04/03/2003

The players just aren't clever enough to take control of a game using 4-3-3. It is well documented that it takes a great deal of organisation and discipline in the transition from defence to attack and back to defence again if you are going to play the 4-3-3 effectively. I just don't think that lower league clubs have the personnel to do this properly.

It has to be either 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 for me every time.

Sorry S&H but I think we will get found out very quickly if you persist with 4-3-3 and that we will drop a lot of points trying to learn it and will probably never get the hang of it

We clearly play better with the 4-4-2, but i think if we can get the players to play 4-3-3 comfortably it could work, but do we really have the time to keep trying? For me its 4-4-2 all the way.

Have one more go at 4-3-3 if it doesnt work 4-4-2. I dont see why HandS want to play 4-3-3 so badly..
Our 4-4-2 team of:
................McKeown
Hatton..Pearson..Miller..Aswad
Colbeck..Niven..Artus....Soares/Artus
...........Cook..Hearn/Pearson
Is IMO a top quality team and more than capable of doing very well this season.

Seems odd that other non league teams are capable of doing it, at least three of the top five last year for example.
I'm in no way fixated on 4-3-3 but i do think we're capable of it, all players are. Its just whether S & H are capable of coaching it correctly.

Obviously the higher up the pyramid you go the better/more intelligent players are. Taking spain as an example, they were successful for four years
with 4-3-3 and in the euros they created a system designed to nullify 4-4-2 and 4-3-3, making the best use of their players and exploiting opposing teams attempts to nullify them.

Everyone's comfortable with 4-4-2 and with good players its a great system, very balanced and simple to understand. Often though, its very easy to undo and exploit, especially with a 4-3-3/4-5-1.

I do agree that "forcing" any particular formation will no doubt be detrimental and we should play the best way we can.

The team above could easily include Wood, Thanoj and 2 more strikers.  We have  stronger team and squad than last season.

Quoted from TownSNAFU5

The team above could easily include Wood, Thanoj and 2 more strikers.  We have  stronger team and squad than last season.

Very hard to pick a team. Shows our strenght in depth (in the majority of positions)

As shown 4-3-3 is very possible at conference level as the top sides for the last few seasons have all been using it, and as said it exploits 4-4-2, hence why S&H probably want to use it, if the top teams are using it, playing 4-4-2 against them is not so easy.

As for the debate about whether its going to work, well I'd rather we try and get it to work in friendlies rather that occasionally trying it in the league like last year.

4-4-2 is easy to play, hence why we don't need to practice it in pre-season, let them play 4-3-3 in friendlies and if come August we still havn't learnt it then so be it.

I think if we play 433 we have to many good strikers on the bench that come January will get transferred as they will not get a game at all

I think most of the better teams last year were playing the modified version of 4-3-3 by playing a deeper 4-5-1. They had the players capable of dropping into the midfield from being further forwards quickly and well drilled in doing so. We ain't yet and judging by all the reports from last night, the drills the managers have put them through ain't worked yet!!! Stick to what you know best I reckon. We've talented enough players to play anyone at 4-4-2. The issue comes when the midfield are being over run by a trio. The managers and players then have the responsibility to identify it and adapt accordingly.

The 2 teams who got promoted last year played a version of 433. Not many teams play 442 now.

They are probably insistent on it because that is the formation they played at Boston (I know, I watched, I saw)!! And, therefore, probably Ilkeston before that.

Quoted from psgmariner

The 2 teams who got promoted last year played a version of 433. Not many teams play 442 now.

Not sure about this level but certainly higher up the leagues you can get outnumbered in midfield playing 4-4-2. It leaves the two forwards isolated and out of the game for long periods. I worry about Roy Hodgson who despite his vast experience is universally known as a 4-4-2 or 4-4-1-1 man. I felt we needed to match the Italians up in midfield. Strangely enough, we actually had the players to do it but left Adam Johnson at home.

My 442 would be

                       Mckeown

Hatton/Woods  Miller Pearson  Aswad


Coulbeck   Niven(C)  Thanoj     Soares

             Cookie          Southwell

Imo its not all about starting hearn, and southwell finds postions and has linked up well with cookie whos a big aggresive powerful man.

Southwell four headers four goals, for a wee man thats top.

Leave Hearn out? Mental.

I'd say that of the games I've been to in the past five years the biggest single problem we've had tends to be us getting dominated in the middle. Can't believe for a minute that the players we have are incapable of playing 4-3-3 and surely pre-season is the time to try and get it right.

