Gemmel Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 4 - 4 - 2 Crazy i know, but it might just work
Thedelldays Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 to complement out revolutionary coaching set up??
harvey Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 4 - 4 - 2 Crazy i know, but it might just work But you 'like' Jan, so surely you like the direction that he's going ?
Gemmel Posted 8 November, 2008 Author Posted 8 November, 2008 But you 'like' Jan, so surely you like the direction that he's going ? Actually i do like the guy in the way he comes across, although if you could show me a post where im happy with the direction we are going..... i'd be very interested. I'm certainly not happy with the formation and whilst the idea of changing managers again just leaves me numb - as it did when we got rid of Pearson, that doesnt mean he is not above criticism, on one of the most fundemental flaws in this whole set up. May be you have confused me with someone else.
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 4-3-3 could be an effective system to employ - if you have the right players . Clearly we don't have the necessary top players needed to utilise this formation so persisting with it in the face of repeated failures (at SMS anyway) is an act of total folly . IMO Jan Poortvliet has to change the system - or we change him for another manager with a surer grip on the realities of British football .
Saints67 Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 Didn't people scream out for a change from 4-4-2 last season? Hey ho Saints change formation and it's back to the old ways. I work with Preston fans and you should have heard them moan about the fact that their 4-4-2 couldn't cope with our 4-3-3 formation last week. Some times it works and sometimes it doesn't.
Gemmel Posted 8 November, 2008 Author Posted 8 November, 2008 Didn't people scream out for a change from 4-4-2 last season? Hey ho Saints change formation and it's back to the old ways. I work with Preston fans and you should have heard them moan about the fact that their 4-4-2 couldn't cope with our 4-3-3 formation last week. Some times it works and sometimes it doesn't. Our formation may of ended up 4 3 3 last week, but we have and continue to start with one up front until we are chasing the game and that's the irony for me, when the chips are down we resort to the system we should be employing from the start.
TopGun Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 The problem with 442 is that it is standard fare for CCC teams and they'll still bash us off the park. JP's current tactics are as good for us and maybe better in the longer term this season.
Gemmel Posted 8 November, 2008 Author Posted 8 November, 2008 The problem with 442 is that it is standard fare for CCC teams and they'll still bash us off the park. JP's current tactics are as good for us and maybe better in the longer term this season. What wins football matches? What cant we do ? What is our goal difference?
Saints67 Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 What wins football matches? What cant we do ? What is our goal difference? Can you guarantee that 4-4-2 will bring us wins every game? Will our goal differnce improve or just stay the same? To me I think we should persevere with Jans formation as the more the players get used with the formation the more we'll slice the opposition to pieces in the future
Rasiak-9- Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 Put it this way - can you imagine Barcelona playing 4-3-3 using Henry as their central "target man" striker? McGoldrick may be no Henry but he's not a target man and is clearly built to play in a 4-4-2. All our players are built to play in a 4-4-2. As an English player you ****ing grow up with 4-4-2. We played better today with 4-4-2. I'm well behind Jan and I honestly do like his mentality and how he's built the team but he just needs to bite the ****ing bullet on this one and go 4-4-2
DT Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 the first thing you do is sort the defence. we haven't done this in five years. for lancashire read callum davidson. going down fast.
Saints67 Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 Put it this way - can you imagine Barcelona playing 4-3-3 using Henry as their central "target man" striker? McGoldrick may be no Henry but he's not a target man and is clearly built to play in a 4-4-2. All our players are built to play in a 4-4-2. As an English player you ****ing grow up with 4-4-2. We played better today with 4-4-2. I'm well behind Jan and I honestly do like his mentality and how he's built the team but he just needs to bite the ****ing bullet on this one and go 4-4-2 I thought they played Et'o in that role with Henry and Messi either side. But that would never work, eh?
Saint Billy Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 4 - 4 - 2 Crazy i know, but it might just work Perhaps the loan arranger may help us to have more than one lone striker:p
ottery st mary Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 I thought they played Et'o in that role with Henry and Messi either side. But that would never work, eh? can we loan all three and do they fit the age requirement and will they understand the total football concept..
Iowsaintsfan Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 We just need to be more attackive at home
OldNick Posted 8 November, 2008 Posted 8 November, 2008 It was down to the starting line up not the formation.No way should we have strarted with a kid on each wing, when we had BWP or JE on the bench
Thedelldays Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 what makes it worse...stern would have been great (again) in a 4-4-2...
