Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: Loxton01 on January 30, 2013, 10:51:38 AM
-
Last night PL showed his continued naivety when asked about the system saying that the formation and system of play was irrelevant!!!
He continually changes the formation from game to game and to me it is having a massive impact on performance! One minute Bennett is a fb then a wingback then a lm. These kids need reassurance and guidance not constant change!!
I have backed PL till last week but for me he is compounding issues by constantly changing team formation. Yesterday first half five defenders vs cisse was ridicolous and smacked of a manager who is unprepared and disorganised!!
For me it's back to basics stick to a formation work on it in training!! Ok qpr may not be winning but there hard to beat organised and no their roles!! Can we say that about us!!
We have to play the best formation for our players! That for me is 4-3-3! Guzan Lowton dunne vlaar and Clark at lb! I can dream about a solid dcm to sit in front but it ain't happening so Delph and Westwood! Nzog in front with gabby and weimann supporting Benteke!!
Then stick to the shape work on it stop changing it.
Weimann would be first name on the sheet for me. How he was left out yesterday was a disgrace on current form!!
Lambert has been under pressure re wages from above but to not play our few players in form and constantly keep changing things is making us worse! He has to take a long hard look at his errors and learn from them bloody quick
-
4-4-2 or 4-2-3-1. Either way it HAS to be 4 at the back.
-
I noted this as a concern from Norwich fans a while ago, but our dear Dave Woodhall shot me down saying that Paul's incessant tinkering and lack of consistency was a plus point. The times, they are a changin'!
EDIT: Just looked it up and it wasn't Dave but someone else. Dave replied to whoever was replying to me; memory playing tricks on me - apologies, Dave!
-
After 5 minutes you could see Newcastle's strategy. Get their wide forwards to push up on Bennett and Lowton, thus stopping them from pushing forward. This meant, everytime Krul had the ball he could throw it out to the full back unchallenged. As soon as Bannan or Westwood went to close down a gap was left in the middle that was exposed. Lambert could have changed this after 5 minutes without even making a substitution.
He could have done two things:
Move Clark to LB, Bennett to LM and N'Zogbia to RM
Move Clark to CM/DM Bannan to LM and N'Zogbia to RM
He did nothing until a few moments before Newcastle's 2nd goal. He'd gone 4-4-2 but N'Zogbia wasn't in position to play RM, and was still standing in the position to support Bent in the middle of the pitch thus leaving the area where Cabaye scored Villa player free.
Credit to Lambert for changing it at half time, but he should have done it earlier. I would like to see our possession stats for the 1st half an hour. If we had the ball for more than 40% of the time I would be surprised. I understand the tension, the need for keeping it tight but the starting formation really didn't help us at all last night.
I think the players HAVE got the fight for the scrap, I just don't think they have the right degree of coaching, leadership and ability to see it through.
-
Agree entirely OP. Play a proper formation, make us work hard and use width and we'd be a half decent side.
-
He will persist with that abomination of a 5-3-2, despite us being royally buggered just about every time we've played it. Bennett last night was woeful beyond belief.
-
4231 is how we should be playing.
Even without signings it is the best use of what we have.
-
The changes at half-time obviously helped, but I think more than anything else we got to the stage at 2-0 last night where we had to just go for it. That response should have come at the Wigan game. The lack of dithering around and playing with more intent helped more than the changes.
-
formation, what formation?
The tactics last night appeared to be to try and confuse Newcastle, in the end it nearly worked.
Pardew was probably thinking, what the fuck is going on here?
-
Lambert's interview with Pat Murphy on R5 was pretty bizarre.
-
There is a gaping hole in the middle of our team.
I wish Lambert and Lerner would just plug it.
It would ease the pressur eon our defence and solidy the whole unit.
-
He will persist with that abomination of a 5-3-2, despite us being royally buggered just about every time we've played it. Bennett last night was woeful beyond belief.
Thing is its more a 5-2-1-2 approach.It's convoluted beyond belief.Brain Little on the coms mentioned how in second half things improved as the players knew what they were supposed to be doing.Lowton got forward more as he had someone in front of him to take a man away from him.
