Forward: do we need one to hold the ball up? or is it a myth?

[brady1993]

3 minutes ago, jono said:

So happy to see that post Mostyn, I agree .... A striker being able to hold the ball is a secondary skill in my book. Strikers need to score or get in scoring positions via their own ball skills or a pass from midfield / team mate.

we haven't had a midfield that is both dominant AND creative for quite a while. Funnily enough I think we have the mix of players if fit to do it but it is the midfield that for me is our weakness. This was even more evident under Pearson. Chris Martin wouldn't change that. He'd be a sticking plaster. 

If you look at most successful footballing sides they have at least one forward capable of linking up play and getting involved with the midfield in creating a chance. This is what gives the midfield a foothold in the final third of the pitch to build up the play and carve out a chance. It's particularly important when you want to play a high intensity passing game like we do because to pull an opposition defence out of position requires all players in forward positions to look to get involved with the build-up play. It's why right now we are struggling to open teams up because all our centre forwards are solely looking for the final ball but we don't have the platform to provide such a ball because the centre forward isn't coming short to get involved with the game. 

[toddy]

Where's my DeLorean?

Hold up and Martin, nope.

I would like to see another No.10 in the vein of Vydra,  - Hughes effort on Saturday, it was Vydra who dropped off and laid off the ball for Hughes to have a crack. Unfortunately he cannot be in two places at once, so for me another Vydra type of player, someone full of energy with pace [freighten the life out of defenders when you have a couple of pacy front runners] and then add Ince to a true front 3.

We would possibly need another ball player in midfield to complete the trio up front...........

[Ninos]

59 minutes ago, Norman said:

It's a load of absolute ******* ********.

I watch any game of football. Last night I watched Arsenal for about the 10th time this season (that might or might not be an exaggeration). They play with 4 at the back, Coquelin at CDM with Cazorla in the middle, Ozil slightly (ok, quite a bit) more advanced them him, with the Ox and Walcott out wide.

And who was playing up front on his own. Some little Chilean midget that never stopped running, turning, dropping deep, running in behind and pulling his shorts up to unveil some rather impressive thigh muscles. Not to mention is testosterone fueled chin line and his wonderful pecs, but i digress,

He's 4'10, playing with 2 people who can run faster than i can sneeze but have no footballing ability at times. But he can do it. Sound familiar.

But, no, i think Giroud the 2 legged donkey might be better up there on his own. What with his good looks, that nicely coiffured beard, his accent that makes my knees tremble and his hold up play. The last one being a joke.

My point is, whilst Sanchez is a brilliant player, i think he shows what a vertically challenged player can do when up front on his own. Can we play like Arsenal? No.

So my point being, can a ***** Sanchez play in a ***** league and do roughly the same things? I think so.

You might disagree. I don't care. But i will write back to you and tell you you're wrong. Not because i care or want to be right all the time. I just will.

But i'm driving for the next hour or so, so don't expect an instant reply to your rubbish observations that contradict my well thought out points. It looks needy.

Post more please. 

[cosmic]

Sorry @Mostyn6, can't answer your question. There wasn't a poll choice that best fit my point of view.

[brady1993]

14 minutes ago, toddy said:

Where's my DeLorean?

Hold up and Martin, nope.

I would like to see another No.10 in the vein of Vydra,  - Hughes effort on Saturday, it was Vydra who dropped off and laid off the ball for Hughes to have a crack. Unfortunately he cannot be in two places at once, so for me another Vydra type of player, someone full of energy with pace [freighten the life out of defenders when you have a couple of pacy front runners] and then add Ince to a true front 3.

We would possibly need another ball player in midfield to complete the trio up front...........

The problem is he isn't doing this enough and needs to.

I do think you have a point about needing another player for a genuine front three (I actually think Vydra would be more effective played as the left inside forward) because Anya carries close to zero threat.

[Tony Le Mesmer]

41 minutes ago, roosram said:

What I find perplexing is that we have seen how good Vydra is in an explosive forward run at the opposition.  We have also seen how he is not so good as a lone striker/back to goal/hold the ball type of centre forward.  Surely Pearson knew this before he let CM go and replaced him with MV.  Vydra would benefit from someone who could 'set him up' to use his strengths.  The type of player to do that is CM.  Poor management from Pearson, particularly as he, allegedly, had decided to go 433.  Stable doors and bolting horses!

 

Agree with this. The way we set up at the moment is absolutely fine and the players we have are more than capable. The problems I see are that the opposition come to the iPro and pack the defence, sit deeper and work hard to close down the space therefore the off the shoulder runs that Vydra thrives on won't ever arrive. Not until the latter stages if the opponents are looking to push up and suddenly there is space in behind.

