dcfc88888 Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 This stupid 4-5-1 formation that Nigel insists on playing is getting on my nerves. I'm confused why he keeps playing Sammon as a lone striker, when he's been better in a 4-4-2 formation, It just seems if Sammon is a lone striker he isn't getting as many balls upfront from midfield. And the diamond 4-4-2 formation when we lost at Leicester, hell that was so bad we had to switch fot a 3 man midfield within half an hour because we went 2 down. It just seems like Nigel is a really poor tactician when it comes to formation, because he's been here since December 09 now and he keeps messing about experimenting with different formations that aren't working, nothing wrong with normal 4-4-2. We've had loads of goals this season at home with 2 upfront. Thoughts? Is nigel a bad tactician when it comes to formation? And what do you think is our best? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCFCfranco Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 I honestly think nige is still learning. People are saying 442 is becoming outdated. So maybe nige wants to find a new one. It's not 451. I'd play 442 though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramarena Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 There is nothing wrong with 4-5-1, it's how the manager sets up the team and the blend of the team picked by the manager that can be the problem. NC is Mr Cautious I'm afraid. I sometimes wonder how well this team would do away from home if he just set them up to go at the opposition and let them play without fear. It's not like the way we play away from home at present is working, we try and defend yet our defence is like a chocolate fireguard, so why persist with it. The fear of the opposition and negativity has also crept into a few of our home games, the Forest and Brighton games spring to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Dave Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 There is no problem with 4-5-1 if the midfield players support the striker, and if the striker always has options to pass it off. Not only must the midfield support the striker but they also have to make runs past him. This doesnt seem to happen at derby much this eason so we need to play 4-4-2. Especially with a striker like Sammon who can hold the ball up and get flick ons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DcFc Dyycheee Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 It's 4-4-2 and 4-5-1 when Ward plays. NC said on the radio that Ward has a free role, he can go on the left or up front. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonRam Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 I believe it's down to wanting to have Hendrink/Bryson/Hughes on the pitch all at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Dave Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 I believe it's down to wanting to have Hendrink/Bryson/Hughes on the pitch all at the same time. I agree, he doesn't want to drop any of them as not to upset them but on recent run of form i would haave Bryson and Hendrick and give Hughes a rest for a bit, hasn't been the same since the Leeds game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alph Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 I think we should play 442 because it forces support for Sammon. I prefer 451 myself because our midfield trio of Bryson, Hendrick and Hughes are pretty good. 451 means we can field our best players (our best 6 outfield players probably includes 3 central midfielders, 2 defenders and a wide man). Problem is between the 3 of them they can't support Sammon enough. God knows why, there's 3 of them!!! I prefer variations of 451 anyway. A lot of modern day midfielders become specialists. The box to box midfielder is often a jack of all trades and master on none. Teams prefer now to have a playmaker and a protector/destroyer (whatever you want to call them). It just makes it easier for everybody to know their job. Keeps it simple. No covering. Nobody asked to do anything they aren't best at. Love 4231 or 4321. It just forces support to the front man. There's no excuse for CB to be exposed. Only problem is sometimes the opposition midfield can wedge a gap between the DM and AM's. like when we had Cywka and Commons who didn't like tracking back we sometimes looked like two teams of defence and attack. With Coutts, Hughes, Bryson, Hendrick, Ward, Jacobs you have a decent players at this level. We need to fit as many of them in our 11 as possible to be at our best playing the way Nigel wants to play. His 4411 looked alright. Jacobs didn't have to defend (which he seems to hate defending) and Sammon isn't a taxi journey from Hughes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted January 22, 2013 Share Posted January 22, 2013 The search for the mystical formation that gives you the edge, eh? Football's equivalent of 'stone, paper, scissors'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrimsonRam Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 I think we should play 442 because it forces support for Sammon. I prefer 451 myself because our midfield trio of Bryson, Hendrick and Hughes are pretty good. 451 means we can field our best players (our best 6 outfield players probably includes 3 central midfielders, 2 defenders and a wide man). Problem is between the 3 of them they can't support Sammon enough. God knows why, there's 3 of them!!! I prefer variations of 451 anyway. A lot of modern day midfielders become specialists. The box to box midfielder is often a jack of all trades and master on none. Teams prefer now to have a playmaker and a protector/destroyer (whatever you want to call them). It just makes it easier for everybody to know their job. Keeps it simple. No covering. Nobody asked to do anything they aren't best at. Love 4231 or 4321. It just forces support to the front man. There's no excuse for CB to be exposed. Only problem is sometimes the opposition midfield can wedge a gap between the DM and AM's. like when we had Cywka and Commons who didn't like tracking back we sometimes looked like two teams of defence and attack. With Coutts, Hughes, Bryson, Hendrick, Ward, Jacobs you have a decent players at this level. We need to fit as many of them in our 11 as possible to be at our best playing the way Nigel wants to play. His 4411 looked alright. Jacobs didn't have to defend (which he seems to hate defending) and Sammon isn't a taxi journey from Hughes Something springs to mind about playing your best 11 rather than your 11 best. I'd drop any of the central trio all day if it meant the outfield team was better for it. Personally i'd drop Bryson and allow Hendrick and Hughes to rotate forward and back in the centre depending on the game and what it calls for. Not that I don't rate Bryson or anything it's just having a 17 and 20 year old in the middle makes me smile. Like this ----> 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' /> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Teale Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 The search for the mystical formation that gives you the edge, eh? Football's equivalent of 'stone, paper, scissors'. Very true. We are all great managers and call mangers like Harry rednapp tactically inept. