New manager . You have to play 4-3-3

[Dimmu]

3 hours ago, JW37 said:

Can we appoint someone from the school of Ajax please. Create a 4-3-3 philosophy from first team to academy and encourage promoting from the youth teams, The Derby Way. 

Guardiola will do. Not from Ajax but hugely influenced by Cruyff and his Barcelona team.

[ramsbottom]

It's not the fact we can't play anything other than 4-3-3, it's the fact we can't play 4-4-2.  The formation Big Nige insisted on playing robbed the whole side of the two pivots that has allowed us play well in the past, CDM (Thorne/Eustace) and No 9 (Martin).  Without either of those we have flat lines that the opposition can easily close down and overcome.  Those neat triangles we had under Schteve, PC & Waffle have been non-existent all season.

A 4-3-3 can be easily adapted to a 4-2-3-1 simply by moving the defense up 10 yards and ensuring one of the midfield two doesn't wander in support of the other 5 attackers when we're going forward.

[G STAR RAM]

3 hours ago, BathRam72 said:

My point is, unless MM really doesn't follow football, he knew exactly what he was getting when he hired Pearson.

He must have known what a strong personality he is and would want to do it his way. If MM wandered into the changing room and started to under mind him, I am sure Pearson would not have been as diplomatic as Clement.

 

You say that but a lot of the resident experts on here said our team needed a few tweaks and a good man manager and we would get promoted...and still concluded that Pearson was the man to do it.

[duncanjwitham]

Just now, G STAR RAM said:

You say that but a lot of the resident experts on here said our team needed a few tweaks and a good man manager and we would get promoted...and still concluded that Pearson was the man to do it.

My big worry with appointing Pearson was that he would just try and do exactly what he did at Leicester here, with completely the wrong type of players.  If he had come in and said I'm going to stick with the 433 pass-and-move football, but try and add some of my attributes to it, then it maybe had a chance of working.  So if I was Morris, interviewing Pearson for the job, pretty much the entirety of my line of questioning would getting Pearson to convince me he was going to do the latter, not the former.  So either Morris didn't follow that line of questioning, or he did and Pearson managed to convince him.  But either way, we ended up in the former situation, and it's cost us heaven knows how much in terms of lost progress and money.

[G STAR RAM]

29 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

My big worry with appointing Pearson was that he would just try and do exactly what he did at Leicester here, with completely the wrong type of players.  If he had come in and said I'm going to stick with the 433 pass-and-move football, but try and add some of my attributes to it, then it maybe had a chance of working.  So if I was Morris, interviewing Pearson for the job, pretty much the entirety of my line of questioning would getting Pearson to convince me he was going to do the latter, not the former.  So either Morris didn't follow that line of questioning, or he did and Pearson managed to convince him.  But either way, we ended up in the former situation, and it's cost us heaven knows how much in terms of lost progress and money.

Equally concerning for me is that MM still seemed convinced that Pearson was the man to take us forward, if what he said to Bradley/Nicholson was true.

[duncanjwitham]

1 hour ago, brady1993 said:

My hope with this is that the midfielder breaking beyond striker won't be as necessary due to the extra running from Vydra and that the hold up play won't be as necessary because of Hughes's and Butterfield's composure. It is just a hope though.

Yep. And I'm slightly concerned that the next manager will be tasked with doing the same thing (breaking up the squad, being more direct etc).  Although from what we've seen of Powell, he doesn't look to be that type, if he gets the job.

[duncanjwitham]

1 hour ago, brady1993 said:

My hope with this is that the midfielder breaking beyond striker won't be as necessary due to the extra running from Vydra and that the hold up play won't be as necessary because of Hughes's and Butterfield's composure. It is just a hope though. 

The problem is how you get the service to the forwards, and that's what we struggled with under Pearson.  If you're going direct, you'd normally have a target man you can lump the ball to for flick-ons, and the quick forwards play from there (Deeney for Vydra at Watford, for example).  We don't have that option, so we've got to get the ball into the forwards feet quickly - we can't afford to pass slowly around the back, because that just gives the opposing defense chance to get back into shape, and we're either left with hoping the forwards dribble through their entire defence, or we're trying to thread inch-perfect through-balls past their entire backline.  But again we're hamstrung by Shackell and Johnsons poor distribution - the ball needs to go from the backline into the forwards feet so quickly, that we can't afford Shackell to be having 3 touches while he gets his body shape right.  The forwards probably need to start deeper as well, and be picking up the ball and running at the opponents (before the opponents get into shape), rather than hanging on the last mans shoulder waiting for a through-ball that never comes.

[duncanjwitham]

23 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

Equally concerning for me is that MM still seemed convinced that Pearson was the man to take us forward, if what he said to Bradley/Nicholson was true.

 

13 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

Yep. And I'm slightly concerned that the next manager will be tasked with doing the same thing (breaking up the squad, being more direct etc).  Although from what we've seen of Powell, he doesn't look to be that type, if he gets the job.

Not sure if that was my screw-up, or the forum software's, but looks like I've quoted completely the wrong post before 

[brady1993]

2 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

The problem is how you get the service to the forwards, and that's what we struggled with under Pearson.  If you're going direct, you'd normally have a target man you can lump the ball to for flick-ons, and the quick forwards play from there (Deeney for Vydra at Watford, for example).  We don't have that option, so we've got to get the ball into the forwards feet quickly - we can't afford to pass slowly around the back, because that just gives the opposing defense chance to get back into shape, and we're either left with hoping the forwards dribble through their entire defence, or we're trying to thread inch-perfect through-balls past their entire backline.  But again we're hamstrung by Shackell and Johnsons poor distribution - the ball needs to go from the backline into the forwards feet so quickly, that we can't afford Shackell to be having 3 touches while he gets his body shape right.  The forwards probably need to start deeper as well, and be picking up the ball and running at the opponents (before the opponents get into shape), rather than hanging on the last mans shoulder waiting for a through-ball that never comes.

Oh I agree completely. I think the team I put forward to play for now really hinges on Russell and ince tucking in and coming short for the ball. Vydra also has to be coached to come short more. I actually think Vydra might have it in his locker to adapt this because I do think he looks very neat and tidy when the ball is at feet, he just needs to look at getting on the ball. Unfortunately I think we are stuck trying to mould Vydra into what we want for now, because Wilson and Bent are even worse at coming short (i.e. they both just don't do it). Blackman might be an option but I have serious doubts about his footballing brain and decision making on the pitch.