To even contemplate playing 433 is beyond comprehension! stop doing it and stop doing it now and to all you who believe in it i say: you are only trying to justify it because you have lost another argument. Stop being so daft and grow up! admit you were wrong and get on with supporting a 442 system. Ask AB our most successful manager ever about 433 and he would laugh in your face and don't even dare say that he ever supported it because you know he didn't. Hey but what did he do?

*Starts to slowly edge towards the door*

yes biccy why not? like i said everything doesnt have to evolve around hearn and from last nights performance cookie and southwell linked up better than ive seen elds and hearn, so thats my choice.

Quoted from OneLove

yes biccy why not? like i said everything doesnt have to evolve around hearn and from last nights performance cookie and southwell linked up better than ive seen elds and hearn, so thats my choice.

Cos he's by far and away our best player. He's been top scorer for his team for the past 2 seasons. Need I go on?

Quoted from Biccys

Cos he's by far and away our best player. He's been top scorer for his team for the past 2 seasons. Need I go on?

Agreed, leaving our 30 goal a season striker and last seasons player of the season out for a lad whose looking at his first season in pro football and is not built up for mens football at all at the minute would be a silly silly move..

Quoted from Biccys

Cos he's by far and away our best player. He's been top scorer for his team for the past 2 seasons. Need I go on?

Crazy talk. Blimey! Of course Liam Hearn needs to start when he is anywhere near fit! Southwell is potential and a kid, Liam is 27, in his prime and bagged us 30 goals last season!

I don't like to see him out wide in a 4-3-3 but whatever formation you pick, Liam should be the first name on the team sheet.

Over the last two seasons, Liam has 72 goals in 118 games. A strike rate any forward would be rightly proud of.

Quoted from 75

Over the last two seasons, Liam has 72 goals in 118 games. A strike rate any forward would be rightly proud of.

Apart from Lionel Messi.  

Quoted from Maringer

Apart from Lionel Messi.  

I did think that when I typed it! Messi is playing on his own though is mate Christiano's strike rate isn't bad either.

Quoted from Biccys

I think most of the better teams last year were playing the modified version of 4-3-3 by playing a deeper 4-5-1. They had the players capable of dropping into the midfield from being further forwards quickly and well drilled in doing so. We ain't yet and judging by all the reports from last night, the drills the managers have put them through ain't worked yet!!! Stick to what you know best I reckon. We've talented enough players to play anyone at 4-4-2. The issue comes when the midfield are being over run by a trio. The managers and players then have the responsibility to identify it and adapt accordingly.

Agree with all of that except maybe the last sentence.

Are you effectively saying don't try 4-3-3 until we need to?
Not sure I fancy that - think it's safer to work on it in pre-season just in case.

Just wondering if 4-3-3 doubters(I'm not convinced yet either) are wrongly assuming cos we start with it in pre-season, we'll be starting with it come the league ?

Early days but right now I doubt we'll use 4-4-3 much at home.
Didn't Scott say in the interview we're gonna need to go to places and play 4-3-3 ?
I'd guess this fits in with your 4-5-1 theory Biccys (and BP Vicar's too. i.e. stop being outnumbered in midifeld)
Like you say Biccys we're not there yet but judging by Scott's olympic athelete anology, I'd hope we should be come kick off whatever system we play.

Interesting views 80's. I wasn't there last night so cannot comment other than to wonder if they aren't going to start with 433 why are we wasting valuable pre-season time going with it?

The problem with a defensive-minded 4-3-3 (i.e. a 4-5-1 in all but name) is that it negates the threat of Hearn if he's going to be played as the forward on the left. He really needs to be playing on the shoulder of the defenders to show his best and doesn't have the game to play as the lone striker.

For a 4-5-1, you'd play have to play Cook up front on his own, probably supported by Colbeck on the right and A.N. Other (Soares?) on the left.

calm down, like i said its my opinions. not saying this for every game but at present id pick that team.

Quoted from 1600

Agree with all of that except maybe the last sentence.

So you don't think the players and management DON'T have the responsibility to identify they're being overrun in midfield and change it....?

Quoted from 1600

Are you effectively saying don't try 4-3-3 until we need to?
Not sure I fancy that - think it's safer to work on it in pre-season just in case.

No, we tried it and it didn't work against both lower and higher league opposition. Pretty damning in my view. We can't do it yet. Not saying we won't ever be able to, but for now, it looks like a dead duck.

