Skip to main content

4-2-3-1

4-2-3-1

marsbars

marsbars

Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
18,402
Location
Newcastle
thoughts? It looks like Neil will be sticking with it no matter what tbh

Think we should change it or give him time to perfect it? Maybe it'll be more effective when he gets his own players in?

It was bloody exciting to watch after Grayson but have we got the right mix of players to use it at the moment?

Neil has been able to shuffle to good effect with injuries and shown tactical nouse with subs at times.

I'm stumped. Just a bad day at the office or a failing system?
 
Can't stand it. We could be equally as solid with a 4141 or a 352 and still manage to be competive going forward.

If the team comes at you its to easy for the front 3 in the formation to become detached.
 
Last edited:
I'm an old fashioned, cards on the table, black & white, dynamic duo up top 4-4-2 man mesen.

I'd have us sitting in 3rd, playing 442.
 
Its certainly hard graft for the striker. Moult looked energetic but isolated today.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 
Hitch 22 said:
Its certainly hard graft for the striker. Moult looked energetic but isolated today.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yeah moult showed some nice touches and when played to his feet the ball stuck to him.
 
It’s not a bad formation to play away from home and we have done well away. At home we need two strikers, close to each other, playing off one another, creating chances, bringing others into the game etc. It’s woeful seeing an isolated front man each week. Why not try Hugill and Robinson up, or Hugill and Tom Barkhuizen. Get some round pegs in round holes and play 442 ffs.
 
Imo we just don't have the players for a 4-4-2. Who would play out wide? Barkhuizen and Robinson are ineffective that far back. The only player we have that can play that role is Horgan, who many of you have written off.

4-4-2 is great when you have real quality in midfield, but we just don't at the moment. 4-2-3-1 works for us and the way we play because the extra bodies in the middle let us dominate possession more. We didn't today because the midfield was far too lightweight. Browne should've started.

There's a reason why so many teams play 4-2-3-1.
 
marsbars said:
thoughts? It looks like Neil will be sticking with it no matter what tbh

Think we should change it or give him time to perfect it? Maybe it'll be more effective when he gets his own players in?

It was bloody exciting to watch after Grayson but have we got the right mix of players to use it at the moment?

Neil has been able to shuffle to good effect with injuries and shown tactical nouse with subs at times.

I'm stumped. Just a bad day at the office or a failing system?
Click to expand...

based on today Birmingham played the same system and dominated us..... but its players not formation that is the issue.

For me had we SWAPPED Maghoma for Robbo; David Davis for DJ and Sam Gallagher for Hugil we would have won regardless of formation......


Other swaps were possible too, i've just chosen 3 of our worst performers !
 
Ok - who performs well in the three? Seriously only Maguire has shone in that role so far. For me thats the issue. Well as long as you get enough bite in the two!
 
marsbars said:
Ok - who performs well in the three? Seriously only Maguire has shone in that role so far. For me thats the issue. Well as long as you get enough bite in the two!
Click to expand...

At the moment the question is more who performs well in the four? Not one combination of any of our midfield would leave me confident going into a game with a flat four across the middle.
 
sports rehab said:
based on today Birmingham played the same system and dominated us..... but its players not formation that is the issue.

For me had we SWAPPED Maghoma for Robbo; David Davis for DJ and Sam Gallagher for Hugil we would have won regardless of formation......


Other swaps were possible too, i've just chosen 3 of our worst performers !
Click to expand...

And yet the Birmingham players you mention have been part of a side who are second from bottom and have scored 16 goals in 28 games!
 
Norseman said:
At the moment the question is more who performs well in the four? Not one combination of any of our midfield would leave me confident going into a game with a flat four across the middle.
Click to expand...

fair enough but we can get the back 4 right most of the time and the 2 i.e. Pearson plus one other then its the 3 I think needs addressing. These guys should be pressing high and feeding off knock downs/lay off from Hugill. This is how it supposed to work isn't it? Not enough goal threat from these three in open play for me..
 
The system is still in the early stages.

We've not had a run with full backs who really can bomb on and create overloads and contribute in an attacking sense - something that's important in the 4231.

Players are still taking time to adapt to the system - the wider attacking midfielders in particular seem to be finding it hard to follow AN's instructions - he clearly wants them to move into narrow pockets with the full backs going outside but it's not really happened yet.

The "number 10" role is also a big factor in the system and we've not really had that creative spark all season - Browne isn't an orthodox number 10, and Harrop hasn't had much of a run there yet.


