JFH considering 4-4-2 / 3-5-2 once Conor fully fit

[West London is Rss]

I really don't!

Remember how out of sorts Caulker looked in a back 3 under Harry? Also Bidwell and Perch as offensive wing backs doesn't look right to me. Both are better suited to playing as a standard full back.

Stick to 4 at the back, it's suits our squad better, it suits the league better and the players understand it better!

Yes.. Under Harry!

If anyone could make this work, it would be JFH! Personally I think the only person not suited to this formation out of that team is Perch.

[Ginger Ninja]

Can't see it. He had all last season to experiment with formations and he stuck with what he knows. I'd be a bit disappointed if he started experimenting now when he's had last season to work on things. 4-2-3-1 suits us in so many ways. No harm in having a plan B but 4-2-3-1 definitely suits us.

Technically, he didn't. He had half a season to make do with what he had and what he could throw together in the January window.

[Tarbie]

Yes.. Under Harry!

If anyone could make this work, it would be JFH! Personally I think the only person not suited to this formation out of that team is Perch.

We'll agree to disagree on this one mate.

Either way, I really doubt we'll see 3 at the back under Jimmy. His whole game plan is built around defensive stability. Whilst we might have ran out 3-0 winners at the weekend, look at how we did it. 2 banks of 4, no massive risks in terms of committing players forward, keep it tight at the back and look to score goals from set pieces or on the break. It was also the same last season, although I think we'll look better doing it this season as Jimmy has picked players to suit his style of play.

Point I'm making is the traits the Hasselbaink likes in his side are typically not traits you'd associate with a side playing 3 at the back with attacking wing backs!

[QPR1234]

I like this

I think it lacks creativity, but is a very hard working, physical and high tempo team.

[LoftusRoadLad]

Yes.. Under Harry!

If anyone could make this work, it would be JFH! Personally I think the only person not suited to this formation out of that team is Perch.

Did he not throw on Perch as a winger recently ?

[West London is Rss]

We'll agree to disagree on this one mate.

Either way, I really doubt we'll see 3 at the back under Jimmy. His whole game plan is built around defensive stability. Whilst we might have ran out 3-0 winners at the weekend, look at how we did it. 2 banks of 4, no massive risks in terms of committing players forward, keep it tight at the back and look to score goals from set pieces or on the break. It was also the same last season, although I think we'll look better doing it this season as Jimmy has picked players to suit his style of play.

Point I'm making is the traits the Hasselbaink likes in his side are typically not traits you'd associate with a side playing 3 at the back with attacking wing backs!

I'm just saying I'd like to see it... Who knows if it would have any longevity.

[West London is Rss]

Did he not throw on Perch as a winger recently ?

Nope?

[Stanley]

Did he not throw on Perch as a winger recently ?

Yes, RM against Watford in the 2nd half. Looked we went 3-5-2 at that point.

[West London is Rss]

I stand corrected, I didn't go to the Watford game.

[hal9thou]

Go on Hal mate, you're gonna love hearing this.

Indeed ;) . Of course we need a plan B, and since CW is not a one up merchant it makes sense to think in terms of two up, or possibly even three.

But people have this fixed idea that playing one striker is inherently negative. It shouldn't be, because once you have possession and are going forward the one up top gets support, so 4-2-3-1 becomes 4-2-1-3 or even 4-3-3. That's the idea. Always worth remembering that Spain banged in plenty of goals with no one up front. Which really means that anyone can end up there. In fact I reckon the 'no 9' set up is the closest we've had to total football since you know who.

edit: re 3-5-2 with Ned / SC / Grant we actually have the personnel. But 3-5-2 can also get very negative and you can end up deep when the the ball is lost...... it isn't always case the more the merrier up top.