What formation do you think suits Derby's current squad (home and away can vary) and why?

[sage]

I think 451/433 suits us at home when you need width to create chances against a packed defence and 442 (diamond) works well away, when we need to nullify the opposition whilst ensuring the forwards don't get isolated. 

 

I just don't think we have the right midfield to play 442 with two wingers. Hendrick and Bryson is the only combination which could just about cope with this. 

[Cisse]

1-1-8. I want goals.

[Dimmu]

I really hope we will have few options both home and away!

[sage]

oh no this thread is Finnished

[Cisse]

oh no this thread is Finnished

Nice of you to notice.

[ramblur]

1-1-8. I want goals.

I'm sure you'd get them,Cisse.Which end would be the debate,though.I'd put my money on our net (and,yes,I realise you're tongue in cheek)

[Cisse]

The early days of football 118 was a common tactic. Besides we let too many goals anyway. Just feed the fish and he will score.

[ramblur]

The early days of football 118 was a common tactic. Besides we let too many goals anyway. Just feed the fish and he will score.

Probably why the fecking offside law came in.For what it's worth,I like the current law.The original law came in to stop 'goalhangers'.The trouble with the offside trap (before the law change),was that it attempted to convert a forward who wasn't looking to commit an offence/gain an advantage into someone causing an infringement.Let's see more goals and better defending.

[Alph]

4231 most simple and adaptable formation in the game and I love it!

[VulcanRam]

Doesn't matter what formation we play if we can't defend crosses or play offside!

 

But yes, three central midfield to have 433 with the ball and 451 without suits us I reckon.

 

Eustace holding, giving license for Bryson and Hughes to push on seems to have worked better than just having two in CM.

[G STAR RAM]

Surely the manager and coaching staff should be looking at each individual game and be picking the formation they think is best suited to beating the opposition?

[Srg]

Surely the manager and coaching staff should be looking at each individual game and be picking the formation they think is best suited to beating the opposition?

 

Depends which way you look at it. Some might say that the opposition should be changing to suit us.

 

I think we play a form of 4-1-2-2-1 currently, and I think it is probably our best option.

[Mostyn6]

I would go for a 3-4-1-2 (or 3-4-2-1) obviously with a 'keeper behind:-

 

Wisdom - Keogh - Buxton

 

Ward - Eustace - Bryson - Forsyth

 

Hughes

 

Bennett - Martin

 

I'd happily drop Martin in alongside Hughes and allow interchanging between the front three.

 

Forsyth needs taking out of the defensive firing line and allowing to play his natural position, similarly Bennett needs to play centrally.

[Gary Teale]

I would play 0-0-10 when attacking interchanging and moving between the lines and 10-0-0 when defending going with runners and keeping our shape.

[Asanovic]

That fluid midfield that Nige introduced was fantastic, particularly at Brighton. Didn't necessarily see it as diamond as everyone played everywhere. Would work away most times IMO.

[G STAR RAM]

Depends which way you look at it. Some might say that the opposition should be changing to suit us.

 

I think we play a form of 4-1-2-2-1 currently, and I think it is probably our best option.

 

In a match with two evenly matched teams I think it is normally the home team that dictates the formations of the team.

 

I would like to see us very attacking at home, it gets the crowd on side.

 

Away from home we should be inviting teams on to us and playing quick counter attacking football.

[RodleyRam]

I think what we have been playing has been pretty fluid to be honest, we haven't stuck to one formation rigidly the whole match.

 

I prefer a back 4 - I think Mostyn's 3 would leave us a little exposed and I wouldn't have Ward playing right wing back to be honest. With 3 and a DCM we could be a bit at risk against anyone playing with any width and pace out wide IMO but full points to Mostyn for his pretty patterns...

 

Eustace protecting the back 4 and breaking up play has worked well, he's been a pretty astute signing.

 

Beyond that I think we've got the ability and fluidity to mix things up around Martin playing as the central striker. Hughes and Bryson have done well linking up with him and then the other two forward players have a bit of license to play wide or join in up front.

 

I suppose if you want to label it it's probably a 4-1-2-2-1 but it's never really one thing for very long in any one game. To be fair, the application of this formation hasn't differed too much from Clough to McLaren. It will be interesting to see if and how things changes as the likes of Hendrick and Russell come back into contention.

[JohnClement]

In the modern game Don Revie's Leeds would be playing 3-3-2 after about 1/2 an hour.

[eddie]

I would play 0-0-10 when attacking interchanging and moving between the lines and 10-0-0 when defending going with runners and keeping our shape.

 

That sounds like Arthur Cox-speak.

 

"We attack as a team, we defend as a team".

[Mostyn6]

I think what we have been playing has been pretty fluid to be honest, we haven't stuck to one formation rigidly the whole match.

 

I prefer a back 4 - I think Mostyn's 3 would leave us a little exposed and I wouldn't have Ward playing right wing back to be honest. With 3 and a DCM we could be a bit at risk against anyone playing with any width and pace out wide IMO but full points to Mostyn for his pretty patterns...

 

Eustace protecting the back 4 and breaking up play has worked well, he's been a pretty astute signing.

 

Beyond that I think we've got the ability and fluidity to mix things up around Martin playing as the central striker. Hughes and Bryson have done well linking up with him and then the other two forward players have a bit of license to play wide or join in up front.

 

I suppose if you want to label it it's probably a 4-1-2-2-1 but it's never really one thing for very long in any one game. To be fair, the application of this formation hasn't differed too much from Clough to McLaren. It will be interesting to see if and how things changes as the likes of Hendrick and Russell come back into contention.

 

 

I wouldn't either. That's not wing back. That's right midfield like he played for some parts towards the end of the game on Saturday. Ward likes to come deep to get the ball, but also likes to run and go outside the defender. As we are so ***** at defending, I wouldn't set up the team to be anything like defensive. By having several players more advanced than usual, the chances are the opposition would be pinned back in their own half (think first half v Sheff Weds last season at home) and as such wouldn't be too adventurous attacking, knowing our attacking prowess. Most of my formation is on the theory it would make the opposition brick themselves. Most of our conceding of goals have been through the middle and hardly ever from the wings. I wouldn't be too worried about the opposition getting down the wings as they'd be too scared to.