Strikers?

[PistoldPete2]

1 hour ago, Carl Sagan said:

It's an impressive five to choose from, and then there's both Zanzala and Bennett wanting to step up from the U21s. Given they're recent signings, Bent, Blackman and Weimann will be on big money and long contracts so are unlikely to want to move anywhere soon, especially Bent given his age. We haven't used any of these three players well, when they should be major assets. I hope Pearson is able to make more out of the squad we have including strikers.

 

Bent has only one year on his contract so could be let go. But he can still score goals. Any new striker would be a replacement for bent I think. 

[Samfcv]

24 minutes ago, cannable said:

If the Chesterfield cup game's anything to go by I think Martin as an attacking midfielder with somebody pacey and energetic ahead of him in a counter-attacking team would work. 

Against Chez Vegas he played deep second half and had Russell (then Ward) and Bent ahead of him and lofted it over the top twice for them to run onto, clean through. 

This is the thing with Martin; he's not quite an attacking midfielder and he's not quite a target man either. He's like a physical #10 (or as I usually put it "a fat attacking midfielder"). 

I agree he's technically good and certainly clever enough to play that position. The main concern I'd have is that he openly admit he doesn't feel like he's contributing to the team when he's not scoring even when creating for others. So scoring 10 goals a season from a deeper position seeing others get more than him wouldn't sit well I feel. 

[EnigmaRam]

If we went 442 we'd have bigger priorities than strikers when we have Martin bent weimann zanzala Ince Russell and Blackman to choose from which arguably 442 is there best positions apart from maybe Martin. Although Martin and Ince could probably sit behind the main striker in a 4411

if we stayed 433 it would be interesting to see weimann zanzala and Camara play together in a match. Frighten the hell out of them for pace

[jono]

1 hour ago, EnigmaRam said:

If we went 442 we'd have bigger priorities than strikers when we have Martin bent weimann zanzala Ince Russell and Blackman to choose from which arguably 442 is there best positions apart from maybe Martin. Although Martin and Ince could probably sit behind the main striker in a 4411

if we stayed 433 it would be interesting to see weimann zanzala and Camara play together in a match. Frighten the hell out of them for pace

Interesting point. Yes there are a few "gods" who lack pace, an old favourite of mine being Teddy Sherringham but one thing for sure, pace frightens opponents more than anything else. You struggle to combat real pace with any text book strategy. If you beat a man then, for a period he is completely redundant and you have an advantage. 

[Nuwtfly]

If we are to play 4-4-2, the combination of Kodjia and Martin sounds excellent. With Blackman and Weimann to come off the bench too, we should be scoring plenty next year. 

I really hope we manage to pull this Kodjia signing off. Really impressed me this season. Scoring 20+ goals in a side that doesn't create much is very impressive. 

[Uptherams]

I look forward to a change of formation. In this league we shouldn't even contemplate playing a DM in at least 35 of our fixtures. We also have the issue of over-crowding the middle of the pitch. I hope in that regard we are looking to expand the width of the Ipro pitch. 

[rynny]

1 minute ago, Uptherams said:

I look forward to a change of formation. In this league we shouldn't even contemplate playing a DM in at least 35 of our fixtures. We also have the issue of over-crowding the middle of the pitch. I hope in that regard we are looking to expand the width of the Ipro pitch. 

Why shouldn't we be playing with a dm? We should play to our strengths not what other teams implement.

[Uptherams]

2 minutes ago, rynny said:

Why shouldn't we be playing with a dm? We should play to our strengths not what other teams implement.

A third CM is fine. Higher up the pitch. We always do better when the DM is more like a CM. But us playing a DM has been for one reason and that is we can not defend properly without one. We should not need the protection. Not against the majority of teams we come across in this league. So I hope he sorts our ability to defend. Our CB's for the last couple of seasons have not seen capable of copping with a 2 on 2 attack. That's not right. 