Our midfielders come forward with the ball and as there is no space it sort of concertinas play so that the only 2 routes to goal are either an extremely well worked, intricate, incisive exchange of passes of Arsenal-esque proportions to get someone through the defence for a shot at goal OR we use the width, get down the flanks and get balls into onrushing players.

Now the first one we keep trying and it's not working. We just don't have the guile or craft to open defences up like a tin of sardines. We faff around with it across the opponents box sure and it looks good but the end result is the same. We never get through. The second option we try also and we are good at that with Anya, Ince and Christie but our crosses and pull backs rarely reach a Derby player.

We can either get in a big man to come deep and flick on / hold up and pull defenders out of position or we can use the personnel we already have to do the above but better. If we crossed accurately and were more decisive in possession then we'd create a lot more chances. It's no more complicated than that.

 

[jono]

17 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

If you look at most successful footballing sides they have at least one forward capable of linking up play and getting involved with the midfield in creating a chance. This is what gives the midfield a foothold in the final third of the pitch to build up the play and carve out a chance. It's particularly important when you want to play a high intensity passing game like we do because to pull an opposition defence out of position requires all players in forward positions to look to get involved with the build-up play. It's why right now we are struggling to open teams up because all our centre forwards are solely looking for the final ball but we don't have the platform to provide such a ball because the centre forward isn't coming short to get involved with the game. 

I get your point but that sort of assumes a pairing of strikers. My fear is that relying on a player who's primary strength is holding and linking means you can miss the boat in terms of having a rapier in the box. I am not on an anti CM thing. I just think having a holding striker especially if they lack pace, relies  too heavily on the midfield runners and make us one dimensional. I works sometimes but lacks flexibility. It's one of the reasons why I like 442 / 4411 but we don't seem to have the midfield options to make that work. 

[Tony Le Mesmer]

1 hour ago, Norman said:

It's a load of absolute ******* ********.

I watch any game of football. Last night I watched Arsenal for about the 10th time this season (that might or might not be an exaggeration). They play with 4 at the back, Coquelin at CDM with Cazorla in the middle, Ozil slightly (ok, quite a bit) more advanced them him, with the Ox and Walcott out wide.

And who was playing up front on his own. Some little Chilean midget that never stopped running, turning, dropping deep, running in behind and pulling his shorts up to unveil some rather impressive thigh muscles. Not to mention is testosterone fueled chin line and his wonderful pecs, but i digress,

He's 4'10, playing with 2 people who can run faster than i can sneeze but have no footballing ability at times. But he can do it. Sound familiar.

But, no, i think Giroud the 2 legged donkey might be better up there on his own. What with his good looks, that nicely coiffured beard, his accent that makes my knees tremble and his hold up play. The last one being a joke.

My point is, whilst Sanchez is a brilliant player, i think he shows what a vertically challenged player can do when up front on his own. Can we play like Arsenal? No.

So my point being, can a ***** Sanchez play in a ***** league and do roughly the same things? I think so.

You might disagree. I don't care. But i will write back to you and tell you you're wrong. Not because i care or want to be right all the time. I just will.

But i'm driving for the next hour or so, so don't expect an instant reply to your rubbish observations that contradict my well thought out points. It looks needy.

Spoken like the true Norman Price.

[toddy]

23 minutes ago, brady1993 said:

The problem is he isn't doing this enough and needs to.

I do think you have a point about needing another player for a genuine front three (I actually think Vydra would be more effective played as the left inside forward) because Anya carries close to zero threat.

That is because he is trying to be in two places at once.

Vydra needs feed, but also help up front, hence why a said a true front 3.

[Uptherams]

Some games we do some games we don't. What we need is two opposites that can play alongside each other but also not go out of form when they start just half of the season. Look at some of the better teams. They don't have players leading the line that hold the ball up. 

[Millenniumram]

1 hour ago, Robbie Ram said:

Pearce not a patch on Bucko as a leader. And no Ram is he.

Well I'd say considering he plays for the Rams, puts 100% in and performs for the team then he is a ram... also is a far better player than bucko

[brady1993]

3 minutes ago, jono said:

I get your point but that sort of assumes a pairing of strikers.

I know what you're saying but I think you've missed my point a tad. There has to be a forward player who connects the front line to the midfield. It might not be his sole role in the team but he needs to be able to do it to have a platform to attack from.

 

6 minutes ago, jono said:

My fear is that relying on a player who's primary strength is holding and linking means you can miss the boat in terms of having a rapier in the box.

