433 is gone get over it!

[eddie]

5 minutes ago, angieram said:

For me, yesterday, our best two players.

Yes, a couple of mates of mine said the same thing.

[angieram]

1 minute ago, eddie said:

Yes, a couple of mates of mine said the same thing.

They are obviously discerning people!  

[Alph]

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.

Take 2 players. Player A and B. If player A moves into Zone A then Zone B can be taken by player B. This changes the shape of the opposition.

Imagine the complexity with 11 players.

That's why you stick to systems. Because you need players to move off one another instinctively.

Who do you think implements these systems and instructions?

Well, not Pearson because the team doesn't bloody break shape!!

[NottsRam77]

4 hours 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.

Why? what have u seen that others haven't this season that suggests any different.

Iv sat through every home game and Iv seen nothing at all to suggest we're getting more out of this lot in a 442 than a 433

i want to move to a 442, I think long term it would reap greater benefits for us but Iv seen absolutely zip to suggest it's working for us, and believe me I want it to work. 

[brady1993]

5 hours ago, NottsRam77 said:

Why? what have u seen that others haven't this season that suggests any different.

Iv sat through every home game and Iv seen nothing at all to suggest we're getting more out of this lot in a 442 than a 433

i want to move to a 442, I think long term it would reap greater benefits for us but Iv seen absolutely zip to suggest it's working for us, and believe me I want it to work. 

I agree with the rest of your post but why do you want us to move to a 442 long term ? Personally I'd prefer to see us build on the 433 our squad is best suited through improvements in personal. 

[eddie]

6 hours ago, angieram said:

They are obviously discerning people!  

I don't know so much - they consider me a friend.

[brady1993]

Here's an exercise for anyone who thinks 442 is best system for the squad: name the 5 best players at the club and tell me how to get the most them. From that make a conclusion about what system we should use to best take advantage of these players.

I'll start:

1) Will Hughes - Possesses great ball control, dribbling ability, off the ball movement, passing and vision. His passing and movement particular come to the fore when he can play quick 1-2s off players making him perfectly suited to play as a playmaker in side that likes to play a short passing game.

2) George Thorne - Great tackler, reads the game well, fantastic vision, fantastic passing range and great communication. At his best when he can play as the 'quarter back' of the team, sitting in a little pocket of space in front of the defence where he can control the flow of the game from both an offensive and defensive standpoint. Doesn't carry much of goal threat.

3) Jacob Butterfield - Similar to Hughes in where his strengths resides but not quite as good at it and isn't as mobile. However he does possess a fantastic shot with either foot and always going to best utilised as an attacking midfielder.

4) Tom Ince - Fantastic dribbler, fantastic left foot, good ball control and decent passing. Best utilised as one of an attacking three or just off a striker where he can drift into little pockets of space to single out defenders and damage opposition also in these positions there is less worry about his tendency to drift in and out of games.

5) Craig Bryson - Has an absolute fantastic engine, has fantastic movement off the ball, great timing of his runs and is a good finisher. At his best when he has freedom to run around the pitch, hassling opposition in defence and bursting beyond the front line in attack. However he can struggle if asked to sit and hold position because of poor tackling and reading of the game in defense plus it completely stifles his strengths.

As you can see it is my belief 4/5 of our best players are central midfielders with three of them better served with freedom to roam around the pitch. The other players is at his best pushed as far up the pitch as possible with freedom to drift into pockets of space in order to better hurt teams. Now you might not be able to squeeze all of these players into the same team however the goal should surely be to get most possible on the pitch in a system that takes advantage of their abilities.

Therefore I'd put forward that we need to play with at least three central midfielders to be best team we can be, particularly when as a three (Thorne, Butterfield/Bryson, Hughes) they cover each other's weaknesses so very well. 

[lrm14]

10 hours ago, NottsRam77 said:

Why? what have u seen that others haven't this season that suggests any different.

Iv sat through every home game and Iv seen nothing at all to suggest we're getting more out of this lot in a 442 than a 433

i want to move to a 442, I think long term it would reap greater benefits for us but Iv seen absolutely zip to suggest it's working for us, and believe me I want it to work. 

4 points in 2 games as opposed to 6 points in 8 suggests that one is working better than the other. Also both of our most recent games have been away so you wouldn't have seen us play it anyway.

Also I'm curious, why you think 4-4-2 will benefit us in the long term?

[G STAR RAM]

19 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.

Very good point, it's the same one you used after the Rotherham debacle last season wasn't it? Oh no wait.....

[toddy]

31 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Very good point, it's the same one you used after the Rotherham debacle last season wasn't it? Oh no wait.....

Yes, we are into our 3rd manager since then, but we still have an issue upon the pitch -Occam's Razor?

[G STAR RAM]

5 minutes ago, toddy said:

Yes, we have changed the manager twice since then, but we still have an issue upon the pitch -Occam's Razor?

 

5 minutes ago, toddy said:

Yes, we have changed the manager twice since then, but we still have an issue upon the pitch -Occam's Razor?

Ah so the players only became accountable once Pearson took over, makes sense now.

[toddy]

1 minute ago, G STAR RAM said:

 

Ah so the players only became accountable once Pearson took over, makes sense now.

No you need to understand Occams Razor..............