[rynny]

9 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

A third CM is fine. Higher up the pitch. We always do better when the DM is more like a CM. But us playing a DM has been for one reason and that is we can not defend properly without one. We should not need the protection. Not against the majority of teams we come across in this league. So I hope he sorts our ability to defend. Our CB's for the last couple of seasons have not seen capable of copping with a 2 on 2 attack. That's not right. 

I would say we have struggled more when the dm is a cm, think of when Johnson and Hull in the play off 1st leg with Hughes there. The dm is for when the left and right backs attack.  You should never leave yourself 2 on 2, if 1 player manages to get past 1 of our defenders then it leaves a 2 on 1, see Hull's third goal. Basic stuff that is taught throughout football. Sunday morning pub teams don't leave 2 on 2 unless it is last 5 minutes and you are losing.

[Uptherams]

1 minute ago, rynny said:

I would say we have struggled more when the dm is a cm, think of when Johnson and Hull in the play off 1st leg with Hughes there. The dm is for when the left and right backs attack.  You should never leave yourself 2 on 2, if 1 player manages to get past 1 of our defenders then it leaves a 2 on 1, see Hull's third goal. Basic stuff that is taught throughout football. Sunday morning pub teams don't leave 2 on 2 unless it is last 5 minutes and you are losing.

We almost always play better when the DM is further up the pitch. Take the second leg against Hull. Hendrick held a high line in the first half. We became less effective the deeper he got. This happens in all but a dozen or so tough games. Have you ever heard of overloading? You should attempt to prevent yourself from an even attack. But a good CB pairing should be more than capable of holding off a 2 on 2 attack. Most teams that play against us only have 1 up top. So we do not suffer from a constant onslaught of 2 on 2. If we played without the DM or the DM became a third CM in 35 games or so we would get through a match whereby we only suffer on average from one 2 on 2 attack. We are not facing a 4-4-2 lineup in most of these games so we do not need the DM. 

[cannable]

20 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

Most teams that play against us only have 1 up top. 

Just twice last season did we come up against a side that went for a true lone forward. In 44 games we came up against either two strikers, a striker and a #10 or two strikers and a #10.

[cheron85]

1 hour ago, Uptherams said:

I look forward to a change of formation. In this league we shouldn't even contemplate playing a DM in at least 35 of our fixtures. We also have the issue of over-crowding the middle of the pitch. I hope in that regard we are looking to expand the width of the Ipro pitch. 

 

1 hour ago, rynny said:

Why shouldn't we be playing with a dm? We should play to our strengths not what other teams implement.

Check the thread title... 

[Uptherams]

3 minutes ago, cannable said:

Just twice last season did we come up against a side that went for a true lone forward. In 44 games we came up against either two strikers, a striker and a #10 or two strikers and a #10.

I don't think your source is very good. The static formations from various sources are merely advisory and are quite outdated now. Also we often get managers handing over formations that are intentionally misleading. As an example I could say Derby will play a 4-4-3 with Hughes, Hendrick and Thorne in the middle. So people assume that means Thorne as a DM. It could also mean no DM and Hughes behind Martin. 

I don't remember many games where our 2 CB's had a striker each rubbing up against them. Our opponents often pack the middle. They might have a Johnny Russell type on the pitch who by definition is a forward or striker but when the match begins they are not one half of a two up top. There is just one up top. In fact, the deeper the DM for us is, the higher that second man is. It's interlinked. So either we play 4-4-2 so the opposition has to play an actual extra midfielder or we push our DM further up so that we have 3 CM's and the opposition manager again decides a midfielder would be more fitting than a forward in that role in the middle. 

[Uptherams]

15 minutes ago, cheron85 said:

 

Check the thread title... 

I did, along with your post. Which is why I was talking about playing a 4-4-2. We don't need another striker when we look at numbers. But if our now manager is going to play a 4-4-2 and often then he might want to replace one of our smaller forwards/wingers with a new recruit and also probably replace Bent and Blackman too if he brings in another bigger striker. I can't see us having a queue for the striker role. I would take Bamford for example. Can play alongside Martin, we know he can play out wide too if needs must. If him or Martin get's injured for a short while then we could revert to just one up top or play one of the smaller forwards beside them. I would then sell on Blackman and allow Bent to leave. I don't think we can keep our strikers happy if they barley get a look and and I don't think we can attract anyone decent either if they know they are fighting for a single spot up top. So if we are going to play a 4-4-2 system then I would keep Martin and get Bamford. 