The football has been fairly ordinary and we've scored less than last season. Hopefully when AN gets more of his own players in and the system has time to develop we'll see more goals.
 
The formation works with the right personnel. The biggest problem today was how ineffective Barky and Robinson were. I don't think other than our goal there was a ball put into the box until the 75th minute. No striker in the world is going to do anything without the right service. Barkhuizan has been nowhere near as effective under Neil as he was under Grayson. Maybe he just doesn't suit this style of football. If he is on his game a 3 of him, Harrop and Maguire would be frightening and Hugill or Moult wouldn't be feeding off scraps.

Personally think Barky needs an extended break, he has looked knackered since November. Today also proved we need a like for like back up for Pearson. Without it our attacking players can't focus on what we need them to do.
 
Nishtar36 said:
The system is still in the early stages.

We've not had a run with full backs who really can bomb on and create overloads and contribute in an attacking sense - something that's important in the 4231.

Players are still taking time to adapt to the system - the wider attacking midfielders in particular seem to be finding it hard to follow AN's instructions - he clearly wants them to move into narrow pockets with the full backs going outside but it's not really happened yet.

The "number 10" role is also a big factor in the system and we've not really had that creative spark all season - Browne isn't an orthodox number 10, and Harrop hasn't had much of a run there yet.


The football has been fairly ordinary and we've scored less than last season. Hopefully when AN gets more of his own players in and the system has time to develop we'll see more goals.
Click to expand...

Definitely agree regarding the full backs. That has made a big difference when Cunningham gets forward and crosses into the danger area. Hope you're right regarding the rest 🙂
 
paddysr said:
The formation works with the right personnel. The biggest problem today was how ineffective Barky and Robinson were. I don't think other than our goal there was a ball put into the box until the 75th minute. No striker in the world is going to do anything without the right service. Barkhuizan has been nowhere near as effective under Neil as he was under Grayson. Maybe he just doesn't suit this style of football. If he is on his game a 3 of him, Harrop and Maguire would be frightening and Hugill or Moult wouldn't be feeding off scraps.

Personally think Barky needs an extended break, he has looked knackered since November. Today also proved we need a like for like back up for Pearson. Without it our attacking players can't focus on what we need them to do.
Click to expand...

Yeah its the 3 that are not working out I agree.
 
I genuinely think that a 5-3-2/3-5-2 could be the ideal position for this side with our current squad. Grayson used it in our first season in the championship and it worked well (despite the lack of goals), although his defensive setups made it hard to enjoy the football.

Think about it though, a back 5 of Fisher, Hunts, Clarke, Davies, and Cunningham sounds like an immovable object. Fisher and Cunningham are the type of full back that can bomb forwards and put in decent crosses. We'd keep that midfield 3, and we'd get a proper 2 up front. Hugill and Maguire up there together, with support from the wingbacks and Harrop (who would have freedom to push on thanks to Pearson and Browne), could be a lethal attack.

Probably won't happen but, deployed properly, a wingback formation can be very attacking. Wolves use a similar formation, as do Chelsea. It might not work but I'd like to see Neil experiment with formations one day.
 
Last edited:
Mancunian White said:
I genuinely think that a 5-3-2/3-5-2 could be the ideal position for this side with our current squad. Grayson used it in our first season in the championship and it worked well (despite the lack of goals), although his defensive setups made it hard to enjoy the football.

Think about it though, a back 5 of Fisher, Hunts, Clarke, Davies, and Cunningham sounds like an immovable object. Fisher and Cunningham are the type of full back that can bomb forwards and put in decent crosses. We'd keep that midfield 3, and we'd get a proper 2 up front. Hugill and Maguire up there together, with support from the wingbacks and Harrop (who would have freedom to push on thanks to Pearson and Browne), could be a lethal attack.

Probably won't happen but, deployed properly, a wingback formation can be very attacking. Wolves use a similar formation, as do Chelsea. It might not work but I'd like to see Neil experiment with formations one day.
Click to expand...

It does sound like that would suit our players better doesn't it?
 
I'd agree that Cunningham and Fisher and to an extent Earl would probably thrive as wing backs and with the 3 centre halves we have it would be decent especially given that Clarke and Davies can also play fullback we have the right kind of 3.

Given the lack of quality deliveries we have seen from the wide players in our 3 I wouldn't be opposed to trying this.

It's whether or not we can play it with the high press that Neil seems to like (although we haven't seen much of that at home since the defensive crisis)
 
Back
Top