Welcome to the LTLF Forest Forum.
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 75

Thread: Change of formation for forest?

      
  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    16

    Default Change of formation for forest?

    It is obvious now that steve is playing too defensive with two holding midfielders in greening and boateng as they seem to be doing the same job and I think a lot of people agree with a 4-4-2 formation being put in place. Greening is a better footballer than boateng IMO but if we tighten up our defence then boateng is unncessary

    This would be my squad:

    Camp
    Gunter WES Chambo Left back (not cohen)

    Greening

    Ando Cohen

    Lazy Mcgugan

    Derbyshire Miller or Findley

    I think for the squad we have, the diamond formation would work best as we do not need to play two defensive mids

    What does everyone think?

    Similar Threads:

  2. # ADS
    Circuit advertisement
    Join Date
    Always
    Posts
    Many

  3. #2

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    Here's what I think will work:

    Gunts Chambo Morgan Proper Left Back or Lynch

    Greening


    Ando Cohen

    Majewski


    Findley Miller



    With McGugan being cover for Raddy, Findley and Shire interchangable, Moussi or The Boat for Greening, GazMac for Ando, Reid for Cohen. We're no better off playing two tricky attacking midfielders in the middle than we are two defensive midfielders in the middle.


  4. #3
    nakkernino del clusto
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    6,911

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    bizarrely enough, and looking at fulham forums - greening impressed most when played on the wing!!


  5. #4
    TheDude
    Guest

    Default

    A manager would have to be an idiot to take any notice of what us fans think he should do.


  6. #5
    Not that type of player
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The Mixer
    Posts
    35,263

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    I prefer the 4231 and think we'll struggle if we play 442 as we'll invariably get overrun in midfield (unless it's the diamond formation). I'm quite happy to see a couple from Greening/Cohen and Boateng/Moussi as the DMs. We still need a quality winger to make 4231 work, but now we have Shire and Miller I expect it to be the best choice over the season.

    Stand Firm And Strike Hard

  7. #6
    nakkernino del clusto
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    6,911

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    greening cohen as the 2 centre mids should be enough, ando tracks back - reid and mcgugan together makes it too lazy which we cant afford.


  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    The Sarf
    Posts
    28,097

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sctheve View Post
    It is obvious now that steve is playing too defensive with two holding midfielders in greening and boateng as they seem to be doing the same job and I think a lot of people agree with a 4-4-2 formation being put in place. Greening is a better footballer than boateng IMO but if we tighten up our defence then boateng is unncessary

    This would be my squad:

    Camp
    Gunter WES Chambo Left back (not cohen)

    Greening

    Ando Cohen

    Lazy Mcgugan

    Derbyshire Miller or Findley

    I think for the squad we have, the diamond formation would work best as we do not need to play two defensive mids

    What does everyone think?
    I'm thinking you didn't watch the game yesterday when we were playing a very clear 'diamond' formation.


  9. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    16

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    i was at the game but greening doesn't get forward enough IMO and prefers to stay back and distribute passes while boateng clears up but i think its a waste having both of them on instead of 2 strikers


  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Coventry
    Posts
    4,013

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheDude View Post
    A manager would have to be an idiot to take any notice of what us fans think he should do.
    Any idea why SMC capped Nugent for England, apart from the papers were calling for it?


  11. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    The Sarf
    Posts
    28,097

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sctheve View Post
    i was at the game but greening doesn't get forward enough IMO and prefers to stay back and distribute passes while boateng clears up but i think its a waste having both of them on instead of 2 strikers
    So you're after a change of players rather than a change of Formation?


  12. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    The Sarf
    Posts
    28,097

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jah View Post
    Any idea why SMC capped Nugent for England, apart from the papers were calling for it?
    One Cap, One goal. You can't argue with his strike rate.


  13. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    'ull
    Posts
    11,543

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    With the squad as it currently stands I would like to see:

    Camp

    Gunter Wes Chambers Lynch

    Anderson Majewski Greening Cohen

    Miller Derbyshire

    Bench: Findley, Reid, McGugan, Moussi, Smith.

    This gives us options on the bench to change things around (something we have lacked in the first couple of games). It also gives much needed competition in certain areas with McGugan / Reid / Moussi / Findley all hot on the heels of the starting lads. We obviously lack any real defensive cover in the squad and perhaps the addition of potentially Collins and Carney may solve that.


  14. #13
    Not that type of player
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The Mixer
    Posts
    35,263

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    Quote Originally Posted by Sctheve View Post
    i was at the game but greening doesn't get forward enough IMO and prefers to stay back and distribute passes while boateng clears up but i think its a waste having both of them on instead of 2 strikers
    Greening looked excellent as a deep lying midfielder against Barnsley and Notts.


  15. #14
    TheDude
    Guest

    Default

    No idea, was scoring a lot of goals?

    He was better then Michael Ricketts.


  16. #15
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    16

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    i suppose but something needs to be changed up and get garner out


  17. #16
    Not that type of player
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    The Mixer
    Posts
    35,263

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    Also, Steve had the pitch widened as he wants us to play with wingers.


  18. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    538

    Default

    Google and Reid are strangling easy balls to the front men. 30 yard shots are great when they go in, but they cut the final third. They need to work together and give us shape.
    Earnie scored for Cardiff.


  19. #18
    nakkernino del clusto
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    6,911

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    garner is gash


  20. #19
    Best served cold
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Cliftonia
    Posts
    24,608

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spike View Post
    Google and Reid are strangling easy balls to the front men. 30 yard shots are great when they go in, but they cut the final third. They need to work together and give us shape.
    Earnie scored for Cardiff.
    Fully agree with that!

    "I've been blessed with many things in this life: an arm like a damn rocket, a c**k like a burmese python, and the mind of a f**king scientist" - Kenny Powers

  21. #20
    The Ambassador
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Nottingham, UK.
    Posts
    565

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    Gunter - Morgan - Chambers - Lynch
    Anderson - Greening - Cohen
    Derbyshire - Findley - Miller

    Screw it and go for goals.


  22. #21

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ravi View Post
    Also, Steve had the pitch widened as he wants us to play with wingers.
    More of a case of him getting it 'un-narrowed' from when Davies was here?


  23. #22

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    You can play 4-4-2 in two ways:

    1. so called ortodox – it is midfield with two natural wingers, defensive midfielder and creative playmaker.

    2. modern 4-4-2 – which is football style based on short passes – it is more as 4-2-2-2. Of course, you should have for this system really good players. First two CD must be able pass the ball (are they Chambers and Morgan…?). Then two so-called holding midfielders but again, they must be very creative (Greening is very good for this role, maybe Cohen or even Reid with him) and pass the balls to next two midfiled players operating under two strikers. These midfielders are the most creative players in the team (Majewski and McGugan), they arrange final passes for strikers. Up front it could be 1-1 and they could play behind (very good combination is Derbyshire-Miller). But one of the most important positions are RB and LB. Their task is work on the whole line and many times could send final crosses (as sent in the past from right and left wing – these formerly very important positons are somewhat antiquated in modern football). Gunter is OK, but… again, we need proper left back.


  24. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    918

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    -------------------------Camp----------------------------

    ----Gunter-------Morgan-------Chambers------New LB----

    ----McGugan-------------Cohen---------------Greening---

    ------------------------Majewski------------------------

    ----------------Derbyshire-------Miller-------------------


  25. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    479

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    My guess is that McClueless is about as savvy on formations and tactics as most of us forumites are after half a dozen pints. Hope I'm wrong, but yesterday's evidence is pretty damning.


  26. #25

    Default Re: Change of formation for forest?

    Majewski should be definitely in starting 11.


 

 

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •