Formation

[Ramarena]

Lot's of criticism of Mac sticking to the same formation, which is fine but I'm not sure the solutions I've heard people suggest would work. 

4-4-2 is all the rage now, but how do you play two strikers when you don't have any out and out strikers available? We also don't have any defensive midfield options available either, are people seriously suggesting a midfield two of Hughes, Bryson or Hendrick with two wide players would be able to control a game? I believe we'd be taken apart quite easily in a 4-4-2.

The more I think about it the less options I can come up with. The best is 5-3-2 which we had a go with against Chesterfield, but it did not look good with most of our key players available and it still leaves us with no out and out strikers, however it would potentially allow Hughes, Hendrick and Bryson to play together. 

Don't envy Mac at the moment lot's of tough calls to make. Sure he's made mistakes, but he really is struggling for options as well. 

[cosmic]

So basically you'd like mac to pick another formation, but we don't have the right personnel to do so? So he chose the right formation. 

[Ramarena]

So basically you'd like mac to pick another formation, but we don't have the right personnel to do so? So he chose the right formation. 

[tomsdubs]

442

Grant

Christie - Keogh - Albentosa - Forsyth

Ince - Thorne/Hanson - Hughes - Ward

Russell - Thomas

[England Ram]

With the personal we have available I'd have switched the middle 3 formation. He is playing an attacking 433, we need to flip the middle 3 to make it a defensive 433. I know we are struggling to score, but we are also leaking goals. 

Hendrick may not be a real defensive midfielder, but sitting him next to Hanson and using the front 4 gives us a much more solid base. Also would have enabled Hendrick to help out in the gaping hole Christie leaves all the time. 

You can't go 442 without a real wing threat coupled with a Thorne quality cdm. To add you'd have Russel plus 'who' in the top 2? 

Errors v Brum & Borough have come from our right back space. Yes Ince lost the ball there v Brum, but can anyone tell me where his outlet pass to the right back was as I can't see Christie anywhere. 

Last night again, poor positional awareness on more than a few occasions and a very poor pass leading to the goal. Yes, keogh gets waltz past for the goal but I'm tired of explaining his weaknesses to people. 

It is difficult to overly criticise Mac as he has built his team on a formation, rightly or wrongly and changing it doesn't help the majority. The biggest criticism I have is that we gad no plan B if Martin got injured, no one pushing him for a starting place. Bent is not a like for like replacement and we still had those issues with him up front. Having a proper hold up man to challenge and replace Martin would have been the prudent thing to do. Saying you have cover at every position is not the same as having good quality cover in the same position in the same formation.  

 

[YorkshireRam]

442

Grant

Christie - Keogh - Albentosa - Forsyth

Ince - Thorne/Hanson - Hughes - Ward

Russell - Thomas

[tomsdubs]

​That could work.

Russell cannot play the lone striker role. When he plays on the wing, he is effective because the through balls to him allow him to use his pace and skill to beat opposition defenders. Upfront, with his back to goal, his is unable to utilise these abilities and therefore has been fairly ineffective.

If we played him with another striker, he could either play behind the striker, giving him space in the gap behind OR playing as an out and out striker with Thomas playing behind him, slipping balls through for him to run on to. Either would be more effective than currently.

Also, sacrificing the midfielder for the second striker wouldn't be as costly as first thought. Usually, the third midfielder, coupled with Martin's hold up play allowed us to dominate possession and boss the midfield. However, we're going to have to scrape a result on Friday so a more direct approach could suit us better.

[TroyDyer]

If you had all your best players fit, and a plan A formation that worked every time, surely any one of us could be the manager?

He is paid very very well to work out these issues, and resolve them. 

[Ramarena]

Some interesting idea's. I'm not convinced by 4-4-2 and I agree with England Ram that you can't play that formation without a commanding central midfielder. 

Also interesting is playing Thomas and Russell as a pair, this could work and could ease the pressure on Thomas with Russell helping him out. 

 

[t'oldu]

If you had all your best players fit, and a plan A formation that worked every time, surely any one of us could be the manager?

He is paid very very well to work out these issues, and resolve them. 

[tomsdubs]

Some interesting idea's. I'm not convinced by 4-4-2 and I agree with England Ram that you can't play that formation without a commanding central midfielder. 

Also interesting is playing Thomas and Russell as a pair, this could work and could ease the pressure on Thomas with Russell helping him out. 

 

[Sexydadbod]

4-4-2 is still the most effective formation around if used correctly. All the top teams use it like real madrid , bayern and atletico. You need 4 hard working midfielders though and 1 striker that will drop into midfield when possession is lost

[Sexydadbod]

There has been a pattern that in the championship you need 2 strikers up front to succeed whereas in the prem you need 5 in midfield

[t'oldu]

Big centre backs hate 2 small strikers buzzing round them.   We could do that.