70's Mike Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Can you guarantee that 4-4-2 will bring us wins every game? Will our goal differnce improve or just stay the same? To me I think we should persevere with Jans formation as the more the players get used with the formation the more we'll slice the opposition to pieces in the future dreamer
John B Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Can you guarantee that 4-4-2 will bring us wins every game? Will our goal differnce improve or just stay the same? To me I think we should persevere with Jans formation as the more the players get used with the formation the more we'll slice the opposition to pieces in the future We have played enough games including Pre-season to show you are a little deluded. Pretty football is not leading to goals and that is what football is all about
Andy_Porter Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 4-5-1 at home is really starting to annoy me, even Lallana is playing really deep. He would still be effective either out right or central midfield in a 4-4-2.
70's Mike Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 We have played enough games including Pre-season to show you are a little deluded. Pretty football is not leading to goals and that is what football is all about i do not always agree with you John but that is a fair summary, in the dreamer/fantasy football world that some of our supporters are living in, the nasty opposition do not tackle or block or try and win they just sit back and let us play.
OldNick Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 i do not always agree with you John but that is a fair summary' date=' in the dreamer/fantasy football world that some of our supporters are living in, the nasty opposition do not tackle or block or try and win they just sit back and let us play.[/quote'] It boils down to how you cope with losing 100k's a week while still trying to put out a team. We are using an asset that is paid for by using the academy.Trimming the high earners. I still am to be convinced that there was a different way.
Wildgoose Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Put it this way - can you imagine Barcelona playing 4-3-3 using Henry as their central "target man" striker? McGoldrick may be no Henry but he's not a target man and is clearly built to play in a 4-4-2. All our players are built to play in a 4-4-2. As an English player you ****ing grow up with 4-4-2. We played better today with 4-4-2. I'm well behind Jan and I honestly do like his mentality and how he's built the team but he just needs to bite the ****ing bullet on this one and go 4-4-2 Let me get this straight, are you suggesting we should go 4-4-2 then???? ;-)
Wildgoose Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 It was down to the starting line up not the formation.No way should we have strarted with a kid on each wing, when we had BWP or JE on the bench Exactly. I just can't understand why JP is not playing with the experience we need Wotton at CB would have likely neutralized Adebola too. :-/
chivvy1664 Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 I dont mind 433 but the front three are spread across the pitch. We play with 2wingers and a central striker rather than three strikers. Holmes is a winger. BWP is a striker. Lallana is not breaking beyond the back line enough to score goals and provide support.
70's Mike Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 It boils down to how you cope with losing 100k's a week while still trying to put out a team. We are using an asset that is paid for by using the academy.Trimming the high earners. I still am to be convinced that there was a different way. Nick i am not saying there was another way , we are where we are BUT there is a different way to use what we have got. IMO we are playing the wrong system, we are not playing the best players available now, we are to cautious at home
Rasiak-9- Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Let me get this straight, are you suggesting we should go 4-4-2 then???? ;-) 4-4-2 where'd you 4-4-2 get that idea? ...4-4-2
mack rill Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 I would of thought it was blatantly obvious why Jan is putting out the 4-5-1 formation.............Lord Lowe has flogged or loaned out any player who resembles a half decent striker!....No doubt Jan has a Who pulled the short straw draw before each game, And sticks the loser up front. After watching the game on sky I am of the opinion that Lowe can afford to loose his money tide up in SFC and the spiteful **** wants revenge for being kicked out.
Wildgoose Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 4-4-2 where'd you 4-4-2 get that idea? ...4-4-2 :-)
Saint_Jonny Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 We're ganna get mullerd by Wolves and Reading if we don't sort something out. Just watched Reading on the tv now, looked great against a (better than us) Derby Side, we're screwed.
Wilko Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 I couldn't even work out what the formation was supposed to be yesterday. It would be best described as a mess. Nobody looked comfortable and the chipped passes over the top were completely pointless.
