2 Up Top

[Low End Bee]

Can we just play this for the rest of the season and stop faffing about?
None of the legion of strikers we've got is any good as a lone front man anyway.
That is all.

 

[shaun]

Yes please. Leaving someone on the half way line when we are defending corners as well would also be nice.

 

[Bangor Bee]

Definitely, except perhaps in the toughest three or four away games.

 

[steve.bees89]

Yes please. Leaving someone on the half way line when we are defending corners as well would also be nice.

Don't think you'll get your wish regarding corners. Uwe sees this as a priority to get every man back to make sure tr corners are cleared (even though it doesn't work all the time).

Against Carlisle I noticed Grigg hung around the middle of the park whilst Carlisle lined up their corner, much to Uwes disapproval

 

[NorthamptonBee]

You lot are proper mental.

 

[Eieieio]

El Alagui or Donaldson? If it were up to me (luckily it isn't ) I wouldn't play Donaldson and Farid together, I think they occupy fairly similar roles... my personal current preference is Farid actually since he seems to require less shots to put one away!
If Grigg were fit, I'd like to see him partner Farid up front for a few starts in a row and see how they gel.

 

[Alan D]

I am a big Uwe fan, but the one thing that drives me crazy is his love on playing only one up front. Maybe ok against a few of the better teams away from home, but we should be having fun with two up front against some of the teams that we have played so far this season.

 

[Adam]

You lot are proper mental.

Next they will want us to leave someone up when defending corners. Maniacs. Glad Uwe has his head screwed on :yes:

 

[NorthamptonBee]

Next they will want us to leave someone up when defending corners. Maniacs. Glad Uwe has his head screwed on :yes:

We play 3 up front and have done for the past few seasons, we play one wide on the left, one wide on the right and one all alone on his own in the middle. People on here have fallen for it and said it's the way forward but I think the penny has dropped. I have watched 4-5-1 for a few seasons on the road and now we do it at home, I love it.

 

[SlumanBee]

I too would like to see Farid and Grigg start a game - how long do you give Donaldson before he gets dropped?

Farid and Norris played better together last night than Farid and Donaldson did in the first half Saturday - FACT.

 

[Adam]

We play 3 up front and have done for the past few seasons, we play one wide on the left, one wide on the right and one all alone on his own in the middle. People on here have fallen for it and said it's the way forward but I think the penny has dropped. I have watched 4-5-1 for a few seasons on the road and now we do it at home, I love it.

The best teams have a formation/style and let the opposition worry about changing things round to accommodate them. From Barcelona to Peterborough they have a way of playing which the players know, and it works. They let the opposition worry about them, rather than the other way round. Home or away. In my opinion we shouldn't be playing teams like Gillingham and adapting our formation or style to counter their threats, we should play to our strong points and let them adapt to us. Especially if our squad is as strong as they would have us believe, which I'm skeptical of TBH.

 

[seanrs]

I am a big Uwe fan, but the one thing that drives me crazy is his love on playing only one up front. Maybe ok against a few of the better teams away from home, but we should be having fun with two up front against some of the teams that we have played so far this season.

Agree with your point about it being ok against a few of the better teams. IMO it worked perfectly in the first Chelsea game, they expected us to come storming at them and we didn't. Trouble was, we played exactly the same way against Coventry away ( and I dare say in many a more away games)

 

[GP200]

...............not the thread I thought it would be..............

 

[mundee4england]

When 433/4231 works it can be devastating. Swindon at home was a great example of this where we were simply unplayable in the first half. Whilst this the case when it doesn't click it can look very much like 451 and leave the '1' incredibly isolated!

If we are going to play 433 the additional '2' up top need to be quick link players who can defend and attack, probably more midfielders/wingers than strikers. Saunders playing in the role against Carlisle was an example of it not working, whilst Donaldson sometimes is devastating in the role.

When it works it is great but when it doesn't we really struggle, until we can consistently make it work, and given our 3/4 strikers, we should probably stick to 442.... But the talent we have should be able to play 433 to good effect!

