Guest BristolCity89 Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Time for 442? Bored of people saying we cant play it because we dont have the wingers...we can at least try it with adomah on the right and either pearson/bolasie or campbell ryce on the left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProjectMayhem Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 the only problem is kilkenny will struggle to play in a 4 man midfield without another player working for him... i definitely think we should give it a go though you never know he might surprise us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AlwayBelieves Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Mcinnes said yesterday we are not quite good enough to go 442! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Rollason Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Time for 442? Bored of people saying we cant play it because we dont have the wingers...we can at least try it with adomah on the right and either pearson/bolasie or campbell ryce on the left. Its not a winger problem, we dont have the MIDfield for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Colby-Tit Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 I'd like to see this ....................................James.................................... Skuse........Wilson................Fonts............McGivern .................................Cisse.......................................... Albert...........................................................Woolford ..............................Killkenny....................................... ...................Stead..................Pitman......................... (Sorry Marv) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Would like to see Kilkenny and Cisse in a 4-4-2 with bert and Pearson/wooly on wings Both have played in two man midfields in past and could do it again. If we had a solid centre half. Personally I'd be looking to flog marv. Decent player, but not outstanding at anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 I'd like to see this ....................................James.................................... Skuse........Wilson................Fonts............McGivern .................................Cisse.......................................... Albert...........................................................Woolford ..............................Killkenny....................................... ...................Stead..................Pitman......................... (Sorry Marv) That gets my vote. Or a three man defence with Marv and Cisse as our tackling midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bodiesaffer Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 I'd like to see this ....................................James.................................... Skuse........Wilson................Fonts............McGivern .................................Cisse.......................................... Albert...........................................................Woolford ..............................Killkenny....................................... ...................Stead..................Pitman......................... (Sorry Marv) We will deffo be down with this team sheet and formation. 442 needs two destroyers in the middle Cisse is one but we need one more. Marv and Skuse are the only options to partner Cisse in a 442 I would drop killkenny. I would go with Marv. But have we got the wingers for 442? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bywaterred Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 I'd like to see this ....................................James.................................... Skuse........Wilson................Fonts............McGivern .................................Cisse.......................................... Albert...........................................................Woolford ..............................Killkenny....................................... ...................Stead..................Pitman......................... (Sorry Marv) Quite possibly the answer but I think we should consider tge left to be: woolford/JCR/yannick for me it's that side that seems to be a problem. I don't think mr woolford is the answer there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor10 Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 We've never had the squad for it, you being "bored" doesn't change that unassailable fact. The only formation that has consistently worked for us at this level was 4-4-1-1 with Noble. We also had a good spell when we played 3-5-2, which I would be inclined to use if we need to bring in a second striker. We've got three decent enough centre backs in Wilson, Fontaine and Tanga, two of which have enough mobility to plug any gaps. Cisse is brilliant at sitting and it gives Marvin less responsibility to get forward and more chance to batter the opposition midfield. McGivern likes to push forward so a wingback role might better suit him and his delivery is (whilst inconsistent) good. Albert obviously plays on the right and one of Killkenny, Reid or Pearson could play in a more advanced position. Clarkson could also perform that role like he did in this formation at the start of his first season. Then obviously Pitman and Stead start up top as we do need to find a formation that will suit what we have once Maynard has left. 3-5-2 is an underused formation but I think it could work unless we sign another Noble. I agree, we dont have the squad or players for an effective 4-4-2! Do people not think Del would at least try his preferred formation if he felt it would be effective!? Clearly he doesn't think that and I agree with him! With regards to the 3-5-2 that could be interesting! We have 3 decent centre backs to all cover each other, Cisse could screen in front of them giving us added protection. For me though if we went down this route I wouldnt play Albert on the right all the time, if Del were to get a striker of his choice I would quite like to see Albert pushed up top as one of the two strikers, but with more of a licence to roam, drop deep, run in behind and feed off the other striker to stretch defenses! I for one would be interested to see if that could be effective for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Robin Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Mcinnes said yesterday we are not quite good enough to go 442! Well we ain't to good playing 451 are we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 I'd like to see this ....................................James.................................... Skuse........Wilson................Fonts............McGivern .................................Cisse.......................................... Albert...........................................................Woolford ..............................Killkenny....................................... ...................Stead..................Pitman......................... (Sorry Marv) Wow. That is certainly a contender for most light-weight City team ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderHider Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 We've never had the squad for it, you being "bored" doesn't change that unassailable fact. The only formation that has consistently worked for us at this level was 4-4-1-1 with Noble. We also had a good spell when we played 3-5-2, which I would be inclined to use if we need to bring in a second striker. We've got three decent enough centre backs in Wilson, Fontaine and Tanga, two of which have enough mobility to plug any gaps. Cisse is brilliant at sitting and it gives Marvin less responsibility to get forward and more chance to batter the opposition midfield. McGivern likes to push forward so a wingback role might better suit him and his delivery is (whilst inconsistent) good. Albert obviously plays on the right and one of Killkenny, Reid or Pearson could play in a more advanced position. Clarkson could also perform that role like he did in this formation at the start of his first season. Then obviously Pitman and Stead start up top as we do need to find a formation that will suit what we have once Maynard has left. 3-5-2 is an underused formation but I think it could work unless we sign another Noble. Nobles replacement was Carle, and his replacement was Hartley I guess. What wa\s our formation when we had Hartley (who set up pretty much all of Maynard goals that season) Didn't Maynard play upfront with lump, Jeesus cant think of his dam name! Flippin whojamaflip, keep wanting to say Adomah, but not him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderHider Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Dele Adebola! Phew. We never really replaced Brooker imo, quality player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderHider Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Wow. That is certainly a contender for most light-weight City team ever. Its missing Wilkshire for that accolade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Its missing Wilkshire for that accolade. No way Kilkenny has that accolade. Funny that though, there was me thinking Aussies were hard hitting sports men, born winners. Those two were/are probably the most poncy light weight tarts to play in a City midfield, even if they could/can pass a ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CiderHider Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 No way Kilkenny has that accolade. Funny that though, there was me thinking Aussies were hard hitting sports men, born winners. Those two were/are probably the most poncy light weight tarts to play in a City midfield, even if they could/can pass a ball. All Aussies are pussies, a sun tan and stupid whiny accent doesn't make you hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BristolCity89 Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 How can people say we dont have the team to play 442, do you not think everyone in our squad grew up playing 442 we are'nt exactly full of dutch Players are we...team for the min:James-Skuse,Carey,Nyatanga,McGivern-Adomah,Elliot,Pearson,CampbellRyce-Maynard,Pitman. Nothing to lose going away to Southampton imo ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
And Its Smith Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 1325009109' post=1482686'] I'd like to see this ....................................James.................................... Skuse........Wilson................Fonts............McGivern .................................Cisse.......................................... Albert...........................................................Woolford ..............................Killkenny....................................... ...................Stead..................Pitman......................... (Sorry Marv) Oh my g. That team would lose 4-1 most weeks! A team either needs to create mainly through the middle or mainly on the wings. You have 5 defensive players and 5 attacking ones. Drop Kilkenny from that and bring in Marv and it is better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_BCFC Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Well we ain't to good playing 451 are we. Didn't we play 4-5-1 when we went on a great run 5 games ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor10 Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 How can people say we dont have the team to play 442, do you not think everyone in our squad grew up playing 442 we are'nt exactly full of dutch Players are we...team for the min:James-Skuse,Carey,Nyatanga,McGivern-Adomah,Elliot,Pearson,CampbellRyce-Maynard,Pitman. Nothing to lose going away to Southampton imo ! Well if we do go 4-4-2 and it works then I hope I am proved wrong!! But playing 4-4-2 at southampton with that personnel and our current form I cant see us getting anything!! Fair enough people want 4-4-2 but please tell me you are joking when you say JCR should play on the left of the 4!? He is awful, if we are going to go 4-4-2 atleast make us hard to beat and play our better players! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red-Robbo Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 Didn't we play 4-5-1 when we went on a great run 5 games ago? ... and now we're still playing it when we're on a shite 5 game run . As the Stranglers said Something Better Change. If losing the 5-man midfield makes us defensively weaker then that would be counterbalanced by our two men upfront. We won't ship goals if we pin teams back to their half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_BCFC Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 ... and now we're still playing it when we're on a shite 5 game run . True. Maybe says that it is a confidence thing rather than a formation thing but evidently we need a clear out to mprove long term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted December 27, 2011 Share Posted December 27, 2011 ... and now we're still playing it when we're on a shite 5 game run . Didn't we switch to 442 in the 'Boro, Derby and Cov away games and end of losing from drawing positions? 3 points better off if we'd stuck with 451? Who knows eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.