I thought TSM 4-4-2 with Hutton RM and Heskey LM was the worst formation I could see us play ...I was wrong
-
4-3-3 or 4-3-1-2 from now on please.
-
Lambert is making O'Neill and even TSM look like Guardiola or Mourinho in terms of tactical astuteness. Not an easy task, but that's a measure of how bad he's been in the last 6 or 7 games at least. It doesn't augur well for next season, whichever division we end up in.
-
4231 with N'Zog, Weimann, Gabby and Benkeke, means only two midfielders, maybe 2 and a half, bit too offensive for my liking, I'd have Holman or Bannan instead of a forward and go 442.
-
I just want width! That first 15 of the second half last night, with agbon tearing people up out wide was perfect. Then, he went central? I didn't get it, he must have known what he was doing originally worked? He obviously lacks a football noggin, which is why he is perfect for that role, run as fast as you can, get to the line, put the ball in, kushty.
-
2nd half last night was the first real showing of width with intent last night. It worked for a while until Gabby drifted into the middle. Having width frees up Zog to roam at his most effective and with Weimann and Gabby playing the wide roles you have two players who will bust a gut to help out at the back when needed.
-
I just want width! That first 15 of the second half last night, with agbon tearing people up out wide was perfect. Then, he went central? I didn't get it, he must have known what he was doing originally worked? He obviously lacks a football noggin, which is why he is perfect for that role, run as fast as you can, get to the line, put the ball in, kushty.
That was when we were playing 4231, with gabby, nzog and weimann across the pitch behind Benteke.
I agree that at times it may be too attacking but with Weimann and Bannan in particular able to play in the wide roles but also willing to graft it can be a 4411 when we need to defend. We still need a better option in central midfield though but if we're going to have a glaring hole in the middle of the park I'd at least like us to pin the opposition full backs down by having a threat out wide.
-
Of course he'll say the system was irrelevant, but if it really is he wouldn't have changed it. That's what TSM would do: if things were going wrong he'd shout and make like-for-like substitutions. Lambert changing the system so much from game to game and from half to half is enough to know that he's just covering his own arse in the interview there.
I agree with everyone else though. The three at the back experiment worked well against Liverpool when it was backs-to-the-wall and against the likes of Stoke, where even though we didn't win that game I thought we played well. However, in most games it won't work because it not only gives up on width, it actually gives us nothing in the centre either because we have one outfield player at each end of the pitch hanging around doing nothing.
-
Agree with the need to play 4-2-3-1. The players looked so much more comfortable in that formation last night and some of our best performances have happened when we have been set up that way. As proven again last night though, Bannan can't play in one of the defensive midfield roles and would be better off in an advanced position. If we aren't going to bring anyone in then move Clark into midfield to at least give us a bit of a physical presence in there. Warnock did OK when he was moved into there last season and would be worth another go, but it looks like he is on his way.
We need to settle on a formation now and stick with it for the rest of the season. The constant changes surely cannot be helping us.
-
4-3-3 or 4-3-1-2 from now on please.
That'll do for me. And I think the variance between the two comes into play whether we play Gabby or N'Zogbia. When it's Gabby, it's a 4-3-3 with a midfield three and GA, AW and CB, when we go with CNZ it's him ahead of three midfielders in that free role with AW and CB as the front two.
-
Another vote for 4-2-3-1 for me.
Get a settled back four and stick with them, injuries allowing.
We have options for the 2 defensive midfielders - Delph, Bannan, KEA, Holman, Westwood, Herd.
The attacking midfield has options with Ireland and Albrighton, and the likes of Weimann, CNZ and Gabby can play anywhere in the attacking 5.
Again, maybe a bit too attack minded, but i would rather see us relegated playing like we did second half yesterday, than playing TSM at Spurs brand of football.
As others have said, pick a system and stick with it, at least the players know what position they are supposed to be in.
Make substitutions to freshen it up.
