Do we go back to playing 4-3-3 following takeover?

[fezbob]

Originally Posted by krux

I think 433 is the 'best' formation, but the key to it is having 2 superstars in the wide forward positions. And a good target man. Basically a great front 3.

As others have said, 532 suits the current batch.

Agree about needing the right players in the wide positions. Doesn't work with orthodox wingers in my view. Having the likes of Danny Wright was key the last time it was successful for us.

[Funny_Old_Game]

Originally Posted by fezbob

Agree about needing the right players in the wide positions. Doesn't work with orthodox wingers in my view. Having the likes of Danny Wright was key the last time it was successful for us.

Agree, it works with players who are really strikers but can play wide, Wright and Speight did it brilliantly for us. 2 physical players who could win battles in the air and on the ground.

Definitely wouldnt be one for lightweight “wingers” like Ruthers or Jordan Davies.
Posted via mobile theme

[WREXHAM TID]

I like 5-3-2, I find that 4-4-2 leaves you over ran in midfield and has no real advantage when attacking apart from one striker isn't isolated.

4-3-3 faces the issue of the striker being isolated if the wingers get pushed back and if the wingers stay forward then you have risk of overlaps

5-3-2 gives you two strikers, not going to be overloaded in midfield and even if a CB is pulled out of position then you have 2 CBs to cover.

The one issue with 5-3-2 is the full backs have to be attacking, very fit and your best players e.g. Carlos and Paul Edwards.

I'd like to see us adapt 5-3-2 similar to Sheffield United when Vassell is back, where the CB's overlap the full backs and bring the ball forward which French and Vassell are capable doing.

[thedischunter96]

Originally Posted by foreverared

I was having a think earlier about our best period in non-league and you could argue it was over two or three years playing 4-3-3 including that 98 point season. Now we have the new owners and finance, do we think next season (once we have new players) that it would be a decent formation to return to with the right players?

But that season, we had a decent front 3 and players on the bench who could make an impact.

It simply wouldn't work with the current team we have now.

[tokyored]

Originally Posted by WREXHAM TID

I'd like to see us adapt 5-3-2 similar to Sheffield United when Vassell is back, where the CB's overlap the full backs and bring the ball forward which French and Vassell are capable doing.

Let's learn how to defend set pieces first

[blackbrookred]

Originally Posted by WREXHAM TID

I like 5-3-2, I find that 4-4-2 leaves you over ran in midfield and has no real advantage when attacking apart from one striker isn't isolated.

4-3-3 faces the issue of the striker being isolated if the wingers get pushed back and if the wingers stay forward then you have risk of overlaps

5-3-2 gives you two strikers, not going to be overloaded in midfield and even if a CB is pulled out of position then you have 2 CBs to cover.

The one issue with 5-3-2 is the full backs have to be attacking, very fit and your best players e.g. Carlos and Paul Edwards.

I'd like to see us adapt 5-3-2 similar to Sheffield United when Vassell is back, where the CB's overlap the full backs and bring the ball forward which French and Vassell are capable doing.

Bottom of the league lowest scorers in the PL, I would prefer us to be more attacking.

[Phils-an-alki]

Originally Posted by foreverared

I was having a think earlier about our best period in non-league and you could argue it was over two or three years playing 4-3-3 including that 98 point season. Now we have the new owners and finance, do we think next season (once we have new players) that it would be a decent formation to return to with the right players?

Are you congy red in disguise?

[blackbrookred]

Originally Posted by Funny_Old_Game

Agree, it works with players who are really strikers but can play wide, Wright and Speight did it brilliantly for us. 2 physical players who could win battles in the air and on the ground.

Definitely wouldnt be one for lightweight “wingers” like Ruthers or Jordan Davies.
Posted via mobile theme

Agree with this. They were signed as strikers but because of their pace and power were able to play wider in a system which was direct and very effective.

[blackbrookred]

Originally Posted by 138+NotOut

And 5 at the back has had some degree of success.

People slate Keates and I agree the football is crap and he probably should go but...

He's took us from bottom 4 to in the hunt for the playoffs. I'm not saying he's been massively successful but you'd swear we were struggling again this season

Keates needs to go, however, there have been spells in our last 2 games that have seen us play better football, keeping the ball on the ground and playing in the channels. But the issue is that as soon as we get a goal, we revert to Keatesball. Playing the right way, this team is capable of playoffs, but Keates isn't brave enough to play the right way.