I'm doing a poll on the prefered back line for the team
You choose either 4 or 5(wingbacks) at the back and then the players for both formations.
Take part and I'll keep you updated on the results
https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FFCBackline (https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/FFCBackline)
A N Other x 4
A few odd choices in there! e.g. Patrick Roberts as a potential wing-back????
Quote from: Southcoastffc on December 11, 2014, 09:46:05 AM
A few odd choices in there! e.g. Patrick Roberts as a potential wing-back????
I had to give options because when ever i do these things someone always says 'Where is xxxxx?'
Also you could play three at back with two wide midfielders.
Yes I understand that - wasn't having a dig. And I bet someone will select him at left cb!
Quote from: Southcoastffc on December 11, 2014, 09:49:47 AM
Yes I understand that - wasn't having a dig. And I bet someone will select him at left cb!
Is Magath coming back?
UPDATE:
Q1
Flat Back 4: 67%
5 at back: 33%
Q2: Flat Back 4 lineup
RB: Hoogland
CB: Bodurov
CB: Burn
LB: Stafylidis
Q3 Back 3 and wing backs
RWB: Hoogland
CB: Bodurov
CB: Burn
CB: Amorebieta
LWB: Stafylidis
RB: McCormack
CB: Ruiz
CB: Rodallega
LB: Boa Morte
would probably concede less than we are at the moment.
RESULTS
Pick the defensive formation you would use:
Flat Back 4: 72.3%
Back 3 Plus wing backs: 27.7%
Pick a back 4 lineup:
(Votes for positions)
Right Back: Hoogland 78%
Left back : Stafylidis 45%
Right CB: Bodurov 75%
Left CB: Burn 47%
Total Votes (% picked by all voters)
Bodurov 86%
Hoogland 78%
Amorebieta 67%
Burn 57%
Stafylidis 46%
Hutchinson 32%
Grimmer 16%
Amorebieta vote clearly split between LCB and LB.
Pick a back 3 lineup with wingbacks
Right Wing Back: Hoogland 67%
Left wing Back : Stafylidis 72%
Right CB: Bodurov 69%
Middle CB: Burn 52%
Left CB: Amorebieta 67%
Total Votes (% picked by all voters)
Bodurov 93%
Amorebieta 81%
Burn 76%
Stafylidis 75%
Hoogland 68%
Hutchinson 46%
Grimmer 17%
With a pin
I really think we should give the 3 at the back a go, would lessen the burden on Burn if he was in the middle and would suit amorebieta and bodurov perfectly at l/rcb.
Hoogland and Staf are perfect for the wing backs as well.
Quote from: PaulJ123 on December 12, 2014, 01:19:37 PM
I really think we should give the 3 at the back a go, would lessen the burden on Burn if he was in the middle and would suit amorebieta and bodurov perfectly at l/rcb.
Hoogland and Staf are perfect for the wing backs as well.
I am not really sure as have not seen enough of him, but I suspect Hutchingson is the better footballer (him v Burn), and both have a weakness in being a bit on the side, hense I went for Hutchinson in a back 5. HOWEVER Burn is highly motivated and has the most Championship experience of all of them so a difficult choice. I personally would like to try a back 5 with wing backs because I think our full backs are more suited to wong backs. Grimmer was outstanding as a wing back at the Shrews, Staf is better going forward and this would give us width, which we have been badly missing. When defending 5 at the back is surely better than 4, esp given the lack of support from MF.
Is this based on securing another 5-0 drubbing?
Quote from: PaulJ123 on December 12, 2014, 01:19:37 PM
I really think we should give the 3 at the back a go, would lessen the burden on Burn if he was in the middle and would suit amorebieta and bodurov perfectly at l/rcb.
Hoogland and Staf are perfect for the wing backs as well.
:plus one:
I saw someone post a lineup that I was quite fond of along the lines of:
Betts
Bod Burn Amo (Hutch if inj)
Hoog Staf
Parker
Ruiz LVC
Ross
Hugo
Any takers?
With the players we've got I think that's the best formation.
I'd have LVC flat alongside Parker though, and Ruiz alongside McCormack both in behind Hugo.