Quoted from 1600

Just wondering if 4-3-3 doubters(I'm not convinced yet either) are wrongly assuming cos we start with it in pre-season, we'll be starting with it come the league ?

Early days but right now I doubt we'll use 4-4-3 much at home.

That's cheating... But yes, I doubt there'll be much 4-3-3 at home either.

Quoted from 1600

Didn't Scott say in the interview we're gonna need to go to places and play 4-3-3 ?
I'd guess this fits in with your 4-5-1 theory Biccys (and BP Vicar's too. i.e. stop being outnumbered in midifeld)
Like you say Biccys we're not there yet but judging by Scott's olympic athelete anology, I'd hope we should be come kick off whatever system we play.

True but by then we should have a settled 1st choice and play the full 90 minutes with them with probably both formations in the last PSF.

Quoted from barralad

Interesting views 80's. I wasn't there last night so cannot comment other than to wonder if they aren't going to start with 433 why are we wasting valuable pre-season time going with it?

My GUESS is they're concerned about the posiibility of being overrun in midfield away from home.
This could be e.g. when they're trying to hang on to a lead or trying to pick up a point.

If true then I completely understand the reasoning but it would concern me again slightly.
Suppose I take the general view (and it's only mine) that the best form of "attack is defence", "it's best to fight fire with fire" etc

Judging by Luton last season we kept things tight for a long while before going behind but then started to play and fought back.
Sure Hurst said something like "Well we could have been 3 down by then" but who knows maybe we could have been 3 up too ?
Swings and roundabouts and depends on your view I suppose.

If you've got gaps in the middle then you need to address them but is formation the only solution ?

Maringer's point could prove to be a fair one too, but perhaps Hearn will be in the middle of a 4-3-3 ?
Who knows but not sure why Cook has to be up front on his own.
Can he not play out wide in a 4-3-3 ? (seemed to work the left channels well enought last night). Will he definitely be playing anyway ?

Who knows maybe S&H have got completely different ideas to what we're seeing and we're ALL reading too much into things...

Quoted from Biccys

So you don't think the players and management DON'T have the responsibility to identify they're being overrun in midfield and change it....?

Sorry I mean it's better if they can identify the wheels falling off in pre-season than in the league.

Don't get me wrong obviously I don't WANT them to ever fall off(though in a way I do in pre-season if we're gonna ultimately go with it), but I think it's worth having a look if only to cross it off the list so to speak.

It's all a catch 22 really - unless things go wrong, you can't fix to improve them but you don't want anything to go wrong !

Quoted from Biccys

True but by then we should have a settled 1st choice and play the full 90 minutes with them with probably both formations in the last PSF.

Same team different formations ?
Blimey that's another question and haven't given it much thought.
Right now I don't want to go there !

Quoted from Rodley Mariner

I'd say that of the games I've been to in the past five years the biggest single problem we've had tends to be us getting dominated in the middle.

Is this because of the players we had in the middle rather than the formation?  Leary, Hudson, Cummins, et al

I agree we've been dominated too many times in the middle but in the vast majority of games I've seen the other team only had 2 in the centre like us, but unfortunately (for us) their two were usually superior to our two.

Glenn hoddles xmas tree formation years ago was the answer to people scared of playing 4-3-3, essentially a 4-3-2-1. It was way ahead of its time and everyman and his dog savaged it stating it was nonsense and why stray away from the hallowed 4-4-2. This formation allows the back four to be protected, the midfield three to dictate movement and pace while the two behind the target man are free to roam and link up with play either centrally or out wide. I think this would suit hearn and soares much better and allow a cook or pearson as target/link up man. It does demand a very high workrate from the front three primarily but allows the midfield three the time and space to dictate the game more and more protection for the back four. Also allows the fullbacks to bomb on with the midfield three and even two behind filling in to cover gaps. I remember this argument/heated discussion back then, the 4-4-2 view won then and we've essentially still not progressed. Whilst the rest of the world however...

Whilst 4-3-3 currently seems to be as welcome as a fart in a lift I am pleased that the management are trying new ideas. Its good to see the management preparing Plan B, although it is obviously very much work in progress. How many times in the past few season have we struggled to have even a Plan A?

Quoted from Quagmire

Is this because of the players we had in the middle rather than the formation?  Leary, Hudson, Cummins, et al

Probably a fair comment but I do think we're frequently outnumbered as well. I also agree with EarAche that it's good that they're looking at alternatives. If 4-4-2 is all we can play and we go to pieces if we try anything different then it makes us very one-dimensional, very predictable and very easy for opposition managers to set-up against. 4-3-3 isn't an ineffective formation; if it doesnt work it's the players and management who can't make it effective not some intrinsic flaw with that system.

