Delort

Hence why i said he wouldnt score in a brothel

I said both so I can say I was right either way ;)

Egg, I’m not saying it’s the holy grail but depending on the quality of you playing staff 4-4-2 is possibly best suited to the average player. Take wing backs, I hate the modern wing back for the sole reason that you have to be of the highest calibre to be able to play the role effectively. The Ashley Coles of the world are like rocking horse shit. You cannot expect a full back who has been playing in a flat back four to suddenly become a wing back. It is imho possibly the most specialised position in the outfield and you must be lightening fast and quick thinking to be able to play the role. If you put an average player in the role it can provide you with a whole world of defensive problems. Modern formations and modern players need to be adaptable and here lies the key for Malky, how to get the right one. You certainly cannot put 2 up top in any format, it needs thought and maybe the gaffer is keeping familiarity until he is happy he knows where the quality is and which formation is best suited. 4-4-2 may not be the best way anymore but if you don’t possess the players good enough to play other formats then it is certainly not the worst either.[/quote]

If I may say, that was very well put. I agree the modern game has changed over the years, however, the playing staff pot we get to chose our players from do not contain those with the gifted skills to carry it off.

To take on the 442 debate, I think it unfair for those who are vehemently against it, just because it does not fit with current playing practices or Spanish/German/Brazilian ethos – it’s about applying the right formation for the right game. If, say during a game, the manager sees that switching to that formation may be of benefit and confusing to the opposition then why not have it ‘in your locker’. I’m not saying set your team out from the outset in a 442 formation but train them how to adapt to that if the need arises. Just think of it – if no one is playing it that way, nor training for it then it could be difficult for teams to deal with. I suppose what I’m saying is – don’t dismiss it out of hand, you never know when it could be useful. Great military leaders have used tactics employed hundreds/thousands of years prior to great effect – (consider all the options) the sign of a good leader.

There’s no right & no wrong formation to play in football. There never has been & there never will be.
It’s about selecting the formation best suited to the skill set of your squad and that’s one of the problems at Latics at the moment coz I don’t think 1 up front works with the current squad but there’s been times in the past, with different players, when it has worked
As it happens I don’t think that we’ve got the personnel to be successful at 4-4-2 either. I don’t think that we have the midfielders to be strong with 2 in the middle & I don’t think McManaman is an out & out winger but there’s no-one else I can think to put down that flank. I also don’t think our defenders work well as a team with only 2 centre halves

This can also mean that you don’t always pick your best 11 individual players more that you pick the 11 who can best gel as a unit in whatever formation that may be. I’ve seen it virtually all my life watching England where different managers have picked who they think are the best 11 players & tried to shoehorn them in together – Gerrard & Lampard in the middle of the park being one of the more recent examples. The times when they’ve had more success is when they’ve found a system that works with certain players – they won the World Cup despite having the best striker in the country at the time getting splinters in his bum coz other players worked better in Ramsay’s 4-3-3

Personally with Latics current squad, I’d go with 3 centre halves (Boyce, Ramis & Figueroa), 2 wing backs (Perch/Tavernier & Taylor), 3 central midfielders (Kvist, McCann & Mloney) & 2 up top (McManaman being one of them Riera/Delort/Holt being the other)

Tilders, my main gripe with wing backs is that when they are in advanced positions the midfield naturally goes as a unit in support which is great when you have the ball. Trouble is if you lose possession against teams playing 4-4-2 the long ball over the top into the channels causes chaos in defence and in this division it is happening frequently. Your 3 central defenders are pulled all over the place trying to stem the attacks. In the Prem teams don’t just hoof it upfield but in our league they do and that’s why I personally would not go with wing backs.

Well it appears that we nearly have it. No one, it appears, is dead against 442, but realise that it must only be used as an alternative system of play and it is not the ‘golden key’. We do not have the players on board, nor do we have access to, those players who are class enough to play in world beating formations. Finally, we have also noticed that because we ply our trade in the Championship then we must expect (in most of the games we play) to encounter the long hoof ball that would bore the arse off many a supporter, but may be the alternative required on the day. This is not the Premier League.

Horses for course then.