 away hitting the home team on the counter with fast wingers.

Will it depend how lucky we are in getting our targets do we need to get a target man and two wingers in for 4-3-3 and if we miss out on say a winger and target man will it just be 4-4-2.

I don't think having a target man really works in a 4-3-3 (or 4-5-1). The primary attributes needed to be a lone striker are pace to chase balls, strength to hold defenders off said balls when you've arrived and work rate to have the inclination to keep doing this for 90 minutes. Not height. Think Darren Bent, an excellent lone striker. Think Peter Crouch, a poor one.

As a lone striker, if you get your head to a ball, it's very rare that that ball ends up at the feet of one of your own players, because the target man is more isolated and there is a 0% chance of picking up balls that he flicks on, because there are no other strikers near him. Using a target man in a 4-4-2 makes much more sense, where the other striker can stay closer and at least attempt to pick up those balls that are flicked on.

For a lone striker, height is a bonus, not a necessity.

[Posh]

4-2-3-1

Worked well for Coley and Accy last season. And it didn't do too badly for Spain in the World Cup.

[james456]

Some interesting ideas there and I like Jim's 4-4-2/4-3-3 thinking.

It really highlights the importance of us bringing in a good player capable of playing as the lone striker though. What we need is Rene Howe but without the attitude.