My massive concern is when we play Trotta as the '1', that simply doesn't work. Farid, Hayes and Donaldson can all play the role but Trotta and Grigf need someone up their with them.

 

[Herbert]

I am a big Uwe fan, but the one thing that drives me crazy is his love on playing only one up front. Maybe ok against a few of the better teams away from home, but we should be having fun with two up front against some of the teams that we have played so far this season.

We have 2 of the top scorers in the division from last season,and I'm sure another top scorer in Farid yet we persist with 1 up front

 

[jlove]

Playing 4-4-2 is fine for playing in the 1970's but we don't have a McCulloch and Phillips. It's no use playing two up top if we don't have those players; just having two goal-scorers means they can play together.

 

[NorthamptonBee]

When 433/4231 works it can be devastating. Swindon at home was a great example of this where we were simply unplayable in the first half. Whilst this the case when it doesn't click it can look very much like 451 and leave the '1' incredibly isolated!

.

Can of worms opened!! Right, we battered Swindon in possibly our bestest performance of the season, men against boys and we murdered them. We got a 3-3 draw, we bloody drew a game that we were so superior in, my thoughts on Uwe are 4-5-1 and draws in games we should win, Swindon being the best example of this.

 

[North London Bee]

Can of worms opened!! Right, we battered Swindon in possibly our bestest performance of the season, men against boys and we murdered them. We got a 3-3 draw, we bloody drew a game that we were so superior in, my thoughts on Uwe are 4-5-1 and draws in games we should win, Swindon being the best example of this.

Hear what you are saying.
What formation do you think we should employ at home and away, against the best teams and the weakest?

 

[Balders Bee]

Playing 4-4-2 is fine for playing in the 1970's but we don't have a McCulloch and Phillips. It's no use playing two up top if we don't have those players; just having two goal-scorers means they can play together.

The point some have made on here is that we do have the players to play a 4-4-2 but that it doesn't suit CD and Rosler wants to accomodate him as our 'main' striker...to be fair to him he was immense last season but to date hasn't hit the heights this year thus far. Farid and Norris showed well against Dons and who knows a 4-4-2 of Grigg/Farid might work.

I really don't get this 4-4-2 is so 'dated' argument as well. You play your best formation for the job in hand and if that's a 4-4-2 so be it. We all talk about 4-4-2's, 4-3-3's, 4-5-1's like we've all OD'd on Football Manager on the PC. Too often this season we have lacked width and our central striker has been isolated- this needs to be addressed as does our lack of adventure and wins away from home.

 

[ade211]

May I add more worms to the can. Away I would play 1-4-1-4.

Guess I sort of share Rosler's defensive mindset.

Everyone back for corners, and , deep breath, when we get one either quick short one to retain possession or leave more players back to guard against opponents hitting us on the counter attack.

Who said attacking football was dead?

 

[Bill Benn]

I would settle for 2 forwards who never play more than 15 yards apart not too much to hope for is it?

 

[NorthamptonBee]

Hear what you are saying.
What formation do you think we should employ at home and away, against the best teams and the weakest?

The key IMO is having the midfield who can do it, we have now in Forshaw, McCormack and Saville, we have 3 who tackle, press, pass, shoot and score, if you need to perm one of the others in with them then you'd probably still have enough if one is injured, knackered or if McCormack is suspended. That said, Saville picks those yellows up pretty easily. That is a sound base to work from and shouldn't need 4-5-1 that might turn into 4-3-3 if we're lucky as that seems to be our way, we have some good and fast passing but normally nobody in the area when the ball finally arrives around the box, the "3" up front includes 2 that are far too wide and again the middle 3 aren't bods who charge into the danger zone. We have so far tried Clayton, Hayes, Farid, Trotta and BWP as isolated front men and none of them have worked, probably Hayes' performance at Tranny last year was the most succesful but nowhere near enough with support lacking, we've actually made decent players look pony by doing this. The full backs need to get forward, Logan does, Bidwell does and Barron sort of does, the midfield 3 are clever enough to cover when needed IMO, McCormack is a winner and won't allow it to go gung ho, again IMO. We don't need 2 of the front 3 constantly hugging the touchline, we need to find a way where they work closer together, especially away where we are neat and tidy with little penetration.

