Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

442 or 4231?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by nasser95 View Post
    Absolute bs right there. Explain why 4 of the bottom 5 teams last season used a 442? If they set up to win, how bad must the formation be for that purpose that they lost so much.
    maybe because their players were just not good enough whatever system they played. Its not all about formations and stats for fu ck sake.

    Comment


    • #17
      And Leicester? Please explain?? Nas you really need to stop trying to lord it over people and allow them an opinion. You do research for games or whatever it is and no problem with that. The only problem mate is the games you research have no baring on the shite we are being served up.

      Comment


      • #18
        I think it all counts with getting players in and around the box and attacking the goal rather than passing side to side. We need more movement with crossovers and one two's. This all starts on the training pitch and could also be to do with JFH not allowing the players to start expressing themselves. Burton's side were very much the same style in that they didn't always score much but were solid. I remember reading their message boards with their fans saying although they were doing well and winning games it was far from entertaining. Playing with two defensive mids who don't offer enough going forward or a goal threat themselves and don't really create that much has a lot to do with it. We can't expect Chery to create it all. So much in the modern game about 4231 but for over a hundred years teams have played 442 and were very successful in doing it.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by nasser95 View Post
          Absolute bs right there. Explain why 4 of the bottom 5 teams last season used a 442? If they set up to win, how bad must the formation be for that purpose that they lost so much.
          You need to be more consistent in your arguments Nas. Earlier in the thread you excused bottom half teams for having lesser quality squads now it's purely down to formation? Maybe another thing to consider is CAMs are probably quite expensive to buy at this level and aren't as common as strikers in the fact that striker is a traditional position in this country whereas CAMs are more of a modern nuance. Every squad in the country has strikers but not always CAMs. Taking this into consideration, maybe the bottom half teams who usually have smaller budgets can't afford championship quality CAMs and are forced to play 442?
          Last edited by Hove Ranger; 13-09-2016, 09:00 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Hove Ranger View Post
            You need to be more consistent in your arguments Nas. Earlier in the thread you excused bottom half teams for having lesser quality squads now it's purely down to formation? Maybe another thing to consider is CAMs are probably quite expensive to buy at this level and aren't as common as strikers in the fact that striker is a traditional position in this country whereas CAMs are more of a modern nuance. Every squad in the country has strikers but not always CAMs. Taking this into consideration, maybe the bottom half teams who usually have smaller budgets can't afford championship quality CAMs and are forced to play 442?
            why not try 5 3 2

            Comment

            Working...
            X