Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Fishy Forum Fishy Boards Archive › New Formation
Users Browsing Forum
No Members and 154 Guests

New Formation

  This thread currently has 3,378 views. Print
2 Pages 1 2 Next All Recommend Thread
toontown
August 28, 2016, 9:05am
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,416
Posts Per Day: 0.57
Reputation: 91.63%
Rep Score: +13 / 0
Approval: +6,259
Gold Stars: 70
I am surprised nobody has mentioned the new formation we played yesterday and which was so crucial to getting the best out of Vose, and perhaps Bogle. We played a 'xmas-tree' formation of 4-3-2-1

                     McKeown
Davies   Gowling     Pearson   Andrews
    Chambers   Disley  Summerfield
              Bogle       Vose
                   Jackson

Vose certainly doesnt have the willingness and ability to track back, nor the pace to beat defendres, to play wide midfield. But in a slightly withdrawn and, more importantly, tucked in role of a forward 3 he was brilliant. He has the close control and strength to receivethe balll and create a bit of space for himself to play a through ball, or veer inside to get a shot away. He was a revelation in that position and it shows how he has been wasted being asked to play a wide-midfield role he is unsuited to. People on here have said about using him either behind a front 2, or as part of a 3, and yesterday showed why.

It also suited Bogle as it meant he often had a man coming on to him (oo-er) when he received the ball instead of always being tightly marked, i felt, and allowed him to run at defenders a bit more than usual.

I wouldn't have thought that formation would have suited Jackson but he played quite well and set up Bogle for his second.

Please Hursty don't ever go back to playing Vose as a left-midfield again!
Logged Offline
Private Message
pizzzza
August 28, 2016, 9:22am

Pontoonite
Posts: 5,662
Posts Per Day: 1.06
Reputation: 69.75%
Rep Score: +20 / -10
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +6,701
Gold Stars: 137
Looked like 4-4-2 to me.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 1 - 18
Grantley
August 28, 2016, 9:47am
Fine Wine Drinker
Posts: 1,230
Posts Per Day: 0.38
Reputation: 77.08%
Rep Score: +9 / -3
Approval: +2,517
Gold Stars: 9
Chambers and Vose were hugging the line for most of the game. Bogle came deeper because that's where Mckeowns kicks ended up.


Jordan Magrew
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 2 - 18
Cloudy
August 28, 2016, 9:52am
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,335
Posts Per Day: 1.14
Reputation: 71.17%
Rep Score: +17 / -8
Approval: +6,431
Certainly was 4-4-2 and not a Christmas tree formation or anything like!
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 3 - 18
toontown
August 28, 2016, 9:55am
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,416
Posts Per Day: 0.57
Reputation: 91.63%
Rep Score: +13 / 0
Approval: +6,259
Gold Stars: 70
vose was level with bogle behind jackson and in front of chambers/disley/summerfield when stevenage had the ball.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 4 - 18
Cloudy
August 28, 2016, 10:03am
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,335
Posts Per Day: 1.14
Reputation: 71.17%
Rep Score: +17 / -8
Approval: +6,431
Quoted from toontown
vose was level with bogle behind jackson and in front of chambers/disley/summerfield when stevenage had the ball.


You were at a different game to me then. I commented how well Vose was getting back into a defensive position in the first half especially, something he had been deemed on here to being incapable of.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 5 - 18
Garth
August 28, 2016, 10:07am

Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 11,493
Posts Per Day: 1.92
Reputation: 80.75%
Rep Score: +55 / -13
Approval: +4,921
Gold Stars: 26
It was 442 with Vose wide
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 6 - 18
gtfc82
August 28, 2016, 10:12am
Cocktail Drinker
Posts: 1,832
Posts Per Day: 0.31
Reputation: 72.37%
Rep Score: +8 / -4
Approval: +616
Looked a clear 442 to me too. However players like Vose seem to have a freedom to move inwards, like he did for his goal.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 7 - 18
bigdavemariner
August 28, 2016, 10:48am
UTM
Lower Findus
Posts: 398
Posts Per Day: 0.07
Reputation: 90.8%
Rep Score: +11 / 0
Location: Grimsby
Approval: +395
Gold Stars: 4
Started as a 4-4-2 and vose initially looked poor and out the game. He was getting frustrated at not getting on the ball. There was even a moment where Shaun Pearson played s dangerous looking pass and Vose had a pop. Pearson gestured to tell him to run into the channel so he could play it long. You could see the frustration in Vose sttaight away who had a moan, waved his arms and rsn off swearing to himself because he was frustrated at Pearson wanting to play the easy or lazy long ball. You can see there's a footballer in there and we need to play to their strengths (not long ball). This one moment yesterday just made it all the clearer than we need a more technical centre half who is more comfortable on the ball.

Think it was on about 25-30 minutes they pushed vose more centrally and asked Danny Andrew to push up and Diz to sit back to protect the back 4. We were playing a very lopsided formation for the majority. There was a clear moment in the game where Vose looked a different player and it was all about moving him central.
Vose centrally clearly works and links up with Bogle better than anyone. Playing as we did yesterday leaves us dangerously exposed down the left though.

Don't think Jackson had his best game yesterday (bar the link up play for Bogle 2nd). I'd much prefer to see Vose playing behind Bogle centrally and having 2 natural wingers with Chambers/Browne/Bolorinwa as think anyone with pace or power in this league will prove to be the difference


Gary Lump Lump Lump!
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 8 - 18
lew chaterleys lover
August 28, 2016, 10:50am
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,005
Posts Per Day: 1.07
Reputation: 75.9%
Rep Score: +30 / -10
Approval: +10,706
Gold Stars: 236
Quoted from toontown
I am surprised nobody has mentioned the new formation we played yesterday and which was so crucial to getting the best out of Vose, and perhaps Bogle. We played a 'xmas-tree' formation of 4-3-2-1

                     McKeown
Davies   Gowling     Pearson   Andrews
    Chambers   Disley  Summerfield
              Bogle       Vose
                   Jackson

Vose certainly doesnt have the willingness and ability to track back, nor the pace to beat defendres, to play wide midfield. But in a slightly withdrawn and, more importantly, tucked in role of a forward 3 he was brilliant. He has the close control and strength to receivethe balll and create a bit of space for himself to play a through ball, or veer inside to get a shot away. He was a revelation in that position and it shows how he has been wasted being asked to play a wide-midfield role he is unsuited to. People on here have said about using him either behind a front 2, or as part of a 3, and yesterday showed why.

It also suited Bogle as it meant he often had a man coming on to him (oo-er) when he received the ball instead of always being tightly marked, i felt, and allowed him to run at defenders a bit more than usual.

I wouldn't have thought that formation would have suited Jackson but he played quite well and set up Bogle for his second.

Please Hursty don't ever go back to playing Vose as a left-midfield again!


I think far too much is made of formations. Vose had a confident, eye catching game, keeping wide when needed, cutting in when needed and backtracking when needed. Just like it should be when firing on all cylinders. I didn't particularly notice a new formation, just more mobility from the front players.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 9 - 18
2 Pages 1 2 Next All Recommend Thread
Print

Fishy Forum Fishy Boards Archive › New Formation

Back to top of page

This is not an official forum of Grimsby Town Football Club, the opinions expressed are those of the individual authors. If you see an offensive post then click "Report" on the relevant post. Posts will be deleted at the discretion of the moderators whose decision is final. Posts should abide by the Forum Rules. IP addresses of contributors together with dates and times of access are stored. The opinions and viewpoints expressed by contributors to The Fishy are their own and not necessarily those of The Fishy. The Fishy makes no claims that information dispersed through this forum is accurate or reliable. Also The Fishy cannot be held liable for any statements made by contributors of The Fishy.