 

[ade211]

I would settle for 2 forwards who never play more than 15 yards apart not too much to hope for is it?

If we were in the last twenty minutes pushing for a win or a draw I would go two up. At home would consider changing to two up after an hour. As the season progresses and we start to avoid defeat more and more would consider two up at home from the start. Away from home one up.

Boring me.

 

[Brentford 4 Life]

I would settle for 2 forwards who never play more than 15 yards apart not too much to hope for is it?

It shouldn't be too much to ask for. Despite never having played together before, Farid and Hacker managed to get it to work on Tuesday.

 

[Balders Bee]

It shouldn't be too much to ask for. Despite never having played together before, Farid and Hacker managed to get it to work on Tuesday.

Think they might have played once or twice for the Development Squad at the end of last season when Farid was oming back from his injury but fully understand your point.

 

[North London Bee]

The key IMO is having the midfield who can do it, we have now in Forshaw, McCormack and Saville, we have 3 who tackle, press, pass, shoot and score, if you need to perm one of the others in with them then you'd probably still have enough if one is injured, knackered or if McCormack is suspended. That said, Saville picks those yellows up pretty easily. That is a sound base to work from and shouldn't need 4-5-1 that might turn into 4-3-3 if we're lucky as that seems to be our way, we have some good and fast passing but normally nobody in the area when the ball finally arrives around the box, the "3" up front includes 2 that are far too wide and again the middle 3 aren't bods who charge into the danger zone. We have so far tried Clayton, Hayes, Farid, Trotta and BWP as isolated front men and none of them have worked, probably Hayes' performance at Tranny last year was the most succesful but nowhere near enough with support lacking, we've actually made decent players look pony by doing this. The full backs need to get forward, Logan does, Bidwell does and Barron sort of does, the midfield 3 are clever enough to cover when needed IMO, McCormack is a winner and won't allow it to go gung ho, again IMO. We don't need 2 of the front 3 constantly hugging the touchline, we need to find a way where they work closer together, especially away where we are neat and tidy with little penetration.

OK, Saville. McCormack and Forshaw in MF but which 3 up front and is one of thm a winger and would you play the same home and away?

 

[beebopalula]

The point some have made on here is that we do have the players to play a 4-4-2 but that it doesn't suit CD and Rosler wants to accomodate him as our 'main' striker...to be fair to him he was immense last season but to date hasn't hit the heights this year thus far. Farid and Norris showed well against Dons and who knows a 4-4-2 of Grigg/Farid might work.

I really don't get this 4-4-2 is so 'dated' argument as well. You play your best formation for the job in hand and if that's a 4-4-2 so be it. We all talk about 4-4-2's, 4-3-3's, 4-5-1's like we've all OD'd on Football Manager on the PC. Too often this season we have lacked width and our central striker has been isolated- this needs to be addressed as does our lack of adventure and wins away from home.

I think you've hit the nail on the head re accommodating Clayton. IMO if you asked Uwe if he aimed to play with one striker at home, he'd say we played with two/three. The trouble is we have had a string of decent strikers and every one gets isolated simply because Clayton wants to hug the touchline. Clayton is more comfortable in that position but he doesn't have the footballing inclination to move into the box or more central when it's on. It just isn't his game. IMO we have an issue. I rate Clayton highly but I'm coming to the view that he should play wide in a four man midfield diamond and we should have two strikers up top. Trouble is , it won't happen.

 

[NorthamptonBee]

OK, Saville. McCormack and Forshaw in MF but which 3 up front and is one of thm a winger and would you play the same home and away?

We haven't got 3 that can play on the wing or up front, we've shoved CD out there and he has adapted but Grigg or Farid aren't ever going to be able to do that, why not Grigg and Farid as a twosome with Clayton roaming and linking up with full backs and the midfield, Conor changed the game at Gillingham by coming on and not line hugging, he's a huge miss but we haven't the right players for a remote 3.

