442

The most successful teams keep to the same system throughout the club and any player coming in knows his roll.

I like Ollie but I think he is expecting too much too soon from the players he has brought in.

Keep it simple Ollie until you can get better players that can adapt more easier .

Quoted from ginnywings

What is this obsession with 4-4-2?

As if we will magically turn into a great side if we adopt this formation.

I don't for a second think it'll turn us into a great side.  It's not even a formation I'm particularly fond of, especially in the modern game.  Even during the glory days of Buckley MKI it wasn't really a 4-4-2 as you had that front four (Rees, Woods, Childs and Gilbert) floating about.  Then in later years with the addition of Mendonca, Livvo and Groves it often became a 4-5-1 or if you look at a lot of Groves' goals in that spell, a hybrid 4-3-3 as he was so far forward.  MKII Buckley had Donovan playing a free role for large periods and then the back end of that spell it was Donovan or Black playing behind a lone front man at times.  Of his final year or so I can only really remember a pairing of Lester and Ashcroft as when he favoured 2 up top.  He also favoured 4-5-1 a lot during his third spell.

Anyway, back to the point....I personally just think it's the best system for what we've got in terms of players.  We've only got one left-back and he looks shot to pieces.  We've also only got one right-back (at present) and I'd rather not see us run the risk of knackering him out.  Both those situations lend towards avoiding anything where the full back is playing as a wingback or with a narrow midfield.  

We don't have anyone capable of playing as a lone front man, which rules out 4-5-1.  4-3-3, If it was an actual 3 man attack, could work offensively if we had the right combination.  Personally I'd go with something like Wright and Edwards either side of Gibson.  Pace and willing runners.  But inevitably that would end up with Wright and Edwards drawn back into midfield as the full-backs would be exposed, therefore leaving the striker isolated.

4-4-2, whilst rigid, at least allows (as our friend Paul Hurst would love) us to keep our shape.  You limit your attacking options, especially with our central midfielders) but you protect the defence, you have the option of going wide to stretch teams and you should have an outlet through one of your strikers.

It's not perfect and I'd honestly rather us have something a bit more dynamic.  But needs must.

In my opinion we don't have the players to play 3 at the back we've got good centre half's in Waterfall and Pollock who are pretty effective at this level. Preston and Hendrie  look much more at home at full back rather than as wing backs too.

I'm not sure if formation is the problem. On the whole we have a group of very average players who might be ok if they were drilled in a system and played regularly.
The issue is we don't seem to play the same team twice in the same system so it's always going to be a struggle. Add that to the injury issues we have and it's like watching strangers play every week. I have a slight glimmer of hope that 5 substitutes might encourage Olly to start with a more consistent eleven in a more consistent shape
I hope I'm wrong but the current run of form is looking rather like a relegation season again

[quote=140534]You obviously come to a severance agreement, with 6 months left on their contract you offer to pay them a set amount which allows them to sign elsewhere, getting a pay off from previous club and a chance to get a new deal signing on fee etc. or in greens case just signing on.

For what its worth Green is on £2k a week, he bought a house just recently and my friend was mortgage broker and he submitted 3 months of wages slips, I would be inlcined to think Hanson on more.

If this is true, your friend is clearly unprofessional and quite possibly in breach of confidentiality clauses in the contract and Data Privacy law.