Quoted from kevikov

Glenn hoddles xmas tree formation years ago was the answer to people scared of playing 4-3-3, essentially a 4-3-2-1.

Wrong England manager. It was Terry Vegetables who was a proponent of the Chrimbo Tree formation.

It worked OK for him because he had some decent enough players available.

In general, pretty much any formation works if you have players capable of playing it but I'm still not sure we have the midfielders to play a 4-3-3 against good teams.

The managers know that we have to try different formations so we can alter the game plan mid-match.It's all well and good only using 4-4-2 but what do you do when it isn't working ? The players have to be adaptable so they can play another style. These are situations where clever selection of players on the bench can be effective. The Dynamic Duo stated that these friendlies against Donny , Hull and Scunny would be a good way of assessing how we performed WITHOUT the ball. How we kept our shape and tried to win the ball back would also be highlighted. Trying different formations pre-season helps them to assess this. We have to go into the season with a plan A , plan B and even a plan C ,if need be, to beat any kind of formation we come up against.

Is it not possible for the front 3 in a 433 to swap around so that Hearn could become the central striker or go right as the play dictates ?

My bad, thought it was hoddle. See to remember hoddles tactics and formation being scrutinised for its revolutionary style. And not just for the psycho babble and religious beliefs.

We in England traditionally use 4-4-2 it was what most players know and are coached and drilled upon. It's a basic formation and easy to play.

Managers and coaches have tried to counter formations with new formation, lots of European sides used to play with a sweeper or 3-5-2 with wing back.

There seems to be a growing trend especially in the premier league since mourinho won the league with 4-3-3 going forward and 4-5-1 when the ball is in your own half or even tweaking to 4-4-1-1. I would argue this has come about with the type of team he and other managers put together physical, physically fit and strength for a man upfront to hold the ball up, play with his back to goal.

Spain have just won the euro with small players and no forward.

I can't get over how much chatter there is on here saying 4-3-3 is or is not working, and 4-4-2 is the only way forward. Within 4-4-2 there are different ways to play al la italy with there diamond (narrow) midfield.

Just because AB played with wingers and we had great success it does not mean we should go back to this. We have been crying out for years to have a fresh approach, this seems finally to be happening. There are no more lets sign John oster or get jack lester in as he lives down the road or even lets Gary croft in as he could do a job at this level.

The managers are trying formations out and pre season is the time to do it we also don't know what the tactics within the formation are and the objectives set in the dressing room....roll on the new season

applying a formation that totally negates the strengths of our best player is genius

Quoted from Denby

applying a formation that totally negates the strengths of our best player is genius

But that doesn't quite explain how Hearn managed to score so many goals for Alfreton the other year, playing on the left of a 4-3-3?

I can see how 4-3-3 with Hearn and A.N. Other playing alongside Cook in the centre could perhaps work out well, but only if we have the players to work as a midfield 3.

Quoted from Maringer

But that doesn't quite explain how Hearn managed to score so many goals for Alfreton the other year, playing on the left of a 4-3-3?

that's irrelevant, different team, different squad, different opposition

what we've seen at grimbsy is that there is nothing to suggest that hearn will thrive in such a formation

Well, compared to last season, we're half way to being a different team with a different squad - we're quicker in the full-back positions and have more pace up front and in midfield with Cook, Pearson and Colbeck.

I'm not writing off 4-3-3 just yet as it would be good to have a few options as to how we can set the team up, depending on the opposition. Obviously, this is only useful if Hearn can be effective in our 4-3-3 so we'll have to see how things progress. There's no reason why Hearn can't do well in a 4-3-3 as we know he has a few tricks on the ball and can cause the opposition problems coming in from wide positions but we need to make sure he still gets good chances and isn't just doing leg-work in wide positions. I hope he's been practicing shooting with his left foot, too!

I'm looking forward to seeing how Cook performs as I'm hopeful he will prove to be the mobile physical presence we've lacked for the past couple of seasons.

Quoted from Denby

that's irrelevant, different team, different squad, different opposition

what we've seen at grimbsy is that there is nothing to suggest that hearn will thrive in such a formation

Yeah i said different team and players and i got ridiculed

Not yet convinced or saying 4-3-3 will work but isn't part of the thinking that it's easier for attacking fullbacks to overlap a packed midfield in the centre ?
Kind of making the need for wingers redundant and effectively provide 2 extra bodies elsewhere ?