-
After 5 minutes you could see Newcastle's strategy. Get their wide forwards to push up on Bennett and Lowton, thus stopping them from pushing forward. This meant, everytime Krul had the ball he could throw it out to the full back unchallenged. As soon as Bannan or Westwood went to close down a gap was left in the middle that was exposed. Lambert could have changed this after 5 minutes without even making a substitution.
He could have done two things:
Move Clark to LB, Bennett to LM and N'Zogbia to RM
Move Clark to CM/DM Bannan to LM and N'Zogbia to RM
He did nothing until a few moments before Newcastle's 2nd goal. He'd gone 4-4-2 but N'Zogbia wasn't in position to play RM, and was still standing in the position to support Bent in the middle of the pitch thus leaving the area where Cabaye scored Villa player free.
Credit to Lambert for changing it at half time, but he should have done it earlier. I would like to see our possession stats for the 1st half an hour. If we had the ball for more than 40% of the time I would be surprised. I understand the tension, the need for keeping it tight but the starting formation really didn't help us at all last night.
I think the players HAVE got the fight for the scrap, I just don't think they have the right degree of coaching, leadership and ability to see it through.
iwould not put bennet in any team
-
all this talk about tatics and such, the manager is not good enough and we must eccept the fact he has to go
-
Another vote for 4-2-3-1 for me.
Get a settled back four and stick with them, injuries allowing.
We have options for the 2 defensive midfielders - Delph, Bannan, KEA, Holman, Westwood, Herd.
The attacking midfield has options with Ireland and Albrighton, and the likes of Weimann, CNZ and Gabby can play anywhere in the attacking 5.
Again, maybe a bit too attack minded, but i would rather see us relegated playing like we did second half yesterday, than playing TSM at Spurs brand of football.
As others have said, pick a system and stick with it, at least the players know what position they are supposed to be in.
Make substitutions to freshen it up.
The thing about that system is that it is quite easy to drop the two wide players a bit deeper and play a 4-5-1 if needs be.
-
There is a gaping hole in the middle of our team.
I wish Lambert and Lerner would just plug it.
It would ease the pressur eon our defence and solidy the whole unit.
The worst thing about that gaping hole is that it is Clark-shaped. Unless of course you mean 'gaping whole'...
-
Being a good Forumer, I searched for an old topic to bring back to life...
Its 2013/2014 season, we have a new squad with new players and I think we have opportunities to try new formations...
Last season it may not have worked but I would love to see us play a 3 2 2 1 2 formation...
----------------Guzan---------------
-----Baker----Vlaar----Clarke----
Bacuna------------------------Luna
---------Delph----Westwood------
-------------Wiemann--------------
--------Gabby----Benteke---------
Then we have options to rotate in Kozak, NZogbia, helenius, bowery
-
Being a good Forumer, I searched for an old topic to bring back to life...
Its 2013/2014 season, we have a new squad with new players and I think we have opportunities to try new formations...
Last season it may not have worked but I would love to see us play a 3 2 2 1 2 formation...
----------------Guzan---------------
-----Baker----Vlaar----Clarke----
Bacuna------------------------Luna
---------Delph----Westwood------
-------------Wiemann--------------
--------Gabby----Benteke---------
Then we have options to rotate in Kozak, NZogbia, helenius, bowery
In theory that formation could work. I would play Sylla instead of Westwood though. For me, Weimann can't play that role as the advanced mid. Essentially that formation is what we played early on under Gregory. It was effective because we had Boateng and Tayls providing plenty of grit and energy in midfield, with Merson providing that bit of class as the attacking mid.
For me it's an option, IF we buy a decent number 10 in Jan. I think you'd have to play Delph and Sylla as the two CM's because otherwise Westwood or KEA get overrun too easily.
But looking at the earlier sections of this thread it's interesting to note how many complaints are re-emerging again from 10 months ago. This was shortly before we had Sylla in the side and started to pick up decent results when we needed them. We've definitely regressed tactically again, particularly in an offensive sense. Does Lambert learn from his mistakes? It disappoints me that he's almost reverting back to certain systems that didn't work last season, put continue not to work despite 7 new players. And honestly, when's he going to finally realise that you have to play with width? Very few teams play so narrow, unless they're loaded with technically gifted players.
