5 at the back or 4
What's your thoughts
Re: Should Flynny leave
2Now this point last season I would have said 5 but when Poole arrived we kind of played an asymetrical 442. Poole played as a rightback sometimes overlapping where as Butler on the left as a wing back, with the nominal left midfielder tucking in, which was how we played for most of our good run in the latter stages. So my vote goes to 4 at the back.
Re: Should Flynny leave
3That will confuse the OP.Est.1912 wrote:Now this point last season I would have said 5 but when Poole arrived we kind of played an asymetrical 442. Poole played as a rightback sometimes overlapping where as Butler on the left as a wing back, with the nominal left midfielder tucking in, which was how we played for most of our good run in the latter stages. So my vote goes to 4 at the back.
Re: Should Flynny leave
4It's not going to happen but I wonder if Pipey could be tempted out of retirement to play a few games at the back? I bet he's kept himself fit, can't think of a better motivator capable of lifting this team from the gloom.
Re: Should Flynny leave
5I think we'll be lucky to play 3 at the back with all the injuries. Who's going to play right back? McNamara can't play and Willmott injured. If Demetriou doesn't recover then Bennet will have to play at the back, which isn't a bad thing. The midfield isn't looking too good either, especially if Labadie isn't fit. Probably Sheehan, Dolan, Malony & Nurse
Re: Should Flynny leave
6States in Argus that O'Brien and Howkins are back.
The last couple of games we've played without a natural right sided midfielder and have been disjointed, with the players available it was crying out for a back 3 with wing backs.
Think without a recognised right back that we would be better off with a back 3, more cover for whoever does fill in on the right.
The last couple of games we've played without a natural right sided midfielder and have been disjointed, with the players available it was crying out for a back 3 with wing backs.
Think without a recognised right back that we would be better off with a back 3, more cover for whoever does fill in on the right.
Re: Should Flynny leave
7If we play a back 3 with wing-backs playing out of position at somewhere like The New Den, with their noisy crowd, we'll get torn a new a--hole. Our wing-backs wouldn't get out of their own half knowing the sort of high pressing Rowett's teams play.
As much as I hate saying it, there's only one way to get a draw at Millwall and that's playing to our strengths - long balls up to JM and PA. I can see Collins playing a big part also, and suspect that Townsend will be back in goal (seeing as it's King's former team and he'll get hounded by the fans behind him).
As much as I hate saying it, there's only one way to get a draw at Millwall and that's playing to our strengths - long balls up to JM and PA. I can see Collins playing a big part also, and suspect that Townsend will be back in goal (seeing as it's King's former team and he'll get hounded by the fans behind him).
Re: Should Flynny leave
8How would playing someone out of position at wingback be worse than playing someone out of position at right back? At least with wing backs we have cover behind them and have more chance of getting out than a back 4 with no width
Re: Should Flynny leave
9Good point, but I guess a wingback is expected to get up and down the pitch, supporting the attack more than a traditional full-back would. And I don't think we've got anyone currently fit at the club with the energy and nous to take on Championship players like this.Ugo. wrote:How would playing someone out of position at wingback be worse than playing someone out of position at right back? At least with wing backs we have cover behind them and have more chance of getting out than a back 4 with no width
Re: Should Flynny leave
10Understand but the trouble is we are without a recognised right midfielder and right back, trying to fill both with players playing out of position would be suicide in my eyes. Better to play Jefferies or Nurse as a right wing back and then have cover at centre half and centre midfield.DeePeeNCAFC wrote:Good point, but I guess a wingback is expected to get up and down the pitch, supporting the attack more than a traditional full-back would. And I don't think we've got anyone currently fit at the club with the energy and nous to take on Championship players like this.Ugo. wrote:How would playing someone out of position at wingback be worse than playing someone out of position at right back? At least with wing backs we have cover behind them and have more chance of getting out than a back 4 with no width
Re: Should Flynny leave
11Won’t be any home fans behind the goal and if there were I am sure King would manage. Only one stand is open for the home fans, be surprised if there is more than 5,000 of them so unlikely to be that much of an atmosphere.DeePeeNCAFC wrote:If we play a back 3 with wing-backs playing out of position at somewhere like The New Den, with their noisy crowd, we'll get torn a new a--hole. Our wing-backs wouldn't get out of their own half knowing the sort of high pressing Rowett's teams play.
As much as I hate saying it, there's only one way to get a draw at Millwall and that's playing to our strengths - long balls up to JM and PA. I can see Collins playing a big part also, and suspect that Townsend will be back in goal (seeing as it's King's former team and he'll get hounded by the fans behind him).
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Kairdiff Exile