Print Topic - Archive
Fishy Forum / Archive /
Posted by: The Grim Reaper, September 17, 2014, 5:38pm
It made me laugh the other day when Matt Dean asked Paul Hurst why he had changed the formation after the success of Gateshead and Alfreton. Hurst replied that his side had played a 4-3-3 at Gateshead and a 4-4-2 against Alfreton. Completely killed Matt Dean :) BTW Dean said that the fans had been asking that question :-/
Posted by: 2578 (Guest), September 17, 2014, 6:20pm; Reply: 1
Hurst finally changed his failed 433 formation last season after poor results and criticism from fans, I can't remember what game it was when he reverted back to the 442 but it clearly was 442 for all to see, but when Tonduer questioned him regarding the good result being down to the change in formation Hurst replied it was 433!!
There was a game at the start of this season ( might of been Nuneaton) where fans where split on his formation just because the Tinkerman claimed it wasn't a 442 when people who watched the game including myself viewed it as such, and again the commentary team on the the radio summarising the match claimed it was 442.
Now it's obvious that Hurst likes to play these little mind games with the fans and pundits but the fact is he comes out with this patronising drivel now and then to try and save some face, he carries on as if us fans have been watching town with our eyes closed for decades, I think Hurst needs to realise just because we share a county name with Boston, the fans at Grimsby are not flipping idiots and know the difference between 442 and 433.
Posted by: MuddyWaters, September 17, 2014, 7:20pm; Reply: 2
Quoted from 2578
Hurst finally changed his failed 433 formation last season after poor results and criticism from fans, I can't remember what game it was when he reverted back to the 442 but it clearly was 442 for all to see, but when Tonduer questioned him regarding the good result being down to the change in formation Hurst replied it was 433!!
There was a game at the start of this season ( might of been Nuneaton) where fans where split on his formation just because the Tinkerman claimed it wasn't a 442 when people who watched the game including myself viewed it as such, and again the commentary team on the the radio summarising the match claimed it was 442.
Now it's obvious that Hurst likes to play these little mind games with the fans and pundits but the fact is he comes out with this patronising drivel now and then to try and save some face, he carries on as if us fans have been watching town with our eyes closed for decades, I think Hurst needs to realise just because we share a county name with Boston, the fans at Grimsby are not flipping idiots and know the difference between 442 and 433.
Boston are always happier with a front 6, it's a number that they can count to on the fingers of one hand.
Posted by: The Grim Reaper, September 17, 2014, 8:09pm; Reply: 3
But it was 4-3-3 at Gateshead. I was there
Posted by: Marinerz93, September 17, 2014, 8:14pm; Reply: 4
It's the first time I've seen it and I feel it sums Hurst up when Grim74 calls him 'Tinkerman'. Fitting square pegs in round holes, dropping or moving players to suit others and changing formations throughout a game is no wonder players drift in and out of position from 4-4-2 to 4-3-3 and likewise.
I am yet to be convinced he is the man to send players out with fire in their bellies and feel he is too wishy washy to instil that winning desire.
Posted by: 120797 (Guest), September 22, 2014, 11:43pm; Reply: 5
We've been playing "442/433" for ages (even when Scott was here) with Paddy drifting left side and Neilson roaming about.
To be fair, square pegs in round holes is what happens when you've got injuries.
But also think it's sometimes down to ensuring midfield solidity + lack of available/effective wingers to go outright 4-4-2.
Clay on the right side isn't so stupid from a defensive point of view if you consider his energy and tackling ability.
Personally I think this "442/433" has worked well and Hurst is making the best of a depleted/unbalanced squad.
Still, should be interesting to see how he goes on Saturday...
Posted by: TAGG, September 23, 2014, 10:35am; Reply: 6
WTF do fans know? Thought this was a getyourfactsright post :-D
Posted by: RichMariner, September 23, 2014, 11:32am; Reply: 7
It was the same starting XI in both the Gateshead and Alfreton games.
At Gateshead it looked like we had LJL up top, with Neilson and Pittman supporting in a 4-3-3, with Brown, Clay and Paddy behind them. So I guess that was the system against Alfreton. If Hurst claims we went 4-4-2 in that match, then that'd mean Pittman up front with LJL, and Neilson on the right wing and Paddy on the left.
It was against Dartford last season that we reverted to 4-4-2 and we won 5-2.
Each season we've tried 4-3-3 and it eventually fails, but this season (whisper it quietly) it's been effective. Well, I think it works best because Pittman knew how to play in it - whereas, in seasons gone by, we've tried Hannah and Hearn in the wider positions of a front three and they just didn't look comfortable there.
LJL supported by Neilson and Pittman is the formula for this season, which gives us the flexibility to revert to 4-4-2 without having to make any subs (but only if Paddy starts, so he can go wide left when Neilson drops back to wide right, with Brown and Clay in the middle).
Due to injuries I'm not sure when we'll next be able to play this system.
Posted by: 120797 (Guest), September 23, 2014, 8:55pm; Reply: 8
It was the same starting XI in both the Gateshead and Alfreton games.
At Gateshead it looked like we had LJL up top, with Neilson and Pittman supporting in a 4-3-3, with Brown, Clay and Paddy behind them. So I guess that was the system against Alfreton. If Hurst claims we went 4-4-2 in that match, then that'd mean Pittman up front with LJL, and Neilson on the right wing and Paddy on the left.
Could well be.
That said, also seen many games where we change between 4-3-3 and 4-4-2 during the match depending on whether Neilson is roaming or not. (see below)
It was against Dartford last season that we reverted to 4-4-2 and we won 5-2.
Each season we've tried 4-3-3 and it eventually fails, but this season (whisper it quietly) it's been effective. Well, I think it works best because Pittman knew how to play in it - whereas, in seasons gone by, we've tried Hannah and Hearn in the wider positions of a front three and they just didn't look comfortable there.
LJL supported by Neilson and Pittman is the formula for this season, which gives us the flexibility to revert to 4-4-2 without having to make any subs
Great points !
Everyone talking formations should try to get their heads round it IMO.
BEFORE...........................................AFTER
...............LJL...................................LJL....Pittman
Neilson...........Pittman..........Paddy...Brown..Clay..Neilson
.....Paddy.Brown.Clay
As Pittman goes up front, Neilson drops back wide.
However I'll go further...
Neilson STILL has license to roam (into a 3-
1-2?) with the 3 CM's squeezing the middle while also keeping an eye covering the wings.
(but only if Paddy starts, so he can go wide left when Neilson drops back to wide right, with Brown and Clay in the middle).
Or Clay right side which has happened more than once this season.
Which begs the question
which is best...
a) Paddy left side ?
..........LJL...Pittman
Paddy..Brown..Clay...Neilson
b) Clay right side ?
...........LJL...Pittman
Neilson..Paddy..Brown..Clay
Would guess a) but get the impression Neilson prefers left side and Clay moving right at least allows him to do that.
Only guessing, I may well be wrong on that last comment...
My concern over a) is if Neilson pushes up into a 4-3-3, LJL could be shunted left. (some may see this as a positive ! ;))
I guess a) is better player for player (albeit not much in it) but b) is better balanced for the team.
Due to injuries I'm not sure when we'll next be able to play this system.
I think Mackreth could possibly do a Pittman in the 4-3-3 allowing Neilson to go up front in a 4-4-2/4-4-1-1
Print page generated: April 25, 2024, 2:51pm