Jump to content

433 is gone get over it!

YouRams

By YouRams
in Derby County Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply
lee_derby

lee_derby

Posted
Posted
On ‎27‎/‎09‎/‎2016 at 23:24, Bris Vegas said:

This not trying thing is a load of rubbish. We scored three goals and conceded nine in the opening nine matches under Nigel Pearson playing 442. Defensively we were never that bad...

So does that mean we were trying in defence, but not trying in attack? Surely if the players weren't trying we would have lost three or four nil every match.

It doesn't take a genius to work out that our squad is mainly built to play to a 433 system, and thus playing said system we suddenly see an improvement from a number of players.

The midfield, despite lacking a natural holding midfielder, will always look more balanced with three in there and our wide players look more dangerous playing as inside forwards pushed 10 yards further forward.

It's not hindsight. A number of us having been saying this since before the season began. 

Nigel Pearson was clueless.

 

or player power has won again. carnt wait till jan get rid of the bottlers 4 3 3 and we cannot hold a lead but this time around not enough goals to start with. at least we have some hope with anya and vydra growing into the game. we live in hope

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1967Ram

1967Ram

Posted
Posted
On 27/09/2016 at 23:24, Bris Vegas said:

This not trying thing is a load of rubbish. We scored three goals and conceded nine in the opening nine matches under Nigel Pearson playing 442. Defensively we were never that bad...

So does that mean we were trying in defence, but not trying in attack? Surely if the players weren't trying we would have lost three or four nil every match.

It doesn't take a genius to work out that our squad is mainly built to play to a 433 system, and thus playing said system we suddenly see an improvement from a number of players.

The midfield, despite lacking a natural holding midfielder, will always look more balanced with three in there and our wide players look more dangerous playing as inside forwards pushed 10 yards further forward.

It's not hindsight. A number of us having been saying this since before the season began. 

Nigel Pearson was clueless.

 

Totally agree. We only drew yesterday I know, and it was the same result as a couple of weeks ago, when we also let in a late goal but IMO we looked a lot more 'solid' defensively. The three in the middle didn't leave gaping holes for Reading to simply run through which happened on several occasions at Bristol City. Johnson looked very good in the holding and spoiling roll. Hughes and Butterfield offered more going forward. I thought Butterfield was outstanding with the amount of running and pressing he did.

Can't agree with, though I respect, the views of some on here who think Pearson needs more time and it's all the players fault. IMO he was sending them out to play in a formation they weren't suited to. Consequently they were being made to look poor and we have far fewer points than we should have at this point. Pearson made a major error IMO because he should have played to our strengths which I think includes playing with more in midfield whether that be 4-3-3, 4-1-4-1 or 4-5-1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
1967Ram

1967Ram

Posted
Posted
On 27/09/2016 at 23:43, Bris Vegas said:

Because our players and their attributes excel in a 433, and not in a 442. Our midfield, which many felt was our strongest area of the sqaud, suddenly became our weakest as a result of going to 442.

It's really not that difficult to work out. We have inside forwards not wingers, our fullbacks are given more space to operate in a 433 and more protection when pushing forward due to having a three-man midfield.

Why can't we pass quickly in a 442? Perhaps player positioning has something to do with that. Without a forward dropping deep, there is nobody between the lines ready to receive the ball.

So it has to go sideways, backwards and then a hopeful punt. 

 

Spot on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
rynny

rynny

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, toddy said:

The biggest load of twaddle you will ever read on here is that our players can only perform in a 4-3-3.

God give me strength.:blink:

Or maybe people are actually saying that to get the best out of the players and to play to their strengths play 4-3-3 and they will perform better than what they did in 4-4-2.

Also it is not just the formation it is the style and inatructions for the players. Hughes has been told to dictate playbin their half not atand 5 yards away from Keogh and Shackell to get the ball from them and try and make something happen in the middle of our half. Ince is looking forwards more than he is backwards at Christie to see if he needs help defensively, Keogh has another short pass option instead of looking long at 2 forwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
toddy

toddy

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, rynny said:

Or maybe people are actually saying that to get the best out of the players and to play to their strengths play 4-3-3 and they will perform better than what they did in 4-4-2.

Also it is not just the formation it is the style and inatructions for the players. Hughes has been told to dictate playbin their half not atand 5 yards away from Keogh and Shackell to get the ball from them and try and make something happen in the middle of our half. Ince is looking forwards more than he is backwards at Christie to see if he needs help defensively, Keogh has another short pass option instead of looking long at 2 forwards.

Its sort of saying as a midfield player you cannot go into that section of the midfield,  because we play 4-3-3 or 4-4-2 . players have to take responsibility over that white line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
cannable

cannable

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, toddy said:

Its sort of saying as a midfield player you cannot go into that section of the midfield,  because we play 4-3-3 or 4-4-2 . players have to take responsibility over that white line.

So they should ignore the jobs the manager has given them? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
toddy

toddy

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, cannable said:

So they should ignore the jobs the manager has given them? 

Seriously, players are given instructions before and during the game, they  have to become accountable.

Same as for set pieces, the gaffer puts up a number card " and you mark him at corners", it's up to the player to follow those instructions.

We have had a mess on the field since January during Clements spell, we bring in Walsall,  it continues, we bring in Pearson it continues....pattern here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lrm14

lrm14

Posted
Posted

Sometimes managers get the tactics completely wrong Toddy. I can guarantee Bryson didn't want to be sat about 3 yards in front of the defence which is what he did for Pearson. Because of 4-4-2 we've also noticed how poor our centrebacks are at passing, which was never a case in other systems because we had so many more options to play out from the back. Our players CAN play 4-4-2, but we'd be extremely unbalanced (which is what we all saw for about 8 games).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
eddie

eddie

Posted
Posted

So are Johnson and Butterfield rehabilitated in some fans' eyes now?

Apparently two sterling performances from the pair of them in the last two games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
StringerBell

StringerBell

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, toddy said:

Its sort of saying as a midfield player you cannot go into that section of the midfield,  because we play 4-3-3 or 4-4-2 . players have to take responsibility over that white line.

Sometimes centre backs get pulled wide. Do you think it was Leacocks fault he couldn't keep up with Tyson when Clough played him at right back?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...