-
The W formation is the only one not mentioned so far. How would we get on trying to put a team together like that?
GK
RB LB
RH CH LH
OR IR CF IL OL
-
Being a good Forumer, I searched for an old topic to bring back to life...
Its 2013/2014 season, we have a new squad with new players and I think we have opportunities to try new formations...
Last season it may not have worked but I would love to see us play a 3 2 2 1 2 formation...
----------------Guzan---------------
-----Baker----Vlaar----Clarke----
Bacuna------------------------Luna
---------Delph----Westwood------
-------------Wiemann--------------
--------Gabby----Benteke---------
Then we have options to rotate in Kozak, NZogbia, helenius, bowery
In theory that formation could work. I would play Sylla instead of Westwood though. For me, Weimann can't play that role as the advanced mid. Essentially that formation is what we played early on under Gregory. It was effective because we had Boateng and Tayls providing plenty of grit and energy in midfield, with Merson providing that bit of class as the attacking mid.
For me it's an option, IF we buy a decent number 10 in Jan. I think you'd have to play Delph and Sylla as the two CM's because otherwise Westwood or KEA get overrun too easily.
But looking at the earlier sections of this thread it's interesting to note how many complaints are re-emerging again from 10 months ago. This was shortly before we had Sylla in the side and started to pick up decent results when we needed them. We've definitely regressed tactically again, particularly in an offensive sense. Does Lambert learn from his mistakes? It disappoints me that he's almost reverting back to certain systems that didn't work last season, put continue not to work despite 7 new players. And honestly, when's he going to finally realise that you have to play with width? Very few teams play so narrow, unless they're loaded with technically gifted players.
NZogbia whould be able to play the role when he is back!
-
He would. He probably won't be back before the end of the jan window though sadly. I don't think Lambert will play him much either.
-
until we have a number 10, play the three we have but narrower?
or pick 2 strikers and give tonev a shit?
-
Tonev I'd rather see on the wing. I thought we had a bit of joy against Everton because we opened up the pitch a bit more and had some width, mostly coming from Tonev. If he works on his delivery he could be useful. Playing through the middle I'm not sure he's got the touch or vision to do it. Again, this is something we don't appear to have in our squad and needs addressing in Jan.
-
I don't think it's so much the formation, although maybe a slight tweak might be required at home. I think it's that we don't have a number 10 or a creative wide player available. If we had decent quality in those areas we'd be a different team completely and get much better results at home.
-
A 5 year research into how a goal is scored/conceded by Loughborough Uni concluded:
"It's nothing to do with formations and tactics. The event happens when chaos is introduced into normal play."
We need less chaos in our defence and create more chaos in their defence. It's a simple game!
-
A 5 year research into how a goal is scored/conceded by Loughborough Uni concluded:
"It's nothing to do with formations and tactics. The event happens when chaos is introduced into normal play."
We need less chaos in our defence and create more chaos in their defence. It's a simple game!
Ah the chaos theory. I've heard of it. ;)
-
We can't really play 4-2-3-1 because all the options for the 'number 10' role are all converted strikers or wingers. We need more an attacking midfielder than a second striker or an inside forward, because they tend to be less profligate in possession, more likely to choose when to play it risky and when to play it safe, and more aware of pressing and the nuances of their defensive duties. Second strikers and wingers are always going to go a bit mental, attack riskily and leave holes at the back.
-
Until we have a better quality midfielder it is senseless playing three across the middle because it creates so much space to exploit on the wings. The formation works away from home because that's arguably how an away team should play – take a chance on a formation that allows for a quick break forward and try to stifle the home team in the middle. The problem is at home where we have the largest pitch in the PL. The formation we play is thus useless because the away team will be trying to exploit the wings on the counter-attack anyway. 4-4-2 at home is honestly the only sensible option that I can see for us, especially when we are in desperate need of more goals/opportunities.
