Two Strikers - must or myth?

[Dusic]

So, the vocal section of the fanbase who have been calling for two strikers got their wish yesterday and for the first 45 minutes we played as poorly as we have all season, barely creating a single chance. To add to that, we were absolutely bossed in central midfield where Hojbjerg and Lemina were overrun and often left looking for a pass with nobody anywhere near them.

 

Do similar against the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, City (and probably others in the PL) and we would have been hammered, especially as our two centre backs look like they need all the protection they can get.

 

Second half we were much better, but none of our chances really occured because we had two strikers on the pitch.

 

Will be interesting to see how Hughes goes in the PL, especially with so many away games but IMO with two strikers plus two wide players who don't track back very well we could be left very exposed against better players.

 

Afterall, the only teams in the PL who play with two are either a.) the extremely direct teams who don't care about having 30% possession (see Burnley) or the very good teams who dominate anyway (Spurs, sometimes City).

 

Certainly for me its a myth that this is the only way to be able to improve our attack. We definitely missed the extra midfielder yesterday for large parts.

[Saint Garrett]

Completely agree, 1 up front can be more attacking than 2 up front if you get players playing in the right spaces - look at how we played under Pochettino. Just helped we had Lambert, Lallana and J Rod all on fire and they linked brilliantly.

 

We were incredibly poor in that first half, second much better. I think I'd prefer Boufal to be given a free role behind Gabbi, with Redmond & Tadic/JWP either side.

[John B]

Completely agree, 1 up front can be more attacking than 2 up front if you get players playing in the right spaces - look at how we played under Pochettino. Just helped we had Lambert, Lallana and J Rod all on fire and they linked brilliantly.

 

We were incredibly poor in that first half, second much better. I think I'd prefer Boufal to be given a free role behind Gabbi, with Redmond & Tadic/JWP either side.

 

Yes I agree too

 

In the first half there just seemed to be more Wigan players wherever the ball was

[shurlock]

Myth.

 

With our two raw CBs and a lightweight Hoj/immobile Romeu in midfield, it's not going to work against better sides. It's made more difficult by the lack of a centre forward who can consistently win and hold up the ball and link with the second striker.

 

Hope our 4-4-2 fanboys are big enough to admit it's a nonstarter in the league, notwithstanding the inevitable plea by some of wait till Austin gets back.

Edited 19 March, 2018 by shurlock

[fanimal]

The system depends on how mobile and intelligent your two strikers are, and the ability to hold the ball up - we were blessed with SRL and Pelle, with the two scousers buzzing around them respectively.

Toshack and keegan? And then you need four very busy midfielders; we only had two yesterday in Lemina and PEH. As has been said Tadic and Boufal together do not work full stop, and I think Hughes saw that yesterday.

So 2 up front does work dare I say Redmond and JWP away from home, Tadic is a warm weather flat track bully best on the left.

[VectisSaint]

So, the vocal section of the fanbase who have been calling for two strikers got their wish yesterday and for the first 45 minutes we played as poorly as we have all season, barely creating a single chance. To add to that, we were absolutely bossed in central midfield where Hojbjerg and Lemina were overrun and often left looking for a pass with nobody anywhere near them.

Number of strikers is not the issue, it is our ineffective attacking midfielders. Boufal and Tadic create little or nothing and are hardly involved in the game, PEH is quite poor (he was yesterday, notwithstanding his goal and earlier attempt that should have been buried). We do not have effective midfield players to make the chances for strikers whether they be lone strikers or part of a two. Yesterday we had no threat from our LB either, at least in the first half. I am no fan of Redmond but at least when he came on yesterday he did make a difference.

[Crab Lungs]

Same myth as

 

“We’ll start scoring if we buy another striker”

 

It’s rubbish. It’s how the team sets up and plays under the guidance of the manager which determines how free flowing the goals are mostly. Obviously, quality of player also plays a part but just playing two strikers without a decent supply line or tactical set up offensively won’t guarantee anything other than stagnant sideways stuff and being light in midfield.

[Useful Idiot]

I'd say that we don't really have the personnel to play a traditional 4-4-2 with wingers. I think we were actually trying to play more of an Athletico 4-2-2-2 yesterday, with two 'free' attacking midfielders in Tadic and Boufal. Both of them had the freedom to drift in off of their wing and only really stayed wide when defending. It didn't work first half, but formations take a while to get used to, especially when you've not played in them before.

