| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs 18:01 - Dec 27 with 2418 views | WestbourneR |
For me, we have to stop playing three and the back and wing backs. In fact I think it's criminal when there are no actual specialist wing backs in the squad.
All our width (which is limited) comes through the wing backs which puts a lot of pressure on the players shoe horned into playing there. Time and time again an attacking move ends up at the feet of Bidwell wide on the left. It's crazy. I think the guy is a great pro and solid 6 or 7 out of 10 defensive Left Back but he should not ever be a crucial part of our attack.
If we switch to 4 at the back we can go back to proper wingers and get BOS, Wheeler, Pawel and Manning into the team more regularly in wide attacking positions feeding either Sylla or Smith.
It makes so much more sense.
And before anyone says it the four at the back formation doesn't break up the midfield three of Scowen, Luongo and Freeman. |  |
| |  |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 18:07 - Dec 27 with 2394 views | Roller |
I'm going to disagree. I assume that you are only playing one striker. I'be no problem with that, but a lot of people get quite heated about only playing one striker at home.
Can you layout your preferred formation with who is playing where? |  | | |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 18:24 - Dec 27 with 2355 views | WestbourneR |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 18:07 - Dec 27 by Roller |
I'm going to disagree. I assume that you are only playing one striker. I'be no problem with that, but a lot of people get quite heated about only playing one striker at home.
Can you layout your preferred formation with who is playing where? |
Hello Roller. Yeah it's one up front but with plenty of support from advanced wingers and a man in hole just behind. I don't one out and out striker is negative it's the way almost all teams play these days. If you have a problem with it then you've basically ignored all the successful teams for the last 15 years.
4-2-3-1 - Which players play which positions up for change, you've got people like Manning, Cousins and Wheeler on the bench but this would be my starting team.
-------------------Smithies-----------------
Furlong---Onouha---Baptiste---Bidwell
------------Scowen---------------------------
----------------------------Luongo------------
Wzsowek------Freeman---Osayi-Samuel
--------------------Sylla----------------------- | |
| |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 18:32 - Dec 27 with 2333 views | kensalriser |
Successful 4-5-1 depends on attacking midfielders notching up goals. While much of the attention is on the modest return from our strikers, the lack of goals from midfield is equally as much a problem. |  |
| |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 18:56 - Dec 27 with 2282 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
I quite like the system although I do agree that we probably don't have the players for it. Wszolek played quite well yesterday I thought. Some of his passing was a bit shite but he looked well up for it and fitter. Bidwell was his usual Ronseal self. Maybe Robinson could be another option at LWB? [Post edited 27 Dec 2017 18:57]
|  |
| |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 20:48 - Dec 27 with 2126 views | Roller |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 18:24 - Dec 27 by WestbourneR |
Hello Roller. Yeah it's one up front but with plenty of support from advanced wingers and a man in hole just behind. I don't one out and out striker is negative it's the way almost all teams play these days. If you have a problem with it then you've basically ignored all the successful teams for the last 15 years.
4-2-3-1 - Which players play which positions up for change, you've got people like Manning, Cousins and Wheeler on the bench but this would be my starting team.
-------------------Smithies-----------------
Furlong---Onouha---Baptiste---Bidwell
------------Scowen---------------------------
----------------------------Luongo------------
Wzsowek------Freeman---Osayi-Samuel
--------------------Sylla----------------------- |
I'm happy to agree that you've got a decent team there, but I feel that 3-5-2 lets us get all of our known best players on the pitch and in positions which best suit them.
-------------------Smithies-----------------
----Onouha---Baptiste---Robinson-----
Wszolek---------Scowen----------Bidwell
-----------Freeman-------Luongo----------
-----------Sylla------Oseyi-Samuel----------
I don't think it is a coincidence that our form has improved since Onuoha returned and we reverted to 3-5-2. The 4-4-2 (not that you are suggesting that) was painfully exposed as having a soft centre.
Wszolek has looked to be returning to his best form since his short exclusion from the team, and I believe that Bidwell, who is looking far, far better than last season, is growing into his role.
However, I think that your formation stretches the compactness of our midfield three triumvirate which has been a the centre of all that has been good this season and pulls Luongo back from the more attacking role in which he has thrived.
Holloway didn't select 3-5-2 because we had great wing-backs, but because it got the best out of our best players. With the emergence of Robinson as one of the back three this season, it has become an even stronger formation. | | | |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 21:05 - Dec 27 with 2095 views | daveB |
Bidwell has been pretty good as a wing back this season, looked better than he did in a back 4 last season anyway.
I don't think we should be changing the system and I don't think it would make us any more attacking, we haven't got a great left winger, to try and squeeze someone in on the left would unbalance the side imo.
We've played pretty well for most of the season playing this way, last season when Holloway first came in and during the bad run at the end of the season he kept trying to play with 2 out and out wingers either with a back 3 or a back 4 and it rarely worked causing the team to be far too open.
I think playing 3-5-2 at home and a 3-4-1-1 away is the way to go as we've done in the last few games |  | | |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 21:12 - Dec 27 with 2083 views | WestbourneR |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 20:48 - Dec 27 by Roller |
I'm happy to agree that you've got a decent team there, but I feel that 3-5-2 lets us get all of our known best players on the pitch and in positions which best suit them.
-------------------Smithies-----------------
----Onouha---Baptiste---Robinson-----
Wszolek---------Scowen----------Bidwell
-----------Freeman-------Luongo----------
-----------Sylla------Oseyi-Samuel----------
I don't think it is a coincidence that our form has improved since Onuoha returned and we reverted to 3-5-2. The 4-4-2 (not that you are suggesting that) was painfully exposed as having a soft centre.