 

[wayfarer172]

The best teams have a formation/style and let the opposition worry about changing things round to accommodate them. From Barcelona to Peterborough they have a way of playing which the players know, and it works. They let the opposition worry about them, rather than the other way round. Home or away. In my opinion we shouldn't be playing teams like Gillingham and adapting our formation or style to counter their threats, we should play to our strong points and let them adapt to us. Especially if our squad is as strong as they would have us believe, which I'm skeptical of TBH.

Exactly. Everyone knows that the best means of defence is ATTACK.

 

[Bangor Bee]

The trouble is we have had a string of decent strikers and every one gets isolated simply because Clayton wants to hug the touchline. Clayton is more comfortable in that position but he doesn't have the footballing inclination to move into the box or more central when it's on.

Isn't Clayton hugging the touchline because that's what he's told to do? My impression when he was at Crewe was that he played wholly down the middle with a strike partner, Miller. They were regarded as a pretty formidable partnership, so I don't at all buy this version that Clayton can't play upfront with someone else. He should be given the chance to operate with Grigg over a decent period, with Farid as supersub.

 

[Balders Bee]

Isn't Clayton hugging the touchline because that's what he's told to do? My impression when he was at Crewe was that he played wholly down the middle with a strike partner, Miller. They were regarded as a pretty formidable partnership, so I don't at all buy this version that Clayton can't play upfront with someone else. He should be given the chance to operate with Grigg over a decent period, with Farid as supersub.

I don't know about his time at Crewe but I've seen the evidence of my own eyes whilst he's played for us and whether or not he is hugging the line under instructions he hasn't formed any discernable partnership with any of his fellow forwards to date.

As you say over a period Grigg might be that man but as promotion is the goal this year Uwe hasn't got long to work out his best option.

 

[beebopalula]

Isn't Clayton hugging the touchline because that's what he's told to do? My impression when he was at Crewe was that he played wholly down the middle with a strike partner, Miller. They were regarded as a pretty formidable partnership, so I don't at all buy this version that Clayton can't play upfront with someone else. He should be given the chance to operate with Grigg over a decent period, with Farid as supersub.

I thought that Clayton played wideup front at Crewe in a 4-3-3 ? Why would any manager tell a striker to hug the touchline and leave one striker isolated? I don't believe for one minute that Uwe gives him that instruction I just don't think he goes into the box by inclination. There are so many occasions when he could do so particularly if possession is building wide left and it's going to be delivered into the box. Clayton isn't inclined to move into the box to offer a target as it isn't his game. which is why I believe we need to accommodate him in the mid.

 

[Herbert]

Can of worms opened!! Right, we battered Swindon in possibly our bestest performance of the season, men against boys and we murdered them. We got a 3-3 draw, we bloody drew a game that we were so superior in, my thoughts on Uwe are 4-5-1 and draws in games we should win, Swindon being the best example of this.

A too regular theme last season

 

[Herbert]

If we were in the last twenty minutes pushing for a win or a draw I would go two up. At home would consider changing to two up after an hour. As the season progresses and we start to avoid defeat more and more would consider two up at home from the start. Away from home one up.

Boring me.

We avoided defeat a lot last year and it didn't work as the formation was too negative.we are bringing more attacking players in and not suiting the formation to them.

 

[Herbert]

Think they might have played once or twice for the Development Squad at the end of last season when Farid was oming back from his injury but fully understand your point.

So it works ?

 

[Bangor Bee]

I thought that Clayton played wideup front at Crewe in a 4-3-3 ? Why would any manager tell a striker to hug the touchline and leave one striker isolated? I don't believe for one minute that Uwe gives him that instruction I just don't think he goes into the box by inclination. There are so many occasions when he could do so particularly if possession is building wide left and it's going to be delivered into the box. Clayton isn't inclined to move into the box to offer a target as it isn't his game. which is why I believe we need to accommodate him in the mid.

I watched a lot of the videos from Crewe games when we signed him, and he definitely appeared to be playing down the middle with Miller. I believe it's been a deliberate policy to play him wider.