 

I think that the only real way we could play a 4-Diamond-2 is if we have Redmond/Sims and Gabbiadini playing as the strikers. I don't think this system suits our other forwards though, as you need technical strikers who can also fill in out wide for it to work. That said, Carrillo might have the energy for it and could possibly function as a wide target man as an out ball if he pulls onto a fullback.

 

We could possibly play a 3-5-2/5-3-2 with the personnel we have. Probably a midfield 3 out of Rom/Hoj/Lem/(maybe JWP?) against better teams, and drop one of them for Tadic/Boufal against teams around our level. Back 3 could be Bertrand/Hoedt/Stephens or Yoshida in for Bertrand and him going to left wing back.

 

Something like:

 

-----------------McCarthy-----------------

-------Stephens---Hoedt---Bertrand-------

Cedric------------Romeu----------McQueen

--------Hojbjerg----------Lemina-----------

-------------------------------------------

--------Gabbiadini---------Long------------

 

Could conceivably work against a good side where we're going to be without the ball for long periods of time.

 

If we do go for 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-2-1 then Tadic should always play wide left. He links well with Bertrand and gets in lots of good crosses. Wide right, any of Redmond/Sims/JWP depending upon who we're playing. JWP if we're likely to have a lot of the ball, one of the others if not. Boufal should only play as a central attacking midfielder. He's not all that good wide left.

 

Saying that, it seems that Tadic will always play centrally or wide right for some reason, and the rest of the team will fit in around that. Still not sure why, he's not been great in either position for us.

[benjii]

So, the vocal section of the fanbase who have been calling for two strikers got their wish yesterday and for the first 45 minutes we played as poorly as we have all season, barely creating a single chance. To add to that, we were absolutely bossed in central midfield where Hojbjerg and Lemina were overrun and often left looking for a pass with nobody anywhere near them.

 

Do similar against the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, City (and probably others in the PL) and we would have been hammered, especially as our two centre backs look like they need all the protection they can get.

 

Second half we were much better, but none of our chances really occured because we had two strikers on the pitch.

 

Will be interesting to see how Hughes goes in the PL, especially with so many away games but IMO with two strikers plus two wide players who don't track back very well we could be left very exposed against better players.

 

Afterall, the only teams in the PL who play with two are either a.) the extremely direct teams who don't care about having 30% possession (see Burnley) or the very good teams who dominate anyway (Spurs, sometimes City).

 

Certainly for me its a myth that this is the only way to be able to improve our attack. We definitely missed the extra midfielder yesterday for large parts.

 

Agreed.

[sydenhamssocks]

Absolutely agree with all of the above

At our poorest moments during yesterday's first half it made me wonder if this group of players just 'are what they are'. A mixed bag of good individuals who don't really compliment each other that well. Despite what the black box nonsense would have us believe. We have more examples of a pair of players who don't work well together (Tadic Boufal. Various CB pairings. Davis JWP ? Gabby Carrillo? etc) than we do of a duo who we can't do without. A squad like that need more direction to find the route home. Our top priced purchases have only really glowed briefly and of course the Pellegrino factor can't be ignored. Yesterday's win was obviously vital for everyone's spirit and Mark Hughes will have a better idea of what's ahead after watching the first 45 minutes.

[SuperSAINT]

So, the vocal section of the fanbase who have been calling for two strikers got their wish yesterday and for the first 45 minutes we played as poorly as we have all season, barely creating a single chance. To add to that, we were absolutely bossed in central midfield where Hojbjerg and Lemina were overrun and often left looking for a pass with nobody anywhere near them.

 

Do similar against the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, City (and probably others in the PL) and we would have been hammered, especially as our two centre backs look like they need all the protection they can get.

 

Second half we were much better, but none of our chances really occured because we had two strikers on the pitch.

 

Will be interesting to see how Hughes goes in the PL, especially with so many away games but IMO with two strikers plus two wide players who don't track back very well we could be left very exposed against better players.

 

Afterall, the only teams in the PL who play with two are either a.) the extremely direct teams who don't care about having 30% possession (see Burnley) or the very good teams who dominate anyway (Spurs, sometimes City).

 

Certainly for me its a myth that this is the only way to be able to improve our attack. We definitely missed the extra midfielder yesterday for large parts.

 

Yeah, I think before the game yesterday I said that we would have to go on the front foot with 2 up top as I worried that Wigan (with the extra midfield man) would dictate tempo.

 

4-2-3-1 is my preferred formation, but when played correctly with people actually supporting the front man.

