- This topic has 41 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I think Moses needs a spell on the bench because he has been pretty poor of late !
And although the Zog has gone plenty darksiders where calling Bobby rotten because he wouldn’t play him last season :whistle:[/quote]
I have to admit I thought Victor should have played last season but after what I’ve seen this year thank fook he didn’t. If we can get good money for him in summer I’ll go and help him pack as he is not as good as he thinks he is.
Plenty of other teams score with one up front – so yes, it can be done.???
We can’t, cos we don’t have the quality of service nor the right type of striker…and won’t in a month of Sunday’s until we sort both or change our formation.
And no way were we playing 2 up front – FFS, most of the time we aren’t even playing 1!!
He’s clearly talented & he’d be a decent squad player at somewhere like Spurs but the fact is he can’t be relied on to do it week in, week out.
He’s still young though. I’d rather hang on to him & see him develop with us.
I need help working out this wing back formation. In theory its good. A back 3, 2 wing backs Stam and Beaujawhatever, 2 centre mids the two Macs, Gomez as the advanced midfielder and then the way I see it, Di Santo up front and in theory Moses as the snd striker, but for me he plays on the wing which is totally pointless in a wing back formation, just takes up the space of Stam.
Its almost like Roberto came up with the idea then realised it involved 2 up front and went Oh Sh!t can’t have that you just go and stand on the wing Victor.
I don’t think there’s any point trying to ascertain what the formation is. Moses should, in theory, have been the 2nd striker in a 3-5-2 formation but as many on this thread have previously stated, Moses spent much of his time on the right wing. Beausejour is another David Jones at left wing back. Hasn’t got a clue about defending. He needs to be further forward as ideally a winger in a 4-4-2 of wide striker in 4-5-1/4-3-3 formation.
I don’t think there’s any point trying to ascertain what the formation is. Moses should, in theory, have been the 2nd striker in a 3-5-2 formation but as many on this thread have previously stated, Moses spent much of his time on the right wing. Beausejour is another David Jones at left wing back. Hasn’t got a clue about defending. He needs to be further forward as ideally a winger in a 4-4-2 of wide striker in 4-5-1/4-3-3 formation.The difference between Beausejour and Jones is however, the former has played wing back before and that’s what he was signed to do.
Di Santo up front and in theory Moses as the snd striker, but for me he plays on the wing which is totally pointless in a wing back formation, just takes up the space of Stam.That’s exactly what the problem is.
Di Santo up front and in theory Moses as the snd striker, but for me he plays on the wing which is totally pointless in a wing back formation, just takes up the space of Stam.
That’s exactly what the problem is.[/quote]
Well why did Bob not tell Victor to play as a front 2??? He had 90 mins to get his message across but as usual he stood there with his arms folded the whole game.
This isn’t Subbuteo or FIFA where you lay out players in set formations.
These numbers mean nothing in themselves and they alter through a game. 4-5-1 at times, can mean 4-3-3 when the wingers are pushing up, or 3-4-3 or 3-5-2 when a wing defender moves forward. Things are fluid and so all this pseudo-maths is a bit pointless. Players are given a role not a place on the field to stand.
This isn’t Subbuteo or FIFA where you lay out players in set formations.These numbers mean nothing in themselves and they alter through a game. 4-5-1 at times, can mean 4-3-3 when the wingers are pushing up, or 3-4-3 or 3-5-2 when a wing defender moves forward. Things are fluid and so all this pseudo-maths is a bit pointless. Players are given a role not a place on the field to stand.
Well if thats the case what role do half of our lot play??? because I’ve watched us for the best part of 3 seasons and I can’t work it out.
They are not playing 2 up front & if they’re supposed to be then Moses wants hauling off for failing to carry out his instructions
From watching this new formation since Bobby started with it & think it’s supposed to be:
3 centre halves
2 wing backs
2 central midfielders
2 more advanced midfielders in Gomez & Moses who both are apparently best suited to the “in the hole” role. Presumably there to provide the link in the gap between midfield & the striker which was more like a chasm under the system he used previously
1 centre forwardSo what does that make it? a 3-4-2-1? or a 3-2-2-2-1? or I believe what Terry Venables called the Xmas tree formation prior to Euro 96?
It certainly isn’t 2 up front & Moses spend no more time as a second forward that Gomez does
Personally i think the system is better suited to the personnel Latics have (except up front) than previous systems even if the results don’t necessarily back that up.
Against Bolton I’d like to see it with McArthur (who I thought was excellent on Saturday) & Diame in the middle & push McCarthy further forward to take the place of Gomez or Moses. For me McCarthy’s best performances have come when he’s been given that “free” midfield roleOh & whilst I’m on, as I had a dig at him on Wednesday morning I thought Beausejour deservedly won MOM on Saturday & he looked good going forward & at the back
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