I don't think the first player means excluded the second player but you have to let go of the idea of classic player roles. In a 433 your 'rapier' could be a midfielder (think Lampard or Bryson of 13/14), one of the inside forwards (think Ronaldo), the main centre forward performing both roles (Drogba was fantastic at this) or (ideally) a combination of the above. Personally I dislike having a forward whose sole role is to wait for the final ball and 'just score goals' because you end up effectively playing large stretches of games with 10 men. This means that you can 'build' an attack to the same extent and often makes your attacks one dimensional as your game plan is reliant on finding a single player at the right time and hoping he finishes.

 

10 minutes ago, jono said:

I am not on an anti CM thing. I just think having a holding striker especially if they lack pace, relies  too heavily on the midfield runners and make us one dimensional. I works sometimes but lacks flexibility. It's one of the reasons why I like 442 / 4411 but we don't seem to have the midfield options to make that work. 

This where I'm going to have to strongly disagree. I think a 433 with the playstyle we had under McClaren is inherently more flexible than a 442/4411 and is best demonstrated by how varied the goals we scored were. It's something of a myth that we would solely play through Martin and have midfield runners going past him. Sure that was Plan A (and bloody effective at that) but we had significantly more to our game than that it's just Martin in conjunction with the attacking midfielders gave us a foothold in the final third of the pitch from which we could work the ball and carve out the chance.

[archied]

Jeez have we become Derby Marks and Sparks county? Our returns policy puts them to shame ,,,,what's wrong with a large number of our fans ,,total fear of change and moving forward ,,bring back nearly players who never quite got us there,,, in another topic  somebody again asked if we need a rebuild or is it just a confidence thing ,, well for me it's very much a rebuild in terms of the solid base clough put in place has now gone ,, all that attitude ,spirit ,really good ethos is gone ,, that's what a better coach in mclaren built on ,, so yes it's a total rebuild required of the foundations that allowed Steve Mac to prosper with his better coaching skill set ,,, whether that's a massive player clear out and replace is another question and whether Steve Mac can build that with his managerial skills which most would agree don't match his coaching remains to be seen but for gods sake going backwards is very nearly never the right course even when the past was sucessfull never mind when it fell short of the required goal

[brady1993]

11 minutes ago, toddy said:

That is because he is trying to be in two places at once.

Vydra needs feed, but also help up front, hence why a said a true front 3.

I think that is because he doesn't currently understand the tactical role of the central forward in the front three. He's frequently making the wrong tactical decision in the final third currently and it's hampering our attack. There was a moment in the first half against Leeds which summed it up for me. He was being marked by both Leeds centre backs just outside the penalty box left of centre of the pitch with a gap between the centre backs and the Leeds left back, Hughes was breaking from midfield and there was a midfielder between him and Vydra with no other option on. In this situation Vydra could have: 

A) Run into space on the right in the gap between centre backs and left back, giving Hughes an option to slide a pass into his run where there weren't any players. It'd have taken a good pass from Hughes but he's more than capable.

B) Or preferably come short off the centre backs to provide Hughes with an easy passing option to work with. That is what Martin would have done, allowing for a quick one two with Hughes to open up the defence. 

Instead he did neither and just stood there completely static, Hughes passes him the ball and the defender nicks it off his feet. This sort of situation has been happening a lot and suggests he really isn't used to playing the role required.

I would also like to see a true front three but it still requires that players know when to come short and get involved with the play. Right now, Vydra just doesn't.

Out of interest what would you define as a 'true front three'?

[RadioactiveWaste]

Clever link man, i think we need. The old stereotype big hold up man isn't necessarily what we need, but it's clear some thing's just not quite gelling.

The shape and form that takes could be anything, yes, Martin has been that for us in the past, and initial impressions are that's not Vydra's strength.

In the current squad? Hughes might be able to do it, Butters and Ince have been tried without looking great, it's never going to be Bent, Weimann, Russell or Camara. I don't think Anya's cut out for it.

If we can get Martin back by refunding half his loan fee, I'd give that a go.

[brady1993]

7 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Clever link man, i think we need. The old stereotype big hold up man isn't necessarily what we need, but it's clear some thing's just not quite gelling.

The shape and form that takes could be anything, yes, Martin has been that for us in the past, and initial impressions are that's not Vydra's strength.

In the current squad? Hughes might be able to do it, Butters and Ince have been tried without looking great, it's never going to be Bent, Weimann, Russell or Camara. I don't think Anya's cut out for it.

If we can get Martin back by refunding half his loan fee, I'd give that a go.

Agree with you here @RadioactiveWaste. 