[S-Clarke]

It's just about getting up high, playing in the opposition half and offering support to whoever is playing, this two-up front, 1 up front stuff is all a myth. If you look at formations as being set in stone, then we played 1 up front for years with Lambert, Pelle etc.

 

The fact is we got the likes of Rodriguez, Lallana, Puncheon, Ox, Tadic, Mane close to them and had the midfield to support it.

 

Whatever happens in the remaining 9 (or 10) games doesn't hide away from the fact that we need to re-address the spine of this team in the summer. We need a dominant and physical centre back, a dominant and powerful CM (which will allow this area of the team to push up without being too exposed) and proper pace and unpredictability in the final third.

[Shance]

Would help if managers stopped the obsession of playing the wingers inverted. Tadic and Redmond have proven multiple times that they are incapable of doing that. Hope Hughes learns that lesson quickly.

[tajjuk]

Austin has been more than fine up front on his own even with Pellegrino's negative tactics.

 

If we can get him fit then I see no need to play 2 up top, it's more about being more positive/slightly more direct, and having a higher tempo about our game and then we'll create enough chances to win games without being open up at the back.

 

IMO Along with Vardy he is the best striker in the league outside the top 6.

[lkirkpa]

Would help if managers stopped the obsession of playing the wingers inverted. Tadic and Redmond have proven multiple times that they are incapable of doing that. Hope Hughes learns that lesson quickly.

 

Interesting analysis from the Telegraph : https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/03/19/mark-hughes-southampton-debut-attacking-sign-things-come/

[Whitey Grandad]

At least playing with two up front means that we have twice as many players in the opposition half as under MoPe.

[shurlock]

At least playing with two up front means that we have twice as many players in the opposition half as under MoPe.

 

And one less screening the chuckle brothers in central defense.

[alpine_saint]

So, the vocal section of the fanbase who have been calling for two strikers got their wish yesterday and for the first 45 minutes we played as poorly as we have all season, barely creating a single chance. To add to that, we were absolutely bossed in central midfield where Hojbjerg and Lemina were overrun and often left looking for a pass with nobody anywhere near them.

 

Do similar against the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, City (and probably others in the PL) and we would have been hammered, especially as our two centre backs look like they need all the protection they can get.

 

Second half we were much better, but none of our chances really occured because we had two strikers on the pitch.

 

Will be interesting to see how Hughes goes in the PL, especially with so many away games but IMO with two strikers plus two wide players who don't track back very well we could be left very exposed against better players.

 

Afterall, the only teams in the PL who play with two are either a.) the extremely direct teams who don't care about having 30% possession (see Burnley) or the very good teams who dominate anyway (Spurs, sometimes City).

 

Certainly for me its a myth that this is the only way to be able to improve our attack. We definitely missed the extra midfielder yesterday for large parts.

 

OK, so what do you think the difference was between the second half and the rest of the season ?

 

If you say "man-management" or "game-management" then it was still worth changing the manager, and would have been better earlier. And thats enough for me.

 

I'm going to trust Sparky to play 1, 2 or 13 players up front, as and when he deems necessary..

[Whitey Grandad]

And one less screening the chuckle brothers in central defense.

 

MoPe? Is that you?

[striker]

Both can work, it depends on the players and their strengths. With our midfield, and their lack of scoring/attacking mentality, I prefer a 2 or 3 upfront scenario. This gets two strikers on, lets say Gabbi and Austin, to give us more push. I think our midfield is made up of much more of a defensive, ball control, type player. If we had ore attacking mids, lets say mike Mane again, then 1 up top would work.

[verlaine1979]

For most of the game yesterday the central area between half way and the opposite CBs was completely unoccupied. Boufal and Tadic had both been instructed to play wide, Lemina and Hoj were very deep screening our dodgy CBs, and Carrillo and Gabbiadini were both trying to play on the shoulder. It's absolutely mystifying that we've managed to invest tens of millions in the playing squad over the past three seasons or so, yet appear to have no one we can trust with playing in that position.

[Dusic]

OK, so what do you think the difference was between the second half and the rest of the season ?

 

If you say "man-management" or "game-management" then it was still worth changing the manager, and would have been better earlier. And thats enough for me.

 

I'm going to trust Sparky to play 1, 2 or 13 players up front, as and when he deems necessary..

Difference was:

 

- Playing tired L1 opposition who threw a lot of players forward towards the end leaving space to exploit.

 

- Playing against a team of inferior quality more generally which is different to much of the rest of the season

 

- Probably better prepared or focused under Hughes

 

- Took some of our chances

 

Difference wasn't:

 

- Having two up front (as that was the same in the first half when we were woeful).

