A change of formation?

I think a few of the changes in shape and system noted here could be interesting, but I can't help but think that any modification to the formation will be minimal. Reviewing Saturday, I would be more concerned with the tactics than formation, but that is a whole new debate. So the team I would go with is:

McKeown
Wood, Pearson, Pond, Thomas
Colbeck, Niven, Thanoj, Artus
Soares
Elding

Unless Miller is available again, in which case I feel he would start at centre-half, with Pond moved into the midfield next to Niven and Thanoj on the bench. Noticeably, I have left Disley out. And given the recent news about Hearn, I would have a look at Soares in the hole behind a main front man. I don't think at this point Southwell is ready for a start in such a game, and I have not been enamored with the other combinations we have tried thus far (usually consists of two 'target men').

We may be using him like one but Elding isn't a "target man" ?
Whether we like it or not he's in the side for his effort, leadership and goalscoring potential.
I'm non plussed with him myself (and our tactics of playing the ball in the air to him) but tbf if srikers get no proper service they can't score goals.

If our tactics aren't working that's another matter but there's only one target man in the squad and it's Cook. (IMO)

What about:

           McKeown
Hatton Miller    Pearson   Thomas
          Niven   Artus
Colbeck    Thanoj     Soares
             Cook

               McKeown
Hatton Pearson Pond Thomas
                  Niven
             Thanoj Artus
                 Soares
            Elding Cook


Play really narrow and through the middle but have hatton and Thomas offering some occasional counter attacking width*



*I'm making this stuff up as I go along

*Don't worry so are S&H !   (according to some)

But joking aside, you might not be a million miles off Saturday there.
mariner91's looks interesting too - holding midfielders + attacking width !?