One thing I'd like to add is I can see a situation where Vydra is coached into the role. From what I've seen of him the problem isn't his ability to play the role but a lack of familiarity/understanding of playing the role. That is something that with game time and time on the training pitch under McClaren could very well improve. Hopefully he can adapt because if he does I think he will be a real force up front for us.

[duncanjwitham]

You don't *need* anything.  You don't need wingers, you don't need a holding midfielder, you don't need a target man.  You can even argue Guardiola's Barcelona played without centre halves and strikers, so maybe you don't even need those.  What you do need is a coherent strategy across the team, so you have all of the parts of your team pulling together and trying to achieve the same things.

If you are going to sit deep and counter, then you absolutely don't need a striker to hold the ball up, you need pace to break quickly.  If you are going to play direct, you need a strong, physical striker to hold the ball up while the rest of the team catches up. If you are going to control possession, you need someone coming off the front to link play up.  With the system we have at the moment, none of the forwards are dropping into midfield, they're all pushing up waiting for a through ball, so we're trying to control possession when we're effectively 2 or 3 men down.  With the added bonus that if the forwards do get the ball, we lose it, because their first thought is run at the opposition, instead of pass and move and get the ball back in a better position.  (I'm not saying you can't have players doing that in a possession-oriented team, you just can't have all of your forwards doing it).

[cannable]

2 hours ago, Norman said:

It's a load of absolute ******* ********.

I watch any game of football. Last night I watched Arsenal for about the 10th time this season (that might or might not be an exaggeration). They play with 4 at the back, Coquelin at CDM with Cazorla in the middle, Ozil slightly (ok, quite a bit) more advanced them him, with the Ox and Walcott out wide.

And who was playing up front on his own. Some little Chilean midget that never stopped running, turning, dropping deep, running in behind and pulling his shorts up to unveil some rather impressive thigh muscles. Not to mention is testosterone fueled chin line and his wonderful pecs, but i digress,

He's 4'10, playing with 2 people who can run faster than i can sneeze but have no footballing ability at times. But he can do it. Sound familiar.

But, no, i think Giroud the 2 legged donkey might be better up there on his own. What with his good looks, that nicely coiffured beard, his accent that makes my knees tremble and his hold up play. The last one being a joke.

My point is, whilst Sanchez is a brilliant player, i think he shows what a vertically challenged player can do when up front on his own. Can we play like Arsenal? No.

So my point being, can a ***** Sanchez play in a ***** league and do roughly the same things? I think so.

You might disagree. I don't care. But i will write back to you and tell you you're wrong. Not because i care or want to be right all the time. I just will.

But i'm driving for the next hour or so, so don't expect an instant reply to your rubbish observations that contradict my well thought out points. It looks needy.

But that's the key bit though isn't it? Arsenal have a #10 (arguably the best in the world) behind Sanchez. We don't have a #10. We have Hughes who keeps things ticking over and controls games when needs be, we Butters who wants to control the game and play the most passes (his own words), Johnson who wants to be on the end of moves and Bryson who runs in behind. 

We had three players who looked as if they could play as a #10 and we got rid of two of them over the course of the summer! The only other option would be Ince or to shoehorn one of Hughes and Butters in there and hope they flourish. 

I'm highly skeptical of a lone pacey-in behind striker without a #10.

[jono]

1 hour ago, brady1993 said:

I know what you're saying but I think you've missed my point a tad. There has to be a forward player who connects the front line to the midfield. It might not be his sole role in the team but he needs to be able to do it to have a platform to attack from.

 

I don't think the first player means excluded the second player but you have to let go of the idea of classic player roles. In a 433 your 'rapier' could be a midfielder (think Lampard or Bryson of 13/14), one of the inside forwards (think Ronaldo), the main centre forward performing both roles (Drogba was fantastic at this) or (ideally) a combination of the above. Personally I dislike having a forward whose sole role is to wait for the final ball and 'just score goals' because you end up effectively playing large stretches of games with 10 men. This means that you can 'build' an attack to the same extent and often makes your attacks one dimensional as your game plan is reliant on finding a single player at the right time and hoping he finishes.

 

This where I'm going to have to strongly disagree. I think a 433 with the playstyle we had under McClaren is inherently more flexible than a 442/4411 and is best demonstrated by how varied the goals we scored were. It's something of a myth that we would solely play through Martin and have midfield runners going past him. Sure that was Plan A (and bloody effective at that) but we had significantly more to our game than that it's just Martin in conjunction with the attacking midfielders gave us a foothold in the final third of the pitch from which we could work the ball and carve out the chance.

I am not going to completely agree but I really like chewing the cud with you Brady ?

[Sparkle]

I believe we need that link man who can do the job as it makes so many others play a lot better.