Team v QPR (H)

CJMurray said:

Friedal

Walker
Kaboul
Bassong
Benny

Sandro
Modric
Parker

VDV
Adebayor

- Bale and Lennon off the bench for the last 30 mins if we're losing on for VDV and Parker to scare the shit out of Luke Young and Traore

Click to expand...

Mr Pink said:

For me its:

Friedel

Walker
Kaboul
Bassong
Ekotto

Sandro
Parker

Lennon
VDV
Modric

Adebayor


Bale and Defoe as options from the bench for this one would be very tasty.

Click to expand...

TheGreenLily said:

I would like harry to go for this;

Gomes/Freidel​

Corluka (if fit) - Kabul - Gallas (if fit) - BAE​

Walker - Parker - Sandro - Modric​

VDV - Ade​

We have had a problem with the right this season, Lennon has been injured and useless since his return. Bale does not work at all and Modric I am not too keen with either.... And VDV is a big no no. That leaves just walker for now who is naturally a winger according to some of the post I have read on SC. And I think could be better than Lennon eventually..... based on Lennon's recent performances I would say he already is.​

Bale has been disappointing for the most part and needs ti me on the bench for a kick up the arse and a regroup. So Modric can play on the left​

We have been over run in midfield too often this season and Sandro and Park will ad some much needed stability and also providing the back up to release our creative players a bit more. Not only this, but providing a much needed wall in front of a weakened CB pairing.​

This formation would also allow for Ade and VDV to remain up front as a potent strike force.​

I really just hope Corluka and Gallas are fit.​

Click to expand...

felmani26 said:

Why Mr Pink, why?!

Like you said, it may transpire that he has a blinder but I can't fathom for the life of me why he would start, especially considering that he will in all probability start in Russia and Bale may not even travel.

Start our best 11 against QPR, most won't travel out to Russia leaving them fresh for the Fulham game just before the international break.

Click to expand...

Mr Pink said:

I hear you for sure...and it won't be my line up on the day either. I would just love if Lennon could rediscover some form, on his day he's one of the most exciting wide players in the League. QPR are quite weak defensively, although I'm not underestimating them as a team in the general sense at all, and this could be an ideal platform for Lennon to take on his man and get some confidence back into his game.

Click to expand...

felmani26 said:

I know, and if i'm coming across as a huge Lennon hater i'm really not.

However, I truly believe (rightly or wrongly) that with the personnel we possess that the 4231, i.e. Nicdic's team, which has been well discussed is the default, go-to, first choice formation when everybody is fit. Lennon for me, doesn't warrant a starting role as quite simply he doesn't offer anymore than what we would have with VdV, Modric and Bale but i'm well aware of his qualities and coming on late in games, probably for VdV on the right, he could be a match winner with his direct play and obviously pace.

It is a squad game and Lennon will more than play his fair share this season but this really becomes prevalent Christmas/New Year onwards and for the time being, with a weeks rest before each League game (discounting the Europa League) there is no real reason other than injury/suspension to meddle with arguably our best 11.

Click to expand...

Mr Pink said:

I agree and you know that I'm very much an advocate of the 4-2-3-1 system, although some tweaking is normally up for debate in terms of who plays where.

What I would say is that if Lennon can get back to his best I feel he offers more away from home than Bale does. He works harder off the ball for me and that's an important consideration away from home, Pienaar being another option who can offer industry and work rate in that respect as well.

We can discuss a first eleven in that system until the cows come home but its futile for the most part in the sense that so many other variables will dictate any given selection on any give day.

What we want is a system that best utilises this group of players, and all the players understand the system and can slot in effortlessly when required or when the manager sees fit.

Click to expand...

InOffMeLeftShin said:

I always see people commenting that playing 2 'holding' or 'defensive' midfielders is a defensive strategy and that we don't need to do it against weaker teams.

For me playing Parker and Sandro in midfield will make us much more attacking. It'll free up the forward players far more to do damage, it'll help our defensive line squeeze up because they are getting good coverage in front of them and we'll have a much better chance of keeping the ball in their half and maintining the pressure on them.

It's not even like Parker and Sandro are poor on the ball and just hackers either, they can both definitely play football.

Sandro is pretty much the first name on the team sheet for me, it surprises me to see him on the bench in so many peoples ideal lineup.

Click to expand...

cwhite02 said:

Some of these teams are a joke and are clearly not happening, maybe try them out on FIFA.

Click to expand...

sloth said:

You're absolutely right.

There's a school of thought out there that says 4-4-2 is more attacking than the formation you pick, but it isn't. If anything the 4-2-3-1 is the all-round formation, the "stem-cell" formation - adaptable (to either attacking or defensive) depending on conditions.

If people say we don't want 4-2-3-1 because it's too defensive it's as if - to steal an analogy from another field - they were saying we don't want to play Botham because accommodating another bowler makes us too weak in the batting department.

Man City, to take just one example, have been dominating teams week in week out playing two holders in a 4-2-3-1 they have scored 33 goals in nine matches playing this way - over three goals a match!

What else it allows is for the manager to be influential from the bench.

4-4-2 is not more attacking, but it is more random and sometimes games need shaking up. Against Newcastle the other day, for whatever reason, we'd lost the midfield, the set-up wasn't working and time was running out, we needed to shake it up in some way and Harry had the option of bringing on Defoe and changing the formation which he did. Good decision making from the manager.

How can the manager influence the game if he starts with 4-4-2 though?

First of all you increase the likelihood of being scored against without increasing the likelihood of scoring, imo, so you're more likely to go behind if you start 4-4-2, but no more likely to go ahead. If you go behind, how can you change it up?

If the score stays level, how can you change it up? 4-2-3-1 is about pressure and dominance over 90 minutes. Because you have 90 minutes that system works, as the time winds down however you need randomness, there's little point switching to 4-2-3-1 if there's 30 minutes remaining and the scores are level. So how can you change it? How can you knock the opposition out of their stride if you started 4-4-2 and they've held you to a stale-mate to 60 minutes?

What you can do is is go 4-2-3-1 if you've gone a goal up, but even that is not ideal, because even though 4-2-3-1 should properly be considered a balanced formation (equally attacking and defensive), when you switch to it to protect a lead then it is undoubtedly a defensive move and psychologically that's how the players are likely to take it. It may be necessary on occasion to do it - and i wish Redknapp did it more often - but you can understand the reluctance because in that situation you're sending a signal that you want to hang on, instead of pushing forward and dominating.

All of the above said, we can make a case for either formation if our best players suit one formation over another.

For instance if Sandro is injured then 4-4-2 becomes a much more powerful argument because quality wise Sandro's stand-in/s are currently a notch below some of the established stars they'd be keeping out of the side to accommodate. I'd still more often than not stick to 4-2-3-1, but I can understand the alternative view.

But if we look at the players ready to play 90 minutes this weekend and grade them according to quality we get something like this:

Highest quality (Game changers, could play for any team in the world)

Ade, VdV, Bale, Modric

Top Quality (would start regularly for any team in the PL)

Parker, Sandro

High quality (Would start for most teams in the PL and be in the match day squad for any)

BAE, Defoe, Walker (many will disagree), Kaboul, Friedel, Lennon

Quality (PL quality)

Bassong, Livermore, Pav (could be higher but he's too lazy), Rose

So the thing is we don't want to shoe-horn the players in just for the sake of it, but the question should be is there a credible formation, used by winning teams at the highest level that suits our personnel and ensures the maximum of our best players play in their best positions?

Answer that truthfully and you'll know how we should play against QPR.

Click to expand...

sloth said:

How can the manager influence the game if he starts with 4-4-2 though?

Click to expand...