[Ambitious]

A good manager would have sorted this out five games ago... 

Anyway, if it was my choice, what I would do.... 

Grant in goal. I'm all for change, but he keeps his place. I would review this in the Summer, mind. I think Roos has shown more than enough that he can be seriously considered. 

Left back, this is one area I would have changed; Forsyth needs Martin. Warnock doesn't lose the ball anywhere near the same amount, so it seems without a target man then he should come in. 

Centre Back, with the current injuries then our hans our tied. However, it's hugely apparent it should be Keogh or Albentosa and Buxton. Albentosa and Keogh are what I'd class as erratic. I think we need a sense of calm in defence - something Buxton offers. 

Right back - this would give me a headache, as bad as Christie has been for the past three months, Shotton is just too limited. It has to be Christie for me. 

Central Midfield - why do we need a 'defensive midfielder' - how come Bournemouth manage to get by without a defensive midfielder? I'd go with Hughes and Hendrick and shove a ******* rocket up both of them. They need to show more, they need to make themselves more visable... then the need for a defensive midfielder becomes a moot point. 

Attacking Midfielder - one of Calero, Lingard, Bryson or Dawkins - we need someone who will move on the edge of the box; we need someone who will get the ball on the edge of the box. Calero does this extremely well for the U21s and gets goals while he's at it. Lingard could also play there, Byrson and Dawkins too. 

Right attacking midfield - Ince - just keep doing the same as he has been doing. 

Left attacking midfield - Russell - back to where he's at his best. 

Striker - Any of the attacking players bar Ince and Russell. Just get someone playing on the shoulder, preferably someone quick. 

I'd hope if we was to play something like this, it would allow to play in the opposition's half and pressure their backline with forward runners. This system relies heavily on Hendrick and Hughes working like f*cking dogs, but if Arter and Surman can handle it then why can't these two? 

Forsyth's distribution needs Martin otherwise he just concedes possession. I think the long and short of it, as much as we aren't a long ball team with Martin in the side, we need to be even less of a long ball team now. 

Any long ball played is effectively giving away possession at the minute, that's my biggest frustration with the current formation. So, I would say a 4-2-3-1 type formation with players in close proximity of each other and a lot of the ball is the way to go. 

[rammieib]

A central midfield of Hanson and Hughes - Jesus it would get destroyed and that's against a poor midfield. Clayton and Leadbitter would have used their left foot only and still beaten us.

[Mostyn6]

if i was really scrutinising what is going wrong, I would say that Derby are lacking true steel, and a nasty edge. I may be plucking at straws but I sometimes feel that we have such a 'nice guy' as manager, and a couple more as coaches, this rubs off onto the players, and we're simply passive.

Our captain and leader, for all his faults, is also a really nice guy. He wears his heart on his sleeve, but if he's ever been in trouble with the referee it's been down to mistakes, clumsy challenges or a badly timed tackle, never for a crunching or hard-hitting tackle. Similarly, our hardman is Jake Buxton, but he's never been dominant as much as he (along with Keogh) has shown a lot of determination!

Last night, I wanted someone to clatter Bamford, by that I don't mean injure him, I just mean crunch him a little.

I'll never forget a game a few years ago, Derby v Blackpool, we had Rob Hulse, they had Shaun Barker. Barker crunched Hulse in the first five minutes, then again in the second five minutes! Barker earned a move to Derby off that performance, and that performance is the type we need from now until the end of the season!

[Ambitious]

A central midfield of Hanson and Hughes - Jesus it would get destroyed and that's against a poor midfield. Clayton and Leadbitter would have used their left foot only and still beaten us.

[rammieib]

​Hendrick and Hughes... But if you're right then they are nowhere near as good as we think they are. 

If Surman and Arter can do it... Clayton and Leadbitter can do it... why can't our golden pair do it? 

Are Surman and Arter and Clayton and Leadbitter better than Hughes and Hendrick? That'd be for them two to prove. 

[Ambitious]

Yes because the other players (infront and behind) in those teams are better. They have not had the bad luck we have had with injuries and if we hadn't have lost Thorne and Bent/Martin for the past five, I think we would be at least 3 points better off and in become place.

i am a huge fan on Hendrick but he needs to have a bigger impact. Hughes was bullied last night from the word go and becomes petulant. He needs to work his magic ten yards further up the pitch but he can only do that if Thorne (or Eustace) are in there. It's clear certain players make other players better by just being there and that's what Thorne does for us.

However, I would take those two combinations above Hendrick and Hughes if you offered it to me today. Put Thorne in there and play as a three and I wouldn't.