News:

Use a VPN to stream games Safely and Securely 🔒
A Virtual Private Network can also allow you to
watch games Not being broadcast in the UK For
more Information and how to Sign Up go to
https://go.nordvpn.net/SH4FE

Main Menu


Team formation

Started by FulhamStu, October 06, 2015, 02:23:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

FulhamStu

Its clear we play the same formation a narrow 4-4-2 each game.  The player who plays nearest to the back 4 is O'Hara, with Tunnicliffe as the box to box runner.  Cairney plays right but comes inside and Pringle runs the right side giving some protection to the left back who gets forward more than the right back.

One thing I have noticed is how much space we give away in midfield.  Also, there is a lack of protection to the back 4 from central MF because O'Hara is a creative player and certainly not a defensive MF player.

I honestly think that one of our biggest issues is our set up.  Given that O'Hara has to play, I would suggest we need to re-think this set up.   Its been mentioned a few times that 3 at the back would suit our players better.   With Stearman right and Ream left of the 3, Kit could go with Burn or Hutchinson, maybe even Stearman central and Hutch right.   It would give us more height at set pieces too.    Our full backs are perfect for wing backs and Fred/Richards and Husband/Garbut would give us pace and width out wide.

O'Hara and Cairney can give creativity centrally and I would like a holding MF player behind them (Parker or AN Other).   You can bring on Tunnicliffe / LVC and Pringle to add runners if necessary.

Up front McCormack has to play with either Smith or Dembele.  McCormack can do what he does now but be told, his priority is to play in the opposition half and not come too deep.  Woodrow is my cover for McCormack.

I think this formation plays better to our strenghs and gives better defensive cover and more width to attack.  We can go 5 at the back when under pressure and be stronger at set pieces both in defence or attack.   Wonder if Kit has even considered it !!!

FPT

Yep, I'd have tried it by now. Burn as the central centre back with Stearman and Ream to either side of him. Jazz showed for Wales his potential as a wing back, he's been phenomenal for them - Fredericks, in his few Bristol City matches also was used as a wing back. Luke Garbutt and James Husband, I agree, are probably better suited to those roles than as your standard full back. I do quite like the idea of a Parker, O'Hara and Cairney central midfield, though it's not blessed with movement, but it would allow O'Hara to move that bit closer to the oppositions box. Plus Cairney can play a similar role to what he does now, that inside right position where he can slide passes or take shots - I'm keen on seeing him in a more central position. I'm really liking Ross and Dembele up top. I think a 352 would get more out of our players, could I trust Kit to coach it? Almost certainly not.

dannyboi-ffc

#2
For the players we have it makes perfect sense. But like most things that aren't common practice it would be a risk from Kit. And that's on e of the reasons I feel Kit fails so often. He is so scared to lose even when we are 2-0 up. He would rather see out the game rather than go for the killer third.

Even the formation is practically the same with no width. Both wingers are basically better versions of what we had last year with no pace or being able to run with the ball. You could have a team of Murphy's and they would still be predictable with a narrow midfield.

So its great in theory but it would be a gamble especially with how Kit's positions looking. Easy for us to say do it as it's not our future on the line but I do feel Kit needs to take a punt or two and find some balls if he is to turn this around. Playing safe doesn't get you enough wins, it gets you draws

Also feel Tunnicliffe would have as much chance as Parker of playing, he has the legs that O hara doesn't and is more athletic than Cairney. IMO he is our best player this year possibly behind Jamie. But he's gone off the boil a bit in the past week
Give us a follow @dannyboi_ffc   @fulham_focus

Email- [email protected]
Email- [email protected]

Supporting Fulham isn't about winning, it's about belonging


colinwhite

#3
I was thinking the same thing myself Stu. We are far too open in midfield and at times commit too many players forward when we attack. The trouble is we still don't have the right player to play the defensive role. Ohara is offensive at present and Tunnicliffe is box to box . We don't have a defensively minded midfielder , they are all good creative players , but not strong enough or athletic enough for the defensive role , quite apart from th fact that none of them "think" defence.
Agree about the wing backs , and also that Ream and Stearman would benefit vastly from have Burns stature and height alongside them.
If we went to 451 then where would Ross play ? Don't rate parker as a sitting defensive midfielder , he doesn't have the physicality when we don't have possession.
One thing is for sure and that if we carry on playing 442 with attacking full backs we are going to get exposed time and time again .We are great when we have the ball but wide open at times when teams attack us .
Kit needs to seriously consider 352 or 451 but i don think he will.

hovewhite

Its my favoured formation 3-5-2 and kit should be using it(in my opinion)as I think we would be stronger.
Up front mousa and Ross,midfield is the key O'Hara has to play,parker or tunni cairney or Pringle,wing back jazz and hubby.
(Kit just my opinion)coyw

Kent Cassandra

I know I am an old thicko so I like to keep things simple.
Our last five goals against have come from crosses being headed in.
Solution play Dan Burn and get more organised.
If we had shut down the game in the last ten minutes of every match we would now be in the top six.
Simples
Cornish Cassandra 1996, Don Quixote 2002, Kent Cassandra 2009.


Asotosyios

I think this formation would suit us. We don't even need a holding midfielder; O'Hara can continue to be the deep-lying playmaker with two of Christensen, Tunnicliffe, Cairney and Pringle playing along him.

YoungsBitter

The risk to us tho is the three being susceptible to the fast break and with the wing-backs pushing up that is a real risk, we already concede more crosses than anyone else but Preston, my fear would be one of the 3 Cbs gets drawn to the wide man and we have gone from 4 at the back to 2.

I think this set up works against the right opposition, especially one that tends to lump it forwards like a Huddersfield, Blackburn or Ipswich but we would get creamed by Boro, Derby or Brighton.

Our issue is less the formation than us having a coach who is anxious about changing the tactics at all, even if the game in front of him is obviously not going well. We seem to have plan A and thats basically it...
Quark, strangeness and charm

FulhamStu

One of the problems with signing players late is that it does not give you enough time to try these things in a safe environment.  I honestly think that the coaches lead by Rigg have decided on the 4-4-2 and thats it (see Rigg whiteboard picture).  Its good to have a club strategy, however you also need to play to your strengths.  Another thing I often think is that Kit would ideally love to play like the Tigana team.  I bet he dreams about this and I bet its why he persisted with that bloody diamond for so long.  He really does not seem to be able to think outside the box at all, personally I think he is a bit arrogant and a bit thick I met him quite a long time ago and I was not impressed.