| Playing two strikers instead of one 12:42 - Sep 26 with 1353 views | ottovonbismark |
Is there a case to be made for playing two strikers to give us a bit more presence and hold up of the ball in the forward line?
Away to Everton Emerson just got out muscled by their centre backs. In fact Flemming should have started that game ahead of Emerson as he's much more muscular, can handle himself better and would have given us more options.
I'm a little bit uneasy with the one forward player only approach.
Playing two up top would give us a lot more threat and presence. That requires a change of formation which I don't see as realistic now.
But expecting a 21yr old, new to the league, to handle playing alone upfront for the season isn't filling me with confidence.
Thoughts? |  | | |  |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 12:52 - Sep 26 with 1294 views | SheffordBlue |
Think that overall he's done well as a lone striker and the Everton CB pairing will keep lots of strikers quiet this season. Even when he's occupying the CBs without doing much himself he's creating space for others to work in. | |
| |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 12:59 - Sep 26 with 1283 views | Guthrum |
Who do we sacrifice to play two up top? What effect will that have on other aspects of our play?
Emersonn occupying their CBs allows space for others to operate. It's not like Town lacked chances to score themselves, even towards the end of the match, when we were down to 10 men. We don't rely on the No.9 to get goals, but all of the front four (plus Davis).
I think Emersonn has shown well that he has the ability to play the role being asked of him. While having made a decent start, Flemming has by no means proven himself markedly superior yet. |  |
| |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 13:38 - Sep 26 with 1212 views | BelsteadCav |
I’d love to go back to 4-4-2, But who do we drop, Enciso?
You can’t drop a midfielder, especially in the Prem. |  |
| |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 13:43 - Sep 26 with 1198 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 13:38 - Sep 26 by BelsteadCav |
I’d love to go back to 4-4-2, But who do we drop, Enciso?
You can’t drop a midfielder, especially in the Prem. |
Back to the 3CBs again, two wing backs, two holding CMs and Enciso ahead. It would need a big change of approach and use up all our 3 best CBs. We have the players to do it. I’ve no idea if it would work. |  |
| |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 16:09 - Sep 26 with 1012 views | mellowblue |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 13:43 - Sep 26 by Swansea_Blue |
Back to the 3CBs again, two wing backs, two holding CMs and Enciso ahead. It would need a big change of approach and use up all our 3 best CBs. We have the players to do it. I’ve no idea if it would work. |
3-5-2 would be the only way to play 2 strikers, but what a waste of 70 million worth of wingers who will never start a match. | | | |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 16:13 - Sep 26 with 1002 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
Not sure we have the depth for that, and also in this league we need all the midfield presence we can get.
Scoring goals and creating chances hasn’t been a problem either…
Edit: would caveat that at the end of a game we are chasing it makes more sense as we did v Everton. A nice surprise! [Post edited 26 Sep 16:14]
| | | |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 18:48 - Sep 26 with 832 views | armchaircritic59 |
One striker like just about everything in football, is a fad or fashion. They come and go. All system/tactics are flawed to about an equal degree. As the late and very wise Brian Clough said " Players lose you games, not tactics. There's so much crap talked about tactics by people who barely know how to win at dominoes." Amen to that. |  | | |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 20:00 - Sep 26 with 765 views | SuffolkPunchFC |
Why change anything fundamental at this point, and so soon. We look a real attacking threat how we’re currently operating. Tweaks would be better focussed elsewhere imo. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 01:46 - Sep 28 with 512 views | michaeldownunder |
If we were going to play three at the back I would play a midfielder as the 3rd c/half between say O;Shea and Diop. Most teams only play one striker and a No.10 but I have noticed that the No.10 in a lot of teams plays almost as a 2nd striker. That way you would get an extra midfielder on the pitch, if needed for some games. |  | | |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 10:38 - Sep 28 with 336 views | SamWhiteUK |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 18:48 - Sep 26 by armchaircritic59 |
One striker like just about everything in football, is a fad or fashion. They come and go. All system/tactics are flawed to about an equal degree. As the late and very wise Brian Clough said " Players lose you games, not tactics. There's so much crap talked about tactics by people who barely know how to win at dominoes." Amen to that. |
Didn't Paul Lambert have some quote like that and he was dismissed as not having a clue (and rightly so)? |  | | |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 10:39 - Sep 28 with 331 views | SamWhiteUK |
Back to the OP, our performances and points haul so far have been more than respectable.
Emersonn won't have been expected to be starting games, and I'm sure the idea was to get Flemming in as the main striker. But while the former has been performing, so far, in my eyes and GON's, he's earned the right to start. | | | |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 10:44 - Sep 28 with 325 views | jayessess |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 01:46 - Sep 28 by michaeldownunder |
If we were going to play three at the back I would play a midfielder as the 3rd c/half between say O;Shea and Diop. Most teams only play one striker and a No.10 but I have noticed that the No.10 in a lot of teams plays almost as a 2nd striker. That way you would get an extra midfielder on the pitch, if needed for some games. |
Enciso has played up alongside Emersonn most of the time. |  |
| |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 12:39 - Sep 28 with 219 views | Wright1 |
Not for me
1) Who do we drop out of the front line to accommodate that? Enciso is one of best players and getting as many worldie performances out of him as possible is key to our survival - I would suggest moving him from the 10 is a backwards step.
2) I don't think we have enough quality strikers to be playing 2 every game - do you want to be relying on Akpom to play significant minutes regularly? I don't.
3) I think we have scored an ok amount of goals so far - we've missed some good opportunities and with slightly sharper finishing, we'd have a couple more. | | | |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 18:14 - Sep 28 with 63 views | armchaircritic59 |
| Playing two strikers instead of one on 10:38 - Sep 28 by SamWhiteUK |
Didn't Paul Lambert have some quote like that and he was dismissed as not having a clue (and rightly so)? |
I don't know the answer to that one, but I do know comparing Paul Lambert to Brian Clough is like comparing a Trabant to a Rolls Royce. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
