Jump to content

Summer Rumour Mill


sage

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, angieram said:

We got the 1 bit of the result whilst we were playing four at the back!

Did we?  Shaun Barker described it as a 5 at the beginning of the match, and people on here seem to have different opinions.  Maybe even the players didn't know if it was a four, or a asymmetrical 5, with NML further forward than Fozzy?  Whatever, it can't have been a very clear formation if people saw it differently!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, whestonram said:

Did we?  Shaun Barker described it as a 5 at the beginning of the match, and people on here seem to have different opinions.  Maybe even the players didn't know if it was a four, or a asymmetrical 5, with NML further forward than Fozzy?  Whatever, it can't have been a very clear formation if people saw it differently!

It was a really unusual formation. It was essentially 4 at the back, but Forsyth had more licence to go forward than Rooney did. But that was because the supposed "left winger" was Thompson but he barely went out on the left, whereas, NML was stood on the touchline on the right. Was oddly lopsided, and definitely not something that would work in every game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

If we play 5 at the back enough will we eventually get good at it?

You'd think it could be coached into players if they're doing it every match?

Well the daft thing is we brought in players who have experience of it. I think, fundamentally, the problem is with those we haven't replaced (Bradley not-withstanding). We just don't have enough in the middle or up front regardless of any formation we play at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Srg said:

Well the daft thing is we brought in players who have experience of it. I think, fundamentally, the problem is with those we haven't replaced (Bradley not-withstanding). We just don't have enough in the middle or up front regardless of any formation we play at the moment.

To play devil’s advocate we have scored in all four games and I was reliably informed by many on here that we would win every game 1-0 based on our Arsenal-like defence 😊 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

If we play 5 at the back enough will we eventually get good at it?

You'd think it could be coached into players if they're doing it every match?

I think from what has been posted previously you need certain players and types of players to be successful with 3 at the back. I struggle to see the point of it when there is much more stability, and therefore opportunity to attack with 4 at the back. 

Edited by RoyMac5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, angieram said:

We got the 1 bit of the result whilst we were playing four at the back!

Sorry Angie, we never played four at the back. NML was always the attacking RWB with little responsibility to get back, hence Rooney had to cover a lot.

What have it away was when Cashin took a throw in in the 5th or 10th minutes. If we were four at the back, he definitely wouldn’t have been taking the throw in.

It was in essence, three at the back, a normal wing back in Fozzy, a very attacking wing back in NML, three on the middle with Thompson given more reign to attacked and two up front thank fully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, rammieib said:

Sorry Angie, we never played four at the back. NML was always the attacking RWB with little responsibility to get back, hence Rooney had to cover a lot.

What have it away was when Cashin took a throw in in the 5th or 10th minutes. If we were four at the back, he definitely wouldn’t have been taking the throw in.

It was in essence, three at the back, a normal wing back in Fozzy, a very attacking wing back in NML, three on the middle with Thompson given more reign to attacked and two up front thank fully.

I disagree, start of the 2nd half saw a discernible change to shape, accommodating the traditional back 5. 

''NML was always the attacking RWB with little responsibility to get back, hence Rooney had to cover a lot.'' - You do realise you've just described the relationship between a winger and a fullback in a traditional back 4? Especially since Fozzy was further back, how many formations are intentionally lopsided? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, rammieib said:

Sorry Angie, we never played four at the back. NML was always the attacking RWB with little responsibility to get back, hence Rooney had to cover a lot.

What have it away was when Cashin took a throw in in the 5th or 10th minutes. If we were four at the back, he definitely wouldn’t have been taking the throw in.

It was in essence, three at the back, a normal wing back in Fozzy, a very attacking wing back in NML, three on the middle with Thompson given more reign to attacked and two up front thank fully.

We definitely started off a a solid back 4, which slowly morphed more and more into a back 5 as the game went on. Kind of like this:

Wildsmith
Rooney   Nelson   Cashin   Forsyth
           Smith   Hourihane   LThompson
Mendez-Laing                                         
                           Waghorn   Washington         

Edited by Ghost of Clough
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think people get tied down with formations too much, I don’t think NML was anywhere near being in  a full back position.

I sat in the East stand and watched Forsyth, Cashin , Nelson and Rooney go through their warm up drills as a straight four while NML was warming up with the forwards. 
My son and grandson like to go down to the front and watch them warm up, as soon as my lad came back he said it’s definitely a back four then.

Radio Derby and the BBC website both had us down as 352🤷🏻‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Srg said:

Well the daft thing is we brought in players who have experience of it. I think, fundamentally, the problem is with those we haven't replaced (Bradley not-withstanding). We just don't have enough in the middle or up front regardless of any formation we play at the moment.

 

1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

I think from what has been posted previously you need certain players and types of players to be successful with 3 at the back. I struggle to see the point of it when there is much more stability, and therefore opportunity to attack with 4 at the back. 

But surely even if they're not natural at it or particularly comfortable at it, they can at least he trained to be competent at it?

Well, you'd think anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Foreveram said:

I think people get tied down with formations too much, I don’t think NML was anywhere near being in  a full back position.

I sat in the East stand and watched Forsyth, Cashin , Nelson and Rooney go through their warm up drills as a straight four while NML was warming up with the forwards. 
My son and grandson like to go down to the front and watch them warm up, as soon as my lad came back he said it’s definitely a back four then.

Radio Derby and the BBC website both had us down as 352🤷🏻‍♂️

Average positions are usually a good indicator of formation. Based on our starting 11, that was:

Wildsmith
       Nelson   Cashin
      Rooney                                       
                Smith                  Forsyth
                       Hourihane LThompson
                     Washington
Mendez-Laing                                   
Waghorn

 

Kind of a fusion of 433, 442 and 352

Edited by Ghost of Clough
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Average positions are usually a good indicator of formation. Based on our starting 11, that was:

Wildsmith
       Nelson   Cashin
      Rooney                                       
                Smith                  Forsyth
                       Hourihane LThompson
                     Washington
Mendez-Laing                                   
Waghorn

 

Kind of a fusion of 433, 442 and 352

Suppose if we have no idea what formation we’re playing neither will the opposition 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Average positions are usually a good indicator of formation. Based on our starting 11, that was:

Wildsmith
       Nelson   Cashin
      Rooney                                       
                Smith                  Forsyth
                       Hourihane LThompson
                     Washington
Mendez-Laing                                   
Waghorn

 

Kind of a mess.

FTFY 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...