Give it to Ron Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 It boils down to how you cope with losing 100k's a week while still trying to put out a team. We are using an asset that is paid for by using the academy.Trimming the high earners. I still am to be convinced that there was a different way. Well we could of saved some of those 100k's a week by not wasting it on loanees that are not good enough to get on the pitch ahead of an untried 17 year old with one half a game under his belt. I rate Oscar but he needs nurturing not thrown in a game we desperately needed to win when we had other options. Why sign Smith, Forecast, Robertson plus the complete waste of time Gasmi and Pulis. Gasmi won't be ready for ages and looking at the size of him will get launched into row ZZ in the first game he gets near a hairy arse CC defender. I cannot believe that the sum total of these 5 are less than what we would pay Stern.....including the agents fees, clubs loan fees etc. We loan out our 2 top strikers and are still losing 100ks a week? If we had kept them and actually won a few more games then more people would actually come and watch.....a revolutionary idea I know to put out a side with your best players.
rocknrollman no2 Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Well we could of saved some of those 100k's a week by not wasting it on loanees that are not good enough to get on the pitch ahead of an untried 17 year old with one half a game under his belt. I rate Oscar but he needs nurturing not thrown in a game we desperately needed to win when we had other options. Why sign Smith, Forecast, Robertson plus the complete waste of time Gasmi and Pulis. Gasmi won't be ready for ages and looking at the size of him will get launched into row ZZ in the first game he gets near a hairy arse CC defender. I cannot believe that the sum total of these 5 are less than what we would pay Stern.....including the agents fees, clubs loan fees etc. We loan out our 2 top strikers and are still losing 100ks a week? If we had kept them and actually won a few more games then more people would actually come and watch.....a revolutionary idea I know to put out a side with your best players. Absolutley spot on post. Lots of money seems to have been wasted on players we have not even used yet,or on players that are not so good as the ones already here,but all we hear from Lowe is how much we need to save money. Someones not telling the full truth. I wonder who that could be?
dubai_phil Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 It was down to the starting line up not the formation.No way should we have strarted with a kid on each wing, when we had BWP or JE on the bench The kids then went awol leaving both Cork & Skacel exposed. At NO time was there any semblance of a Marsden/bridge overlap with the two players working together. I know our FB's get a lot of stick at the moment, but again yesterday there were far too many occassions that there was simply no Red shirt between them and the opposition corner flag. That is just plain wrong, leaves them with 20 acres to mark and up to 3 players at a time converging on them. The problem also is that on TV Skacel looked more like MLT than I have ever seen him before. Unfortunately only in the way he seemed to fill his shirt compared to the kids, so I am not sure he'd actually have the pace and energy now to work as a left winger even IF he was picked there. Surman in the hole, Lallana on one wing and Euell in the centre MAY be an idea but again, Euell looked so far off the pace when he came on....
Mole Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 It won't matter what formation we play as our players are way of of their depth at Champsionship level.
saint_stevo Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 It won't matter what formation we play as our players are way of of their depth at Champsionship level. Fool
Mole Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Fool I think you'll find i predicted we'd be sh1te this season before a ball was kicked whilst you were sitting in the happy clappy tree.
rocknrollman no2 Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Fool Why do you say that? Did you see the game on Saturday,or most of our other games this season? We have a team full of kids who cant defend or score.
krissyboy31 Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Fool In what way is he a fool? It is blatantly obvious that several are out of their depth. Some because they are not yet ready, others because they are just not good enough.
Give it to Ron Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 It won't matter what formation we play as our players are way of of their depth at Champsionship level. I disagree and that is why I get so angry at games, I no longer enjoy them but just get angry and frustrated at the total incompetence I watch from this management. We have or had the players available to do a job yesterday but totally wasted 55 minutes of a game we needed to win sticking with a formation that has seen 1 home win out of 8 games.
saint_stevo Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Why do you say that? Did you see the game on Saturday,or most of our other games this season? We have a team full of kids who cant defend or score. In what way is he a fool? It is blatantly obvious that several are out of their depth. Some because they are not yet ready, others because they are just not good enough. They are not 'not good enough for the championship' Show me a player on Saturday who is not good enough for this league? Maybe only the young wingers who do not usually play would fall within this bracket but Stanleys alarmist posting and seeming happiness at our struggles really pi**es me off
Mole Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 They are not 'not good enough for the championship' Show me a player on Saturday who is not good enough for this league? Maybe only the young wingers who do not usually play would fall within this bracket but Stanleys alarmist posting and seeming happiness at our struggles really pi**es me off I apologise if i come accross as being happy that Lowe's experiment is panning out how i thought it would. That said short term failure is what we need to bring about regime change so every cloud has a silver lining.
