Stop the 4-2-2-2 and go with a three man midfield, PLEASE!!!

[Deleted member 58678]

Re: Stop the 4-2-2-2 and go with a three man midfield, PLEAS

We conceded 2 against 10 men team with 3 men midfield...so dont think 4-4-2 was the problem of our poor form.

It was one of the problems. Plus the goals came from a free kick and a cross from the right, neither came from midfield. We restricted Bayern to very few shots because we defended deeper than we normally do, we restricted passing space centrally in front of our box and we defended as a unit for once.

 

[MCFC1993]

Re: Stop the 4-2-2-2 and go with a three man midfield, PLEAS

Has to be the same set up for Southampton away, Manual needs to respect opponents a little bit more. Defend deeper, stay tight, get the first goal, make them come at us and then pick them off. The way to do it in the tough games is to pack the midfield.

 

[hgblue]

Re: Stop the 4-2-2-2 and go with a three man midfield, PLEAS

Has to be the same set up for Southampton away, Manual needs to respect opponents a little bit more. Defend deeper, stay tight, get the first goal, make them come at us and then pick them off. The way to do it in the tough games is to pack the midfield.

Totally agree. My one gripe with Pellegrini. Was he forced to be more pragmatic against Bayern because of lack of options, or do I detect the distant sound of a penny dropping?

 

[Neville Kneville]

Re: Stop the 4-2-2-2 and go with a three man midfield, PLEAS

Did I miss something, or was it not the case v Bayern, that we got completely outpassed by ten men & conceded two goals with5 in our midfield, then brought on Jovetic, to play next to Aguero, & he pretty much set up two goalscoring chances, & we won 3-2 ?

Is any of that statement actually wrong, in how the game panned out, if so which bit ?

Therefore, why is the Bayern game being used as an example of something we aspire to do ?

I'm not against us playing 5 in midfield by the way, I'm just anti bollocks.

 

[Rösler von Stretfordbömber]

Re: Stop the 4-2-2-2 and go with a three man midfield, PLEAS

Did I miss something, or was it not the case v Bayern, that we got completely outpassed by ten men & conceded two goals with5 in our midfield, then brought on Jovetic, to play next to Aguero, & he pretty much set up two goalscoring chances, & we won 3-2 ?

Is any of that statement actually wrong, in how the game panned out, if so which bit ?

Therefore, why is the Bayern game being used as an example of something we aspire to do ?

I'm not against us playing 5 in midfield by the way, I'm just anti bollocks.

And also, my recollection of the match was that we really were not much of a threat prior to Jovetic coming on.

I am also not against 5 in the midfield per se - I am against bollocks and lazy arguments. It seems as if a lot of fans just impute some sort of 1:1 causal relationship between formation and result. So by that measure, Bayern away with 1 starting up top means we should never play that way I suppose.

I will maintain that Pellers has indeed been far more flexible as far as tactics and formations than he is given credit for (again the lazy arguments.) Played 10 domestic matches last year with one up top (Dzeko) for example. Certainly injuries factored, but at no point was Dzeko the only healthy striker amongst the four. Or maybe one time, come to think, as I seem to remember Guidetti making the bench in one match.

Also tended to lock down matches during the run-in with Garcia and Milner whereas earlier in the year he'd try to win 4-0 every time. Increasingly added Garcia to the mix down the stretch to great effect even as a starter as well.

As for the CL - if you look at the past two years Pellers has changed things about quite a bit. At least on par with Mancini, who played one up top at Real away but generally two during the '12 disaster. Pellers has now played one up top in two of the matches (both Bayern.) Roma AT HOME or either CSKA - one up top would seem to me to be a bad use of our personnel as the opposition in each case should have been clubs that we could handle without the extra midfielder.

It is like everything in life, I think. Most answers are somewhere in the middle. I'd hate to see a guy play exactly the same way no matter what. But at the same time being a hyper-tinkerer/micromanager can make it difficult for the players to develop proper chemistry with one another. Look at the back four this year and how disorganised it tends to be with what seems to be a little too much rotation, for example.