Though I do accept someone(defender or forward) needs to get to the byline (and the fullbacks may need to run back too) for it to work just as well.

Just seems to me it fits in with an attacking fullback philosophy.

What is a "byline".
I think you mean goalline, so called because the goal sits on it.
If we are looking at 4-3-3 then in my opinion Cooke should be in the middle with Hearn out left and Pearson out right but a bit closer together so that the 2 out left and right can run onto Cooke's headers and therefore be in a position to ghost past the defenders and create chances, ( hopefully take them as well).
It certainly pays to have a plan A, B, C etc if it is not working or the opposition won't allow you to play preferred option.

I'd prefer them to play closer together for sure - right now I don't want anyone way out on the touchline.  
I just wonder whether they might have to come wide to provide the outlet down the channels ?
Unless we're dominating possession in the middle with good passing perhaps.

I always thought a front three and a midfield three in essence meant like Spain showed, a forward six. Admittedly Spains formation was almost weird but it showed all six are involved constantly in the attacking build up, plenty of movement across, deep and thrusting forward runs, the thing with 4-4-2 is that positions are almost set in stone, players are where they are meant to be and that's what makes it so predictable. A fluid 4-3-3/4-5-1/4-3-2-1/4-3-1-2 is the opposite and demands constant changing movement and interplay. Perhaps why it's so hard for teams used to nothing but a rigid 4-4-2 to adapt to it.

If we do insist on playing 4-3-3 then I would like to see a team of:

                              Macca

Hatton.         S. Pearson.   Miler.       Thomas


                              Niven
                    Soares.       Thanoj


     Colbeck.              Hearn.           Cook


Bench: Centre Back, Wood, Disley, Artus, G. Pearson

I'd like :

                                 Macca

Hatton           Miller           Pearson          Thomas
    |                                                                 |
    |                                                                 |  
    |    Colbeck            Niven            Artus       |
    |                                                                 |
    |                                                                 |  
    |         Elding/pearson      Hearn                 |
   \/                                                                \/
                              Cook



Subs - Elding/pearson, southwell, Disley, Wood, thanoj.  So far, until a new centre back, goalie and winger is bought in.

sodomist! Forgot all about soares! That changes things, maybe soares in the elding/pearson position for his speed and link up play. Or on the bench.
We do have strength in depth this season, lots of different options. Have to say we are definately a stronger squad, three more additions and i'm a happy mariner.

Quoted from realityman

To even contemplate playing 433 is beyond comprehension! stop doing it and stop doing it now and to all you who believe in it i say: you are only trying to justify it because you have lost another argument. Stop being so daft and grow up! admit you were wrong and get on with supporting a 442 system. Ask AB our most successful manager ever about 433 and he would laugh in your face and don't even dare say that he ever supported it because you know he didn't. Hey but what did he do?

The games moved on since he was successful. Look at Buckley mk3. I think 442 is slowly being pushed out the game.

Towards the end Mr Buckley was playing 451 with Rankin as the lone striker. He wasn't always 442.

Question-are wingers forwards or mid-fielders?  -how would they fit in the different formation?  Colbeck can actually put a ball in front of forwards whilst facing the goal (he's really a winger I believe) which means they are running towards both the goal and defenders(something they hate) .With the 4-3-3 this does not happen as more often than not the ball is received whilst the forward has his back to the goal and cannot see how the defender is reacting.
Not trying to take sand to arabs here but the above is football basics and ask any forward where he would like the ball delivered.

Quoted from BrMarin

Towards the end Mr Buckley was playing 451 with Rankin as the lone striker. He wasn't always 442.

Aye and in Buckley's third spell we was a better team playing 4-5-1 than we was playing 4-4-2

Quoted from cod.gtfc

Aye and in Buckley's third spell we was a better team playing 4-5-1 than we was playing 4-4-2

And he got us to Wembley in the Johnstones Paint Trophy by playing 5-3-2 (3-5-2).

He said at the Trust's event the other month he always favours 4-4-2, but the players he had in his last spell at the club just werent in the same league as the guys he had in his first two spells (especially the 1st spell) so he had to find a different way of playing to get results with what he had.

Quoted from BrMarin

Towards the end Mr Buckley was playing 451 with Rankin as the lone striker.

Who was so rubbish he signed Butler!