-
A good point made above. Regardles of formation, we don't actually have any proven creative, technically adept, attacking midfielders.
N'Zogbia was tried in that role without really making the place his own, but I'd have him in the side in a heart beat at the moment.
-
I'm hoping we never see again 5-3-0-2 again.
-
I'm hoping we never see again 5-3-0-2 again.
I think going 5 at the back against 1 makeshift west ham striker was a bit over cautious.
-
Until we have a better quality midfielder it is senseless playing three across the middle because it creates so much space to exploit on the wings. The formation works away from home because that's arguably how an away team should play – take a chance on a formation that allows for a quick break forward and try to stifle the home team in the middle. The problem is at home where we have the largest pitch in the PL. The formation we play is thus useless because the away team will be trying to exploit the wings on the counter-attack anyway. 4-4-2 at home is honestly the only sensible option that I can see for us, especially when we are in desperate need of more goals/opportunities.
It was only when we switched to three up front last year that we stated to improve at home (second half Newcastle at home I think it was). Problem this year is that 2 of the 3 haven't played well and one has been injured. That said we do need alternatives but not sure who we would play alongside Benteke if we go with 2. When gabby comes inside his poor touch lets him down.
Not sure we have the biggest pitch, looked at that link somebody posted re premier league handbook and about half the teams had the exact same pitch size as us and the rest where smaller in various degrees.
-
I'm hoping we never see again 5-3-0-2 again.
I think going 5 at the back against 1 makeshift west ham striker was a bit over cautious.
Just a tad but it was the three defensive midfielders that did it for me though it could be argued Westwood marked himself out of the game, so we were a bit short there.
-
When we player 532 last year, one of the three was more attacking - eg Holman . It's very defensive without that.
-
I'm hoping we never see again 5-3-0-2 again.
I think going 5 at the back against 1 makeshift west ham striker was a bit over cautious.
Seeing West Ham's formation on MOTD was quite funny. They have a standard format at the start of each game where the pitch is carved up in to five segments to show the goalkeeper and four outfield lines of players to accomodate modern formations (4-2-3-1, 4-3-2-1, etc) but last night for West Ham they showed 4-4-2-0 to really emphasise the fact West Ham weren't playing a striker!
-
We do not have a wide player because Lambert is narrow minded a la TSM. Did we play Tonev wide v Everton to provide width or to stop Baines going forward? Latter me thinks.
We get the ball wide once v West Ham and we nearly score. West ham took the game to us with no credible strikers, but strech us.
Width, ladies and gentleman is the only way forward.
-
As he has said that Helenius isn't a typical front man, I just don't understand why he hasn't at least attempted to play him in the number 10 role. I'm not even saying it would work, but just an attempt at something different to get us creating again.
-
We can't really play 4-2-3-1 because all the options for the 'number 10' role are all converted strikers or wingers. We need more an attacking midfielder than a second striker or an inside forward
One of the original number 10s.
-
We do not have a wide player because Lambert is narrow minded a la TSM. Did we play Tonev wide v Everton to provide width or to stop Baines going forward? Latter me thinks.
We get the ball wide once v West Ham and we nearly score. West ham took the game to us with no credible strikers, but strech us.
Width, ladies and gentleman is the only way forward.
and
As he has said that Helenius isn't a typical front man, I just don't understand why he hasn't at least attempted to play him in the number 10 role. I'm not even saying it would work, but just an attempt at something different to get us creating again.
Width isn't the only way forward but it should certainly be a part of the suite of tactics that the manager has at his disposal.
I too would like to see the use of a No. 10 and Helenius might well be it (and Grealish, perhaps, at some point in the future). Particularly since Lambert seems to be happy to use 3-5-2 on occasions, the No. 10 would work well behind a front 2.
He needs more options! And, yes, he probably needs more players to offer that.
-
We do not have a wide player because Lambert is narrow minded a la TSM. Did we play Tonev wide v Everton to provide width or to stop Baines going forward? Latter me thinks.
We get the ball wide once v West Ham and we nearly score. West ham took the game to us with no credible strikers, but strech us.
