| We don’t need two up front 22:41 - Aug 21 with 957 views | WarkTheWarkITFC |
What we actually need is for Huws, Bishop or Dozzell to be fit.
I feel for Hurst in a way because I think he wants to play more of a 4141 but we don’t have the personnel fit. Edun could play there but Ward had looked poor on the left. He was better tonight without doing much.
Nolan is central with too big a gap to the wingers. Ideally you’d have Huws, Bishop or Dozzell pushing on and allowing Nolan to move to one side with them moving into the other and this provides much more support for the front man.
Going two up top means 442 which isn’t Hurst. The system is fine but current would need Skuse to be the box to box player which he isn’t. I do feel Hurst is somewhat hamstrung by this. Downes can’t play that role. Nydam possibly could but Hurst doesn’t seem to rate him for some reason.
It was assumed we’d play 4141 when Hurst arrived. In possession the player in Skuse’s role should offer for the ball across from Nolan just off the striker allowing four players in a line across the midfield. No doubt Hurst is holding out for the chance to do that but for now sees Skuse as a better option than what we have fit.
[Post edited 21 Aug 2018 22:48]
|  |
| |  |
| We don’t need two up front on 07:45 - Aug 22 with 863 views | SamWhiteUK |
I agree. I think we have good players, and a good system, but not good players for the system, and vice versa |  | | |
| We don’t need two up front on 07:51 - Aug 22 with 852 views | Thijssens_Tash |
Completely agree, a fully fit Huws would be a massive boost to Hurst and the system, his box to box attacking threat would be vital. He and a fit and firing Teddy Bishop could make this system click.
I like Nolan, a classy player, but what I’ve seen so far he isn’t direct enough or supporting the front man properly. The pressure is on him when the wingers are out of the game, much like they were last night with Ward and Edwards pretty ineffective. |  | | |
| We don’t need two up front on 07:59 - Aug 22 with 823 views | Deano69 |
But which is the lesser of two evils?
Playing a system with less effective personnel or changing the formation to something you would rather not play? |  |
| |
| We don’t need two up front on 08:08 - Aug 22 with 801 views | Bluebell |
| We don’t need two up front on 07:45 - Aug 22 by SamWhiteUK |
I agree. I think we have good players, and a good system, but not good players for the system, and vice versa |
The problem with one up front and the midfielders sitting too far back as seems to be happening at the moment is that the opposing keeper can easily pass the ball out to one of backs as all 4 aren't being marked. They then have possession and can run forward 20 yards with the ball.Harrison runs about like a blue a*sed fly trying to get the ball.
As you say we need a midfielder nearer to Harrison (or Jackson) to assist when he does get the ball. At the moment he is dispossessed far to easily as he struggles to find a player to pass to. We have Skuse and Chalaboah sitting too far back to be any use and the wingers have to move in to help leaving the players they are marking free to receive the ball.
I personally prefer a team with two strikers up front. |  | | |
| We don’t need two up front on 09:37 - Aug 22 with 723 views | JoHnNnY |
Agree, can’t play Chalobah and Skuse together - too defensive a pair for what the formation requires to be potent.. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