 

[bluechampion7891]

Re: Stop the 4-2-2-2 and go with a three man midfield, PLEAS

Did I miss something, or was it not the case v Bayern, that we got completely outpassed by ten men & conceded two goals with5 in our midfield, then brought on Jovetic, to play next to Aguero, & he pretty much set up two goalscoring chances, & we won 3-2 ?

Is any of that statement actually wrong, in how the game panned out, if so which bit ?

Therefore, why is the Bayern game being used as an example of something we aspire to do ?

I'm not against us playing 5 in midfield by the way, I'm just anti bollocks.

we conceded silly goals that had nothing to do with formation.

we were not countered, neither was our midfield by-passed.

bayern will outpass any team, even Barca

 

[NipHolmes]

Re: Stop the 4-2-2-2 and go with a three man midfield, PLEAS

Did I miss something, or was it not the case v Bayern, that we got completely outpassed by ten men & conceded two goals with5 in our midfield, then brought on Jovetic, to play next to Aguero, & he pretty much set up two goalscoring chances, & we won 3-2 ?

Is any of that statement actually wrong, in how the game panned out, if so which bit ?

Therefore, why is the Bayern game being used as an example of something we aspire to do ?

I'm not against us playing 5 in midfield by the way, I'm just anti bollocks.

One was a set piece, little relevance to the midfield and more so Harts clusterfuck of an organisation.
Other was down to poor defensive errors and a rub of the green for Lewandowski.

We were the inferior side, we were an understength team just like Bayern were as often stated. Silva would've been a key addition to us grasping a larger stake of control.

 

[jimmygrimblesboots]

Re: Stop the 4-2-2-2 and go with a three man midfield, PLEAS

This management lark must be quite simple , you pick the players who are in form and try to adapt tactics to suit . We have 2 left backs in clichy and kolarov who we cant trust , although good players on their day ,they have too many off days. But we do have 3 good in form centre backs ,(mangala is a qaulity player . dont let the media fool you) so why dont we try 3-5-2 , with zabs and milner utilised as wing backs .

HART
DEMICHELIS KOMPANY MANGALA
ZABS FERNANDINO/FERNANDO TOURE SILVA/NASRI MILNER
JOVETIC AGUERO

We get a solid back three with pace and experience , two hard working wing backs , a creative midfield with a defensive anchor , and two strikers who can beat players and create havoc. If i had an xbox i would give this a go , and probably get thrashed :)

 

[Neville Kneville]

Re: Stop the 4-2-2-2 and go with a three man midfield, PLEAS

Did I miss something, or was it not the case v Bayern, that we got completely outpassed by ten men & conceded two goals with5 in our midfield, then brought on Jovetic, to play next to Aguero, & he pretty much set up two goalscoring chances, & we won 3-2 ?

Is any of that statement actually wrong, in how the game panned out, if so which bit ?

Therefore, why is the Bayern game being used as an example of something we aspire to do ?

I'm not against us playing 5 in midfield by the way, I'm just anti bollocks.

One was a set piece, little relevance to the midfield and more so Harts clusterfuck of an organisation.
Other was down to poor defensive errors and a rub of the green for Lewandowski.

We were the inferior side, we were an understength team just like Bayern were as often stated. Silva would've been a key addition to us grasping a larger stake of control.

The set piece came because Bayern ran straight through the middle of our midfield. It was coming for some minutes previously.

I don't understand how anyone can talk tactics then see that & not be aware of it. It just seems to me as some people have argued for this formation, & then are determined to see themselves proved right, even though the actual way the game panned out, suggests the complete opposite.

We scored a goal, bypassing the midfield with a long ball & winning a pen.

From then on, we failed completely to pass the ball. Bayern succeeded even with ten men. They scored twice.

We changed formation & rather than being free to pass in their own half & smoke cigars, they were suddenly under pressure & completely fucked up with Aguero, Jovetic & Lampard pressing their back line.

So, from causing them no problems for a good hour or so, we suddenly caused them problems, directly involving the TWO strikers, & we won.

By the logic of some people on this thread, if I played a tennis game using a cricket bat & found myself losing vs an opponent with a broken foot, then I changed & started using a tennis raquet instead & therefore won, I would learn from the experience, that I should start the next match, using a cricket bat.

Some of you lot should apply for Brendan Rodgers job when he's sacked. It's the same barefaced bollocks as he comes out with.