| 4-2-3-1 the way forward? 09:19 - Aug 31 with 916 views | Wallingford_Boy |
Format most play these days, certainly worked last night! |  |
| |  |
| 4-2-3-1 the way forward? on 09:24 - Aug 31 with 873 views | homer_123 |
I think it's more pertinent that we can flex our system. |  |
| |
| 4-2-3-1 the way forward? on 09:25 - Aug 31 with 869 views | itfcsuth |
There wasn't too much disparity between last night and the way we have played under KMc for a long time.
We play a hybrid system, it is quite unique and very fluid between a 3-4-2-1 and 4-2-3-1, depending on how high Burns is in the game.
Last night it was Edwards, and he was incredibly aggressive with his positioning, really high and wide right. |  | | |
| 4-2-3-1 the way forward? on 09:28 - Aug 31 with 843 views | SheffordBlue |
| 4-2-3-1 the way forward? on 09:25 - Aug 31 by itfcsuth |
There wasn't too much disparity between last night and the way we have played under KMc for a long time.
We play a hybrid system, it is quite unique and very fluid between a 3-4-2-1 and 4-2-3-1, depending on how high Burns is in the game.
Last night it was Edwards, and he was incredibly aggressive with his positioning, really high and wide right. |
Agreed - on the iFollow coverage Glen described it as one thing and Ian said it was more of the other. McKenna has said a few times that he doesn't talk formations but roles, responsibilities and where he wants players to attack and defend space.
Not only do we have a hybrid system but it can flex a lot within the game not just between them. |  |
| |
| 4-2-3-1 the way forward? on 09:36 - Aug 31 with 782 views | Guthrum |
We pretty much play two at the back for most of games anyway, with Donacien getting up the pitch as often as possible.
Not sure McKenna's approach can be neatly classified into traditional formation arrays, anyway. Especially as the left-side and right-side players are interchanging on a vertical rather than horizontal axis, all the way from our by-line to the opposition's.
I see it more as a series of units. Two centre-backs on defensive and distribution duties. Two midfielders to control the middle of the opposition half and support attacks. A left wingback and left inside forward to get the ball forward on that side, plus scoring. The same on the right, plus the nearest CB (Donacien). Then the centre forward to cause trouble, hold the ball up, support his inside forwards in attack and take opportunistic chances. |  |
| |
| 4-2-3-1 the way forward? on 11:32 - Aug 31 with 599 views | CityBlue |
as a UEFA coach, we dont talk 11 v 11 and formations. It is always about match ups in zones. I would lok to ensure my players always have the overload so may eb we rotate to set a 4 v3 or a 4 v 2 in any set scenario. The frame for that may well be a back three or back four and a front set up that sees two supporting forwards (no 10s) and a lone striker. The wing back role is important in flooding these zones to create the overloads. It is how we train on the training field in small boxes and we then take this to the field. The modern day coach needs to disect the phase of play in much more detail. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