Wszolek has looked to be returning to his best form since his short exclusion from the team, and I believe that Bidwell, who is looking far, far better than last season, is growing into his role.
However, I think that your formation stretches the compactness of our midfield three triumvirate which has been a the centre of all that has been good this season and pulls Luongo back from the more attacking role in which he has thrived.
Holloway didn't select 3-5-2 because we had great wing-backs, but because it got the best out of our best players. With the emergence of Robinson as one of the back three this season, it has become an even stronger formation. |
But Roller 'all things good' has got us to just above the relegation zone. The midfield three have been the best of pretty poor to average bunch - and I think the formation is part of the problem. Also don't agree about three at the back getting all our best players in their best positions....
Bidwell - no wing back, never ever will be, far too many of our attacking moves end up at his feet at the moment.
Wszolek - spelling noted - can adequately play wing back but he's really a winger
Oseyi-Samuel - playing the hole in your formation and is currently but he is really an out and out winger.
Re centre backs - Robinson and Onouha are the first choice pairing, my mistake.
Anyway I think the midfield three can be very compact in the formation I propose when we're in possession. The onus is more on the wingers to be wing forwards and get in support of the striker my moving into the box when the other winger is crossing from the other side.
I think Wszolek had got goals in him and we KNOW Wheeler has lots if he ever gets the chance.
It all comes down to the wing backs with three at the back. If we still had Isla I'd be keen. We don't. We got full backs and wingers and midfielders. | |
| |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 21:28 - Dec 27 with 2048 views | CiderwithRsie |
Given our lack of decent strikers, and lack of goals from Scowongoman and Wszolek, (or Manning and/or Cousins, come to that) I think we are looking to Wheeler and/or BOS for some goals, even if we did improve service to Sylla/Smith/whoever.
So quite a lot depends on whether BOS/Wheeler can either score from the wings (as per Westbourne's plan) or as a striker (as in Roller's defence of wing-backs). I really think we need to get those two guys onto the pitch more, even if as subs, to get this clear; getting Chair and Eze involved might answer a few questions too. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 08:33 - Dec 28 with 1814 views | Roller |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 21:12 - Dec 27 by WestbourneR |
But Roller 'all things good' has got us to just above the relegation zone. The midfield three have been the best of pretty poor to average bunch - and I think the formation is part of the problem. Also don't agree about three at the back getting all our best players in their best positions....
Bidwell - no wing back, never ever will be, far too many of our attacking moves end up at his feet at the moment.
Wszolek - spelling noted - can adequately play wing back but he's really a winger
Oseyi-Samuel - playing the hole in your formation and is currently but he is really an out and out winger.
Re centre backs - Robinson and Onouha are the first choice pairing, my mistake.
Anyway I think the midfield three can be very compact in the formation I propose when we're in possession. The onus is more on the wingers to be wing forwards and get in support of the striker my moving into the box when the other winger is crossing from the other side.
I think Wszolek had got goals in him and we KNOW Wheeler has lots if he ever gets the chance.
It all comes down to the wing backs with three at the back. If we still had Isla I'd be keen. We don't. We got full backs and wingers and midfielders. |
We've not been able to play our midfield triumvirate in a compact triangle for every match this season because of our injury crisis forcing a flat back four at times. I think this has dictated our form more than anything else; losing Onuoha was a massive blow as without his pace the back three struggled.
I think that your formation will leave our fullbacks horribly exposed with little support from the "advanced wingers" meaning that Luongo is dragged further back and away from his best position. The lack of "Why the hell are we still playing Luongo" threads this season confirms that Holloway has got that right.
Both Bidwell and Wszolek are improving in their new roles. Bidwell is playing far better than he did last season (who knew he could cross with the outside of his foot?) and Wszolek has regained some spark after his short spell out of the team.
Do we KNOW that Wheeler has goals in him? We certainly hope he has, but his record in League Two (33 goals in 149 matches) was worse than Washington's in League One (27 in 82). I'd agree that you can't really make such a direct comparison, but question that we KNOW it as fact. That said, I'd be happy to give him a few starts alongside Sylla.
I'm sure that we can agree that no formation is perfect and all come with some compromises. We probably won't agree on much else. | | | |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 12:14 - Dec 28 with 1643 views | WestbourneR |
| Bidwell and the curse of wing backs on 08:33 - Dec 28 by Roller |
We've not been able to play our midfield triumvirate in a compact triangle for every match this season because of our injury crisis forcing a flat back four at times. I think this has dictated our form more than anything else; losing Onuoha was a massive blow as without his pace the back three struggled.
I think that your formation will leave our fullbacks horribly exposed with little support from the "advanced wingers" meaning that Luongo is dragged further back and away from his best position. The lack of "Why the hell are we still playing Luongo" threads this season confirms that Holloway has got that right.
Both Bidwell and Wszolek are improving in their new roles. Bidwell is playing far better than he did last season (who knew he could cross with the outside of his foot?) and Wszolek has regained some spark after his short spell out of the team.
Do we KNOW that Wheeler has goals in him? We certainly hope he has, but his record in League Two (33 goals in 149 matches) was worse than Washington's in League One (27 in 82). I'd agree that you can't really make such a direct comparison, but question that we KNOW it as fact. That said, I'd be happy to give him a few starts alongside Sylla.
I'm sure that we can agree that no formation is perfect and all come with some compromises. We probably won't agree on much else. |
That’s the last time I write a word in caps | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