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambitious Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 FORMATION MEANS **** ALL!!! The daft, stupid, idiotic ***** at games that spend their time whining need to ******* learn this... I counter the 4-4-2 chant with 3-5-2, because it means that little - it's the mentality behind the formation that is the key. Every team that players 4-5-1 do they have an isolated striker? I think 4-5-1 is infact the best formation if played correctly, 3 man centre midfield if played correctly is the biggest threat you can have IMO. It's all about opinions, and to be honest - why isn't my opinion as valid as Cloughs, SAFs or Mourinhos, I might be the best manager to ever live, but then again I might be a fool babbling on about nothing and the same goes for everyone else. Instead of thinking a formation is the answer to all our problems, think about the reasoning behind it - the players, are they playing their role correctly? are they doing it well enough... why don't we play 4-4-2? do we have 2 centre midfielders strong enough, or do the wingers come in too much, and we lose width - whereas with 5 the wingers tend to stay out wide. Fit a system around the players you have, not the other way round. I can see why we play 4-5-1 personally, I just don't think we're doing it correctly, well correctly enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaddesdenRam Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 4-4-2 (4411) Lego Bray Keogh Obrien Roberts Coutts Hughes Hendrick (or Bryson) Davies (or Jacobs) Ward Sammon 451 Lego Bray Keogh Obrien Roberts Coutts Hughes Hendrick Bryson Ward Sammon The only two we play at the moment. I would like to see this formation Lego Bray Keogh Obrien Roberts Hughes Coutts Hendrick Bryson Sammon Ward Because Brayford bombs down the right, Coutts can come away from the centre and combine with brayford. And then on the left it plays fine because even Bryson isnt a winger Ward can peel off and Roberts can provide support. The CB's get protected more and the full backs have a more defensive support through Bryson and Coutts pulling back. It would rely very heavily on Hendrick and Bryson doing a lot of running but i think they have it in them. But its way too radical for Clough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChaddesdenRam Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 FORMATION MEANS **** ALL!!! The daft, stupid, idiotic ***** at games that spend their time whining need to ******* learn this... I counter the 4-4-2 chant with 3-5-2, because it means that little - it's the mentality behind the formation that is the key. Ah but if you say it is the mentality behind it surely choosing a different formation to 451 would give the players more confidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duracell Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Clough very rarely tries something once and leaves it at that. If he tries something, he'll keep trying it many, many times. I'm sure he's expecting much more from 4-5-1 and much more from Sammon. Maybe we're just going to have to put up with it until Clough decides it won't work - we still may be some way off that happening. Then again, 4-5-1 did very well twice. We beat Bristol very well using that formation and we dealt with Hull very well with it. It's frustrating as a fan to watch something not working so often. Other managers might applaud the bravery of sticking to what you believe in for so long. NC certainly has a backbone. Don't know if Clough is a bad tactician or not. At the moment, it still feels like he's focussing on building a team and focussing on what we're doing and not other teams. If we ever go up, I hope that changes. It will have to if we want to stay up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ambitious Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Ah but if you say it is the mentality behind it surely choosing a different formation to 451 would give the players more confidence? Why? I think our 3 centre midfielders like being close together, none of them like sitting and pretty much think all of them would say they're attack minded midfield - add to the fact, a 2 man midfield HAS to be a lot more disciplined, you can't have as much freedom and the work load perhaps doubles. 4-4-2 is a basic block formation, it's direct, gives little or no freedom.. IMO and if you try to play 4-4-2 with freedom that's when you make mistakes 4-5-1 gives a lot of room to manipulate like 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 that's the way I would play, if I was a manager... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcnram Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Nothing wrong with 4 5 1, many teams use it now. The only time it doesn't work for us is when our midfield don't get up quick enough to support Sammon. Playing 4 4 2 with two wide players just leaves us outnumbered in midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uttoxram75 Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 You need a bit of luck in building a team. For instance, I don't believe Keogh and O'Brien work brilliantly together. Not knocking either of em, its just that they don't seem to have that telepathic understanding of where the other is, who's going for which ball, who's picking up the runner, etc. You can't coach it - some players just "fit" together. I think our 451 is a bit like that - you need players to instinctively know when to make the run, when to stay, and you need different types of players to fully utilise it. Its not always the best individuals - sometimes we look more balanced when Ben Davies plays yet he is probably not most fans choice as a first name on the team sheet player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asanovic Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 We were getting overrun against forest in the first half on Saturday with a 5 man midfield. If we'd taken another man out of that we could have been well and truly shafted, so it seemed sensible to me that we stuck with it until half time. Our best formation would have Hendrick, Hughes, Bryson, Ward and Jacobs IMO. I'd like to see what we were trying to do a couple of years ago, with two wingers making us a 4-3-3 when we're attacking, a 4-5-1 when we don't have the ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddie Posted January 23, 2013 Share Posted January 23, 2013 Ah but if you say it is the mentality behind it surely choosing a different formation to 451 would give the players more confidence? Can I put you down for 'scissors'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.