would the diamond formation be able to work?

[Sexydadbod]

I like the 4-2-3-1 formation because it gets martin and bent into the same team but i feel that martin is a bit wasted playing behind the striker. Why not bent and martin both up front? our opponents  would rather see martin in the hole than up front because they know that he isnt gling to do any damage there and he isnt that quick so allows opposition players to push up.Dawks played well and provides the balance in midfield. Why not this front 6?

    Thorne

Dawks  Hughes

      Ince

Bent Martin

 

[North_Stand_Ram]

I think after Brentford fiasco the formation will be firmly stuck at 433 providing either Bent or Martin are fit. 

[Bris Vegas]

Any problem with a diamond is the lack of width.

The fact we play a possession-based style too, it will be easier for the oppositioon when without the ball to just remain narrow and load the midfield - starving us of space to work something.

Plus, with a diamond, it also forces the fullbacks to get forward which isn't so good when they're slow getting back. It will be an easy target for the oppoition to counter the space down the flanks.

The best part about a 4-3-3 formation is it has the right balance. We should stick with it, and even without a proper DM if we have Hughes and Dawks in there we can at least dominate possesssion and avoid getting overrun like Forest at home.

[LesterRam]

what happened to 4-4-2, am i getting old ?

[Shuff264]

what happened to 4-4-2, am i getting old ?

​4-4-2 has the perfect balance in central midfield of nothing going forward and nothing in defence

[cheron85]

Any problem with a diamond is the lack of width.

​Second half against Brentford was a tactical 'sausage'fest... Lack of width was appealing especially when expecting Warnock and Keogh to provide it since it seems neither of them know how to cross...

First time in ages we've had 2 CFs on the pitch and we decided not to put balls into the box... when we did they were awful... and then we played Martin on the wing... oddness abounds...

[Dimmu]

what happened to 4-4-2, am i getting old ?

​

​4-4-2 has the perfect balance in central midfield of nothing going forward and nothing in defence

​Nowadays succesfully used mostly as a defensive option. Perfect and succesful example Atletico Madrid, with two very deep (but aggressive) defensive lines of four, then one playmaker forward and CF. Those two have defesive responsibilities too.

[LesterRam]

​4-4-2 has the perfect balance in central midfield of nothing going forward and nothing in defence

​ok sorry

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ defence that way^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

shotton   Keogh   grant   hendrick   hughes   dawkins   ince   bent   lingard   Whitbread   warnock

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv attack that way vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

this way we would defend with eleven and attack with eleven.

I think I have finally done it lads

[We'll be back in 81]

with no defensive midfielder 4-4-2 can work If the wide players can come back and help the full backs but which of the wide players can do that? I think this would be our best solution while Thorne is out if we choose the correct wide midfielders.

On the other hand if we play a defensive midfielder then a diamond with Hughes at the front would only work if we have two very good wingbacks. I would really like to see this formation as it would mean we can play two up front. This could be an option for next season with the right personel.

 

[eddie]

​ok sorry

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ defence that way^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

shotton   Keogh   grant   hendrick   hughes   dawkins   ince   bent   lingard   Whitbread   warnock

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv attack that way vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv

this way we would defend with eleven and attack with eleven.

I think I have finally done it lads

​You are Arthur Cox and I claim my pure journalistic speculation.

[Ambitious]

If Martin comes back - he must play.

The problem is you'd have to be a ******* idiot to drop a striker that's scored 10 Championship goals in less than 900 minutes for us. 

I feel Martin AND Bent need to be in the team, as do Ince and Russell. 

I'd personally go with whatever defence is in-form, followed by Thorne/Hughes or Hughes/Dawkins in midfield with Martin, Ince, Russell and Bent in attack. 

 

[Gary Teale]

442 seems to get a lot of stick nowadays yet I've seen Bournemouth, Norwich, boro, Ipswich, wolves all play it. People get obsessed with changing systems, we play best and are most comfortable playing 433. We do have a problem then of picking either bent or martin but that's what Stevie is paid to do. 

[Idiakez]

442 seems to get a lot of stick nowadays yet I've seen Bournemouth, Norwich, boro, Ipswich, wolves all play it. People get obsessed with changing systems, we play best and are most comfortable playing 433. We do have a problem then of picking either bent or martin but that's what Stevie is paid to do. 

Boro play more of a 4231 as either Vossen or Tomlin play behind Bamford. Bournemouth play a 4411 with Kergomant playing as a deep lying forward and I believe Norwich play the same system with Hoolahan playing behind the striker. Wolves and Ipswich do play 442 but very differently. Ipswich get the ball up the pitch quickly (aka hoofball) and have two banks of four when defending. Wolves play with pace and get the ball wide as soon as they can. I'm not sure what the point of this post is but I've already typed it now. Enjoy.

[We'll be back in 81]

442 seems to get a lot of stick nowadays yet I've seen Bournemouth, Norwich, boro, Ipswich, wolves all play it. People get obsessed with changing systems, we play best and are most comfortable playing 433. We do have a problem then of picking either bent or martin but that's what Stevie is paid to do. 

433 does work for Derby but it works alot better when we have the right defensive midfielder there like Thorne or Eustace, not as effective with anyone else. 

So at present time especially with Bent and Martin we should go with a formation so that we can play both  up front but with  wide midfielders that can defend as well. Then whenThorne is fit we can go back to 433.

[Philmycock]

We've played our best footy (when everyone is fit) playing

4

1

4

1

havent we?

[curb]

No

 

next

[Philmycock]

That's that then

[RadioactiveWaste]

if we had better fullbacks, perhaps, but for us this team is a 4-3-3.

thing with 4-3-3 is it becomes 4-5-1 pretty readily when needed, and i think percentage wise you get more influence from having the extra midfielder than from 2 strikers, unless you have 2 good cms to cover the ground and 2 good strikers to get back in goals what you lose in having midfielders there. How you arrange the 5 is to a certain extent not all that important as in a good team they'll run around and get where they need to be.

if your 4-3-3 just has 3 strikers or hug the touchline wingers, it gets overrun in midfield. depends on who you have and what jobs they are comfortable to do.

5 in midfield is the norm these days because it's rare to have the 2 strikers to make 4-4-2 worthwhile. Ironically, with Bent and Martin, we do, but we don't have the midfield for 4-4-2 or the fullbacks for the diamond. 

A 2 from Thorne, Hughes, Bryson, Hendrick, Eustace, Mascarell, Dawkins would never work IMO, or not enough to make fielding Bent Martin worth it. 

Fozzy, Warnock, Christie, Shotton, Keogh.....no way to make a diamond a rams best friend.