That doesnt sound to bad at all but i would still like to see another couple of signings by then but it defiantley seems a good solid team that can surely move up the table COYB!

0

In terms of the keeper, we have that Brian Murphy arriving in November I think, and Barretts contract is up in Jan. So we would have Wright, Begovic and Murhpy I think, pretty good options. Will be good to see Civelli back, but I am a fan of Peters

0

You have too many wide players for a 3-5-2 formation and just 1 centre back, so it's not solid enough for me. Needs to be 3 centre backs and 2 wingbacks.

I like the idea of using Civelli and Edwards as wingbacks. They've both played at full back a lot, so I'm sure they'd be very competent at it. But McAuley would need stronger defenders than Rosenior and Wright alongside him. For example, when Burley played 3-5-2, you wouldn't expect to see Clapham and Wilnis alongside Mowbrary in the middle would you.

0

Sounds a little over-complicated to me..we're struggling to get to grips with 4-4-2
How about playing it the Liverpool way?....


R.Wright

Rosenior Bruce Macauley D.Wright

Leadbitter (C) Garvan

Edwards Norris Walters

Counago

0

Interesting but I really can't see how this formation has any logic at all. It appears that you are taking your favorite players and shoehorning them into a rather odd system.

You want to play 3 at the back but suggest using 2 fullbacks either side of Macauly, who covers an attack down one of the flanks?

The 3 in midfield also comprises 2 wide players although I can see some logic with Norris behind.

Walters behind two strikers? I'm not sure this would work, he would be taking the space Leadbitter Likies to run into. Where is the attacking width?

0

Seems a very, very strange line up to me. Play Pablo in the hole instead of Walters, but why are Rosenior and D.Wright at the back? It should be Bruce, McAulety and Smith.

0

Well my thoughts were (At home ?) when attacking it would turn into the 3,5,2 formation with Edwards and Cevilli being the attacking witdh, when not in possesion the formatino turns into a 532 with Edwards Cevilli and norris all back as a 5 wide defence.
Used a few times in the premiership - as long as you have players who will work 100% for the whole match.

0

i'm glad people are bringing in their own thoughts, how about letting us know what your team would be and formation?

0

Wright
Herridassonn Venus Mowbray Wilnis
Clapham Holland Wright Reuser
Bent Stewart

Solid

0

Nottingham please tell me you dont mean jermaine wright!!!!!

0

I think I would prefer:- Cooper, Burley, Butcher, Beattie, Mills, Thijssen, Muhren, Wark, Gates, Mariner, Brazil

0

Hmm, must admit, I hadn't thought about the problems arising from Civelli's return, assuming that he gets into the team, that is. After all, he hardly played before getting injured and arguably wasn't quite up to English football (though was looking good). Plus, a year out is a lot for anyone, so I can't see Keane rushing him back into the team. He'll probably gradually come in and if he proves his worth won't play until February at the earliest.

But, assuming he does play, where does Walters go? I'm not a fan of Walters up front at all, but he wont' play wide so that forces Keane into that option I suspect.

So - assuming Norris and Civelli are back in the team:

Wright
Rosenior McAuley (new signing)/Smith Wright
Edwards Leadbitter Norris Civelli
Counago Walters

I have serious doubts about the front pairing I admit. But, unless Priskin gets a chance or he signs someone else, I think that's his best option.

Personally, I wouldn't play Walters there, but signing Edwards gave Keane a rod for his own back in that situation and this is what I think Keane might do, not what I'd do.

0

Should add of course, that I rate Edwards, which is why the Walters' situation is a difficult one.

0

That could work, as long as Civelli and Edwards track back to cover the LB and RB positions. Civelli I have no doubts about as he can play there anyway - but what about Edwards? He has struck up a very good partnership with Rosenior, so maybe. I certainly would like to continue seeing Edwards and Walters on the pitch at the same time in the future, not to mention Norris and Leadbitter! And with Quinn, Peters, Trotter and (presumably) Garvan as backup, there will be considerable depth to the midfield options.

A 3-man defence is kind of risky, seeing as we may struggle with a 23-man defence at present (!), but with such a strong midfield potentially absorbing the opposition attacks and counterattacking from higher up the pitch, and if the players track back properly as well as support the attack, it could work.

I have often felt that we are lacking a Wark or Scholes-type player, arriving in time to pick up the cleared balls from the opposition box and adding attacking depth and a delayed longer-range threat. I wonder .... could Leadbitter could be that man? Or if Keano plays him in the centre, Norris?

Thanks for the blog superblueflude - always nice to have food for thought!

0

Naa - very good indeed.
What would you think about Coungo as a lone striker with Walters behind>?
Although on another point how about Stead Priskin as our partnership upfront?

0

super: the problem I think is that Walters and Counago are both support strikers (but very different one) and neither will score enough goals.

Pablo could certainly hold the ball up as a lone striker, but that would rely a lot on team support when breaking, and just in general play. I guess Norris being on the pitch would help with that (as long as he wasn't stuck doing the defensive stuff too much).

Personally I'd like to see Walters and Pablo in the team but not as the strike pairing. Thing is, I can't see anywhere on the pitch for both of them.

0

I totally agree Naa, i have always liked counago for his hold up play.
What about this formation?
Wright
Rosenior McAuley Smith D.Wight
Edwards Norris Leadbitter Walters
Counago
Stead

0

Have no problem with that, as such. Stead is more of a goalscorer (though I do wish he wouldn't shoot so bloody often). I guess until we know for sure we'll never know how good Civelli is but, in theory, he's a better left-midfielder than Walters (who was always a shadow over there compared to the right-side - even in his cracking season two years ago).

0

I may be thick lol but Edwards, is he prodominately right footed? (sorry for wrong spelling)

0

Becasue how would we all feel about Edwards on the left - Walters on the right? leadbitter and norris in middle. counago behind stead or priskin?

0

without any new signing my line up would be;
Wright
Rosenior McAuley Bruce D Wright
Edwards Leadbitter Norris Civelli
Counago Stead

I know that means no place for Walters but i believe that Edwards is a better right winger than him, Civelli a better left winger and Stead and Pablo better forwards.
It will be interesting as to what line-up Keano goes for once they are all fit?!

0

runaround: I tend to agree re:Walters but it does seem harsh on one of our better players. But I guess we can't be sentimental and all that.

Having said that, still think that signing Edwards wasn't so much a mistake as an unnecessary purchase. We had areas far weaker that needed dealing with first.

0

Wright
Rosenior Macauley New signing/Smith Thatcher/Wright - Thatcher naturally left footed
GArvan Norris
Edwards Civelli
Leadbitter
Walters

Our midfielders are alot better than our attackers so play to our strengths with a 4-5-1 with 3 very attack minded players leadbitter civelli and edwards.

What does everyone think?

0

Callum good defence and midfield but i have to agree with Naa i think we'd need to drop walters as he's not a striker and he's not needed in the midfield.

0

Have we got Rosenior for the season or just til Jan? If all year.

Wright
Rosenior McCauley "New signing" Wright - or Smith for McCauley and assuming that the new signing comes and is good enough.

Walters Norris Legbiter Civelli

Rooney and Owen (I think its about time Fergie helped his old mate out and let some of his players on loan) Failing that

Counago and Priskin (Yes I still believe he will come good)

0