Width, ladies and gentleman is the only way forward.
Width Evans help we're shaw to score.
-
We do not have a wide player because Lambert is narrow minded a la TSM. Did we play Tonev wide v Everton to provide width or to stop Baines going forward? Latter me thinks.
We get the ball wide once v West Ham and we nearly score. West ham took the game to us with no credible strikers, but strech us.
Width, ladies and gentleman is the only way forward.
Width has nothing to do with it.
Movement is the key, where the names are on a board before the game doesn't matter if the players stay there. Football is a simple game, to create chances to cross, shoot, etc you have to get the opposition players away from where they want to be. We're not doing that anything like well enough right now.
-
We do not have a wide player because Lambert is narrow minded a la TSM. Did we play Tonev wide v Everton to provide width or to stop Baines going forward? Latter me thinks.
We get the ball wide once v West Ham and we nearly score. West ham took the game to us with no credible strikers, but strech us.
Width, ladies and gentleman is the only way forward.
Width has nothing to do with it.
Movement is the key, where the names are on a board before the game doesn't matter if the players stay there. Football is a simple game, to create chances to cross, shoot, etc you have to get the opposition players away from where they want to be. We're not doing that anything like well enough right now.
This.
When we've been at our attacking best under Lambert, it's when the front three of Benteke, Weimann and Gabby have been more fluid.
-
I completely agree, but what about when they become more viscous? Which they have.
-
Yeah and not getting any runners in beyond Benteke means we can be very easy to defend against as its all in front of the oppositions back four.
-
Yeah and not getting any runners in beyond Benteke means we can be very easy to defend against as its all in front of the oppositions back four.
I think that's where going for a player like Kiyotake comes from - looking to add another dimension to our attacking play.
-
Yeah we're crying out for someone of that type as we don't have anything like that in the squad, unless Delph plays a bit further forward.
-
We could have a lot of joy playing the 3-5-2 once we get this elusive number 10. We looked decent under Gregory playing this system, particularly having Merson playing just ahead of Tayls and Boateng. He had a real solid base behind him allowing him to float and make things tick.
-
We could have a lot of joy playing the 3-5-2 once we get this elusive number 10. We looked decent under Gregory playing this system, particularly having Merson playing just ahead of Tayls and Boateng. He had a real solid base behind him allowing him to float and make things tick.
If done right, it's really a 3-4-1-2 formation. The key is the wing backs and the no10 player. Best exponent of it the PL was Liverpool in the mid 90s.
-
I think 4-3-3 and variants of it are the way to go with the players at the moment. For instance, on Saturday I would like to see Tonev replace Andi and Gabby come back with Baker dropping out.
The midfield would then have Sylla and Westwood sitting with Delph more advanced of the three. I would like to see Delph hitting the box a lot more with his good runs. If Sylla and Westwood are in behind him then it gives him that licence to do more 10-15 yards higher up the pitch.
-
I think 4-3-3 and variants of it are the way to go with the players at the moment. For instance, on Saturday I would like to see Tonev replace Andi and Gabby come back with Baker dropping out.
The midfield would then have Sylla and Westwood sitting with Delph more advanced of the three. I would like to see Delph hitting the box a lot more with his good runs. If Sylla and Westwood are in behind him then it gives him that licence to do more 10-15 yards higher up the pitch.
Delphy has shown potential that he can get among the goals. He's just got to get a bit of composure because he gets a rush of blood and snatches at shots when he's in decent positions, but he's certainly not alone in that. He was a post away from scoring against Arsenal and has had a few other chances.
If we bring Sylla back into the side and sit either Westwood or KEA (for want of better options right now) as the deeper player, it should allow Delph to break forward. Not just to the edge of the box, I'd like to see him break into the box. Our midfielders seem to be allergic to the inside of the penalty area. We've seen already, with KEA against City, the benefit of a good run from mid.