OldNick Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Well we could of saved some of those 100k's a week by not wasting it on loanees that are not good enough to get on the pitch ahead of an untried 17 year old with one half a game under his belt. I rate Oscar but he needs nurturing not thrown in a game we desperately needed to win when we had other options. Why sign Smith, Forecast, Robertson plus the complete waste of time Gasmi and Pulis. Gasmi won't be ready for ages and looking at the size of him will get launched into row ZZ in the first game he gets near a hairy arse CC defender. I cannot believe that the sum total of these 5 are less than what we would pay Stern.....including the agents fees, clubs loan fees etc. We loan out our 2 top strikers and are still losing 100ks a week? If we had kept them and actually won a few more games then more people would actually come and watch.....a revolutionary idea I know to put out a side with your best players. Ron do you realy think the club want to play with only the kids, because I dont. As for SJ last season we had loads of threads telling us he was lazy and a waste of space.Rasiak and saga also. Pulis has not signed yet as far as Im aware. The other players loans would nt be paid a fraction of Johns wage. It seems we cannot borrow anymore money and so we couldnt hav the luxury of the star players wages. Only a few know the real story and i am not one of them and can judge from afar, and give my opinion
Give it to Ron Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 Ron do you realy think the club want to play with only the kids, because I dont. As for SJ last season we had loads of threads telling us he was lazy and a waste of space.Rasiak and saga also. Pulis has not signed yet as far as Im aware. The other players loans would nt be paid a fraction of Johns wage. It seems we cannot borrow anymore money and so we couldnt hav the luxury of the star players wages. Only a few know the real story and i am not one of them and can judge from afar, and give my opinion But last night they chose to...BWP and Euell may not be everyones cup of tea but they are far more experienced and available instead of throwing kids in every week. Lazy and waste of space strikers who score over 20 goals a season are better than ones that constantly miss the target from 10 yards like ours do. That lazy waste of space striker who scored 2 goals to keep us up in the last game! Wages are not the only factor in those loans Nick what about the clubs loan fees and the agents who all demand a cut? Sorry didn't mean it to get personal its just I am so bloody angry after last night and I know you just want to see the best in the club but its hell at the moment and its not working and I take no pleasure in this. My lad is Saints through and through and even got on the pitch the other week at half time taking penalties....he talked me into renewing our ST's...now he has had enough and doesn't want to go anymore as its so bloody awful watching us lose. 20 games 5 wins 5 draws and 10 defeats at home says it all
OldNick Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 But last night they chose to...BWP and Euell may not be everyones cup of tea but they are far more experienced and available instead of throwing kids in every week. Lazy and waste of space strikers who score over 20 goals a season are better than ones that constantly miss the target from 10 yards like ours do. That lazy waste of space striker who scored 2 goals to keep us up in the last game! Wages are not the only factor in those loans Nick what about the clubs loan fees and the agents who all demand a cut? Sorry didn't mean it to get personal its just I am so bloody angry after last night and I know you just want to see the best in the club but its hell at the moment and its not working and I take no pleasure in this. My lad is Saints through and through and even got on the pitch the other week at half time taking penalties....he talked me into renewing our ST's...now he has had enough and doesn't want to go anymore as its so bloody awful watching us lose. 20 games 5 wins 5 draws and 10 defeats at home says it allRon I agree I couldnt believe those 2 were left on the bench and Thompson and gobern chisen, and when the sub was made he took off wotton. I may add it was not me who called him lazy but pointing out that many fans were against a star palyer.
NickG Posted 9 November, 2008 Posted 9 November, 2008 when we used to be good and loan out players to likes of Bournemouth -I believe we used to keep paying at least some of their wages. It may well be the case for Cork and Pekhart -subsidised wages and no fee (only guessing as they are developmental loans supposed to benefit the owning club) likes of Rasiak, John and Saga are not for development for our benefit and guess we may receive a fee as well as save wages. Don't know this is current situation but would fit with our circs
SaintRichmond Posted 10 November, 2008 Posted 10 November, 2008 De boysh will do a stuffing on someone soon. Hope not .......... could end up in Court doing that sort of thing .....
Big Matt Posted 10 November, 2008 Posted 10 November, 2008 Playing one up front is never going to produce more than a goal or so per game, so far, we're averaging 0.62 goals per game at home, and Birmingham are the only so called top team that we've played so far.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now