After watching today we've got to ditch the 5-3-2 formation that Flynny seems to favour. 4-4-2 worked much better as a system second half.
I'd go with ;
Day
Pipe
Franks
Demetriou
Butler
Sheehan
Crofts
Bakinson
Marsh-Brown
Matt
Amond
Re: Starting 11
2I haven't seen any friendlies but I would hazard a guess at something like the below and to be fair Flynn usually favours 4 at the back
Day
Forbes
Franks
Demetriou
Butler
Dolan
Crofts
Cooper
Marsh-Brown
Wilmott
Amond
Subs: GK, Pipe, O'Brien, Bennett, Sheehan. Matt, Semenyo
Day
Forbes
Franks
Demetriou
Butler
Dolan
Crofts
Cooper
Marsh-Brown
Wilmott
Amond
Subs: GK, Pipe, O'Brien, Bennett, Sheehan. Matt, Semenyo
Last edited by Ugo. on July 28th, 2018, 9:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Starting 11
3I am not sure , I feel safer with a 5-3-2 and think Butler operates better in this system than a flat back 4.SULLY34 wrote:After watching today we've got to ditch the 5-3-2 formation that Flynny seems to favour. 4-4-2 worked much better as a system second half.
I'd go with ;
Day
Pipe
Franks
Demetriou
Butler
Sheehan
Crofts
Bakinson
Marsh-Brown
Matt
Amond
Re: Starting 11
4We had our work cut out playing 5-3-2 first half. Butler was overworked and often had 2 players to mark. I'd prefer 4-4-2 but we'll have to wait and see!Alan G Bryant wrote:I am not sure , I feel safer with a 5-3-2 and think Butler operates better in this system than a flat back 4.SULLY34 wrote:After watching today we've got to ditch the 5-3-2 formation that Flynny seems to favour. 4-4-2 worked much better as a system second half.
I'd go with ;
Day
Pipe
Franks
Demetriou
Butler
Sheehan
Crofts
Bakinson
Marsh-Brown
Matt
Amond
Re: Starting 11
5Yes, fair point, I am not sure if it is a good thing or bad thing switching systems at half time. Is Mike trying different systems as he does not know his preferred system or is it something we are planning this season depending on how we are getting on?
I think we will start with 4 at the back next Saturday, just not convinced it suits us.
I think we will start with 4 at the back next Saturday, just not convinced it suits us.
Re: Starting 11
6I didn't think Pipe would get much game time this season but after today he's still first choice RB.Alan G Bryant wrote:Yes, fair point, I am not sure if it is a good thing or bad thing switching systems at half time. Is Mike trying different systems as he does not know his preferred system or is it something we are planning this season depending on how we are getting on?
I think we will start with 4 at the back next Saturday, just not convinced it suits us.
Re: Starting 11
7I thought he was immense today , and clearly the character that will up his game when he feels he needs too. I like marsh brown on the ball and Sheehan looks a better player than the end of last season.SULLY34 wrote:I didn't think Pipe would get much game time this season but after today he's still first choice RB.Alan G Bryant wrote:Yes, fair point, I am not sure if it is a good thing or bad thing switching systems at half time. Is Mike trying different systems as he does not know his preferred system or is it something we are planning this season depending on how we are getting on?
I think we will start with 4 at the back next Saturday, just not convinced it suits us.
Re: Starting 11
8Both Sheehan and KMB had great 45mins.Alan G Bryant wrote:I thought he was immense today , and clearly the character that will up his game when he feels he needs too. I like marsh brown on the ball and Sheehan looks a better player than the end of last season.SULLY34 wrote:I didn't think Pipe would get much game time this season but after today he's still first choice RB.Alan G Bryant wrote:Yes, fair point, I am not sure if it is a good thing or bad thing switching systems at half time. Is Mike trying different systems as he does not know his preferred system or is it something we are planning this season depending on how we are getting on?
I think we will start with 4 at the back next Saturday, just not convinced it suits us.
Re: Starting 11
9Good to hear Marsh-Brown played well, I'd heard he was a flair player and he didn't have much confidence last week.
3-2-3-2 looks like our favoured system, (call it 3-5-2 or 5-3-2 if you like, it has 3CBs, 2 WBs and 2 DMs and two up front with the other 3 across the midfield), but sometimes different systems suit different opponents' strengths and weaknesses - what was happening better with 4-4-2 than 3-5-2?
As simple as matching up their wide men with our full-backs to stop them exploiting the space behind the wing backs, or did they only play one up front so we didn't need all three CBs?
3-2-3-2 looks like our favoured system, (call it 3-5-2 or 5-3-2 if you like, it has 3CBs, 2 WBs and 2 DMs and two up front with the other 3 across the midfield), but sometimes different systems suit different opponents' strengths and weaknesses - what was happening better with 4-4-2 than 3-5-2?
As simple as matching up their wide men with our full-backs to stop them exploiting the space behind the wing backs, or did they only play one up front so we didn't need all three CBs?
Re: Starting 11
10They played 2 front men but reverting back to 4-4-2 enabled us to attack down the flanks without leaving gaps. We can't go through the middle with high balls to strikers weak in the air. We've got to allow Pipe, Butler, Sheehan and KMB to attack down the flanks and second half we did.SJG99 wrote:Good to hear Marsh-Brown played well, I'd heard he was a flair player and he didn't have much confidence last week.
3-2-3-2 looks like our favoured system, (call it 3-5-2 or 5-3-2 if you like, it has 3CBs, 2 WBs and 2 DMs and two up front with the other 3 across the midfield), but sometimes different systems suit different opponents' strengths and weaknesses - what was happening better with 4-4-2 than 3-5-2?
As simple as matching up their wide men with our full-backs to stop them exploiting the space behind the wing backs, or did they only play one up front so we didn't need all three CBs?
Re: Starting 11
11Playing with 3 CBs and 2 DMs like we often do is way too defensive.SJG99 wrote:Good to hear Marsh-Brown played well, I'd heard he was a flair player and he didn't have much confidence last week.
3-2-3-2 looks like our favoured system, (call it 3-5-2 or 5-3-2 if you like, it has 3CBs, 2 WBs and 2 DMs and two up front with the other 3 across the midfield), but sometimes different systems suit different opponents' strengths and weaknesses - what was happening better with 4-4-2 than 3-5-2?
As simple as matching up their wide men with our full-backs to stop them exploiting the space behind the wing backs, or did they only play one up front so we didn't need all three CBs?
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Exile 1976