[cheron85]

11 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

I did, along with your post. Which is why I was talking about playing a 4-4-2. We don't need another striker when we look at numbers. But if our now manager is going to play a 4-4-2 and often then he might want to replace one of our smaller forwards/wingers with a new recruit and also probably replace Bent and Blackman too if he brings in another bigger striker. I can't see us having a queue for the striker role. I would take Bamford for example. Can play alongside Martin, we know he can play out wide too if needs must. If him or Martin get's injured for a short while then we could revert to just one up top or play one of the smaller forwards beside them. I would then sell on Blackman and allow Bent to leave. I don't think we can keep our strikers happy if they barley get a look and and I don't think we can attract anyone decent either if they know they are fighting for a single spot up top. So if we are going to play a 4-4-2 system then I would keep Martin and get Bamford. 

Back on track... good... DMs are not part of this debate...

If your argument is that with a single Striker position we struggle to attract decent strikers... How are we going to do it any better with 2 up top when we already have 5 senior strikers on the books? Weimann dropped down from a Premier League side last summer to play more time up front... A warning sign to anyone surely?

[Uptherams]

15 minutes ago, cheron85 said:

Back on track... good... DMs are not part of this debate...

If your argument is that with a single Striker position we struggle to attract decent strikers... How are we going to do it any better with 2 up top when we already have 5 senior strikers on the books? Weimann dropped down from a Premier League side last summer to play more time up front... A warning sign to anyone surely?

Of course they are. If we are going to play 4-4-2 then that means removal of the DM position. If I wasn't clear, I would get rid of Blackman and Bent and get in someone like Bamford. So two main strikers when we include Martin. I would stick with 4 wingers/forwards. For example, Russell, Ince Weimann and replace Camara. Probably with someone you could better describe as a left or right sided midfielder. So 6 players to 4 starting positions. Martin or Bamford can play up top on their own. Bamford can play outwide. Russell, Ince and Weimann can play alongside either Martin or Bamford. 

[EnigmaRam]

Or just play the diamond and everyone's happy

[cheron85]

11 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

Of course they are. If we are going to play 4-4-2 then that means removal of the DM position. 

This wasn't a discussion on formation... It's a discussion on Strikers... hence the thread title... Next point...

12 minutes ago, Uptherams said:

I would stick with 4 wingers/forwards. For example, Russell, Ince Weimann and replace Camara. Probably with someone you could better describe as a left or right sided midfielder. So 6 players to 4 starting positions. Martin or Bamford can play up top on their own. Bamford can play outwide. Russell, Ince and Weimann can play alongside either Martin or Bamford. 

Have you seen more of Camara than the rest of us? Him and Ince are the only guys who've played any length of time as an actual wide midfielder (using the term instead of winger... 4 4 2 is wide mid, 4 3 3 is winger)... I'd give him a chance...

Whilst I reckon Russell could do a job as a wide mid I doubt he or Weimann would be happy playing there...

 

[t'oldu]

Its time to let Martin go.     We can't go on indefinitely letting his needs determine the system / set up /rest of the side. 

He has been a very privileged member of the squad and although he has been very productive other team members have had to play out of position and now other teams are very aware that he can be nullified.

Its a big decision but it should be made. Then we can move forward.

[Samfcv]

22 minutes ago, t'oldu said:

Its time to let Martin go.     We can't go on indefinitely letting his needs determine the system / set up /rest of the side. 

He has been a very privileged member of the squad and although he has been very productive other team members have had to play out of position and now other teams are very aware that he can be nullified.

Its a big decision but it should be made. Then we can move forward.

I can sort of see your point as the team is completely built around him and when he's there everyone plays to suit him. But he's good enough to play in a different system and you can't discard someone with so many goals. But I agree that if they try something new and he can't adapt it's time to cash in.