[NottsRam77]

5 hours ago, lrm14 said:

4 points in 2 games as opposed to 6 points in 8 suggests that one is working better than the other. Also both of our most recent games have been away so you wouldn't have seen us play it anyway.

Also I'm curious, why you think 4-4-2 will benefit us in the long term?

I don't know lol 

call it gut instinct or divine intervention lol

joking aside imo for what it's worth, having seen 3 seasons of the 433 I just think that it relys on too many factors to be working correctly to succeed for us.

if the ball isn't sticking, the midfield aren't getting close enough or beyond the front man, the full backs arnt giving us enough width, we don't have a fit strong holding midfielder who can put the boot in but also play a bit.

dont get me wrong the football with 433 at times has been as good as Iv ever seen it in my 25 odd years of supporting this lot 

i realise u can dissect any formation in the same way I just feel that 442 gives u the option to have an off day, or a couple not doing their job as u can have 2 banks of four and a pair of forwards that can grab u something even on the worst of days 

I realise that's all in Layman's terms but u know what I mean

[G STAR RAM]

7 minutes ago, toddy said:

No you need to understand Occams Razor..............

No more than you need to understand hypocrisy....

[toddy]

Nothing has really changed since Christmas 2015, the poor results started, poor performances and occasional great performance  - Clement blamed, so we bring in Wassall and we have a continuation of the same. Bring in Pearson, everybody thought is might just be a tweak here, tweak there to sort it out, but another continuation of poor performances.

3 Managers, same performances!

[G STAR RAM]

7 minutes ago, toddy said:

Nothing has really changed since Christmas 2015, the poor results started, poor performances and occasional great performance  - Clement blamed, so we bring in Wassall and we have a continuation of the same. Bring in Pearson, everybody thought is might just be a tweak here, tweak there to sort it out, but another continuation of poor performances.

3 Managers, same performances!

Clement had us in 5th place, playing rather bland football when he left.

Wassall kept us in 5th and at the same time brought about some much more attractive football, albeit inconsistently.

Pearson came in played awful football, stopped us scoring goals, was not getting points on the board and had us sat in the bottom 3.

I see no continuation of performances here.

[angieram]

36 minutes ago, NottsRam77 said:

I don't know lol 

call it gut instinct or divine intervention lol

joking aside imo for what it's worth, having seen 3 seasons of the 433 I just think that it relys on too many factors to be working correctly to succeed for us.

if the ball isn't sticking, the midfield aren't getting close enough or beyond the front man, the full backs arnt giving us enough width, we don't have a fit strong holding midfielder who can put the boot in but also play a bit.

dont get me wrong the football with 433 at times has been as good as Iv ever seen it in my 25 odd years of supporting this lot 

i realise u can dissect any formation in the same way I just feel that 442 gives u the option to have an off day, or a couple not doing their job as u can have 2 banks of four and a pair of forwards that can grab u something even on the worst of days 

I realise that's all in Layman's terms but u know what I mean

But where were our attempts to sort out the midfield bank of four? Forget Hughes and Bryson for a minute and look at the wider players - buying Anya was not a solution to strengthening the position. I'm told he's good defensively but have seen no evidence of it to date. As for the others, just no.

We need wide midfielders of a very different mould if we're playing 4-4-2 and we haven't got them yet. 

Of course , I also think we need two very different central midfielders too. Do I  want to get rid of our entire current midfield to achieve this? No. 

I'm with @brady1993 on this - play to our strengths. 

[McRamFan]

The perfromance on the pitch has a direct correlation to the state of the club as a whole.  This is not a Derby thing, look at any club where 'behind the scenes' looks like an eaton mess, there are many fine examples, Leeds, Blackburn, Gumps and us......history repeating???

[NottsRam77]

19 minutes ago, angieram said:

But where were our attempts to sort out the midfield bank of four? Forget Hughes and Bryson for a minute and look at the wider players - buying Anya was not a solution to strengthening the position. I'm told he's good defensively but have seen no evidence of it to date. As for the others, just no.

We need wide midfielders of a very different mould if we're playing 4-4-2 and we haven't got them yet. 

Of course , I also think we need two very different central midfielders too. Do I  want to get rid of our entire current midfield to achieve this? No. 

I'm with @brady1993 on this - play to our strengths. 

I agree, and as it stands im whole heartedly behind us playing 433, as I said in my previous post Iv seen nothing to suggest the current crop of players can play 442, 433 certainly gets the most out of this lot.

as to why we didn't address the make up of the squad to fit a 442, can only assume Pearson wanted to work with what we had and obviously backed himself to do so.

im just saying in an ideal world id like us to be playing a 442 with players that fit but hey, we're far from ideal atm

[toddy]

1 hour ago, G STAR RAM said:

Clement had us in 5th place, playing rather bland football when he left.

Wassall kept us in 5th and at the same time brought about some much more attractive football, albeit inconsistently.

Pearson came in played awful football, stopped us scoring goals, was not getting points on the board and had us sat in the bottom 3.

I see no continuation of performances here.

Another one who likes to be economical with the truth!

Inconsistent, the performances against what MK dons at Home, Fulham away, QPR away were dire especially QPR and the icing on the cake was Hull at home in the play offs. Inconsistent? - shocking more like.

But as I said earlier nothing new..................