Delph is capable of getting half a dozen goals a season from midfield. He was breaking forward well at the tail end of last season and again, that was aided by having Sylla in midfield to also provide running and energy, as well as Westwood. The sooner we stop playing KEA and Westy together the better. The two negate each other and don't really offer much quality on the ball to make up for that loss of pace and energy.
-
I think 4-3-3 and variants of it are the way to go with the players at the moment. For instance, on Saturday I would like to see Tonev replace Andi and Gabby come back with Baker dropping out.
The midfield would then have Sylla and Westwood sitting with Delph more advanced of the three. I would like to see Delph hitting the box a lot more with his good runs. If Sylla and Westwood are in behind him then it gives him that licence to do more 10-15 yards higher up the pitch.
This is what I'd like to see Delph do as we don't play the 'number 10' role.
-
I rate Delph highly, but even last season with Sylla and Westood or this with Westwood and KEA, he hasn't really convinced me as an attacking midielder. Excellent box-to-box player, but not one for the killer pass or to get a good tally of goals from midfield.
-
I don't think Delph has had the chance to play as an attacking midfielder yet, as has always been part of a central two in the main, with obligations going back towards his own goal and often collecting the ball deep as a consequence.
-
I rate Delph highly, but even last season with Sylla and Westood or this with Westwood and KEA, he hasn't really convinced me as an attacking midielder. Excellent box-to-box player, but not one for the killer pass or to get a good tally of goals from midfield.
Isn't it something like 3000+ minutes of PL football without a goal or an assist ?
Delph isn't an attacking midfielder that much seems clear. No point trying to get him to be something he isn't, let him do the harrassing and water carrying and get someone in who's actual game is about scoring and creating to compliment him
-
I rate Delph highly, but even last season with Sylla and Westood or this with Westwood and KEA, he hasn't really convinced me as an attacking midielder. Excellent box-to-box player, but not one for the killer pass or to get a good tally of goals from midfield.
Isn't it something like 3000+ minutes of PL football without a goal or an assist ?
Delph isn't an attacking midfielder that much seems clear. No point trying to get him to be something he isn't, let him do the harrassing and water carrying and get someone in who's actual game is about scoring and creating to compliment him
He scored a few at Leeds , I think once he breaks his duck that he could net 7 or 8 a season , certainly more of a goal threat than Westwood or sylla in my opinion.
-
When he does start scoring I hope they're as good as some of his Leeds ones:
-
4-4-2 and 4-2-3-1 are very similar. As in a 2 man strike partnership one usually sits deeper.
-
Defensively 2 banks of 4 and 1 spare (who can be in any of the 'gaps') is generally accepted as the standard shape, largely because you shouldn't be leaving people one on one in dangerous areas if everyone is in the right place. 433 lends itself well to this as the 'spare' man tends to be defensively stronger than a traditional 10. It does rely on on the wide forwards putting in a lot of running defensively so they have to be very fit, thankfully Andy and Gabby are both good in that regard.
As said, in attack formations are not so important, moving into the right areas is the key.
Last year we were getting the defensive shape wrong too much, but we did well getting our players into space in dangerous areas, this season that situation has largely reversed. Once we can get the balance right we'll be in a much better place.
-
He scored a few at Leeds , I think once he breaks his duck that he could net 7 or 8 a season , certainly more of a goal threat than Westwood or sylla in my opinion.
That was 2 leagues below where he's playing now.
Not carrying that goal threat doesn't make him a bad player, it just means we gave to use him at what he's best at and get someone else to do the scoring/creating.
-
Square posts and he would have been off the mark down at Arsenal.
-
Square posts and he would have been off the mark down at Arsenal.
Yep, I thought that was in. Scored a nice one against Rotherham though.
-
All though his (lack of) goal tally is evident for all to see, his dribbling ability has come on leaps and bounds. If he were to be higher up, I think these dribbles could be much more effective, and see him getting goals and assists. What would that do defensively? Well that's what Lambert gets paid for.
-
Having thought about this a little more, I think our problem is not formation. I think the issue is that we just do not move the ball quickly enough: too many touches and not enough movement - of ball our receiver.
Is that a function of the player-quality or formation?