[Lord Duckhunter]

We need numbers in the central midfield area, whether that’s a 3-5-2 or 4-2-3-1 or even a diamond with the full backs pushed on, we’ll get passed to death if we don’t. The only way a traditional( or as it’s become known, a Merrington) 4-4-2 can work is if you sit in with 2 banks of 4 & one of the strikers drops in. Basically Leicester when they won the league. I don’t think we’ve got the players to play that way. No Vardy, although long could probably do an Okazaki defensively, isn’t going to pop up with valuable goals. For all their talent Boufal & Tadic aren’t going to knock great passes like Mahrez. We’d end up just sitting so deep, with no out ball. The key to scoring goals in any system is getting enough blokes forward, something we’ve failed miserably to do since Ron left. How many times the past 2 seasons has there been one or two players only busting a gut to get into the box? Tadic, Davis, Boufal, Redmond , JWP all like to drift around outside of it, picking up the pieces and recycling the ball. They don’t gamble, don’t get beyond the striker and don’t show any desire to get on the end of things.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[qwertyell]

Nothing wrong with one up top - Man City and Barcelona seem to be doing okay.

 

It's about the support we give the striker, that's where we're failing. The wide players rarely turn up in the box, our midfielders almost to a man want to sit and hold, or don't have the mobility to get up and down all game.

 

With the limitations of our current squad, I'd give the old Christmas tree formation a whirl: 4321, two free roaming number tens up close behind the striker, the full backs bombing on to provide the width (as they have had to anyway, because our inverted wingers cut inside 90% of the time).

 

Gabbiadini up front with, say, Sims and Boufal in close proximity could be a good blend of clever movement, pace and occasional brilliance. Redmond's rare moments of quality in his Saints career have all come from the centre of the park too.

 

I wouldn't have Tadic anywhere near the team.

 

Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk

[bazza]

Yeah, I think before the game yesterday I said that we would have to go on the front foot with 2 up top as I worried that Wigan (with the extra midfield man) would dictate tempo.

 

4-2-3-1 is my preferred formation, but when played correctly with people actually supporting the front man.

 

Yep, agree completely.

[simo]

You can play as many strikers as you like but if they are **** or get no service it makes no difference if it's 1 or 3 imo

[saintwbu]

I don't think two strikers is necessarily the way for us to go, because we don't have the quality throughout the squad to cater for it. However, I think it was definitely needed yesterday because it gave everyone a lift before the game knowing we were going for it and that we were prepared to compromise stability for attacking intent. Psychologically, it was spot on from a fans' point of view I think, and thankfully it paid off on the pitch too.

[Saint86]

So, the vocal section of the fanbase who have been calling for two strikers got their wish yesterday and for the first 45 minutes we played as poorly as we have all season, barely creating a single chance. To add to that, we were absolutely bossed in central midfield where Hojbjerg and Lemina were overrun and often left looking for a pass with nobody anywhere near them.

 

Do similar against the likes of Arsenal, Chelsea, City (and probably others in the PL) and we would have been hammered, especially as our two centre backs look like they need all the protection they can get.

 

Second half we were much better, but none of our chances really occured because we had two strikers on the pitch.

 

Will be interesting to see how Hughes goes in the PL, especially with so many away games but IMO with two strikers plus two wide players who don't track back very well we could be left very exposed against better players.

 

Afterall, the only teams in the PL who play with two are either a.) the extremely direct teams who don't care about having 30% possession (see Burnley) or the very good teams who dominate anyway (Spurs, sometimes City).

 

Certainly for me its a myth that this is the only way to be able to improve our attack. We definitely missed the extra midfielder yesterday for large parts.

 

So to summarise.

 

New manager plays two up top and wins a difficult game set up for a cup upset.

 

Following playing with two strikers and getting a much needed win to boost confidence and make the fans happy... a section of the fanbase now decides to deride another portion of the fanbase because they wanted two strikers on the pitch... and this is despite the fact that we won like that. And instead of enjoying a win, our fans need to start points scoring.

 

My mind boggles at this place at times, why in gods name would we not moan at other fans after a good win and a trip to wembley to look forward to... especially about something that worked!

 

Also, our tactics were clearly more effective. We had more options and generated more chances.

Edited 19 March, 2018 by Saint86

[mrfahaji]

Don't really understand how Tadic and Boufal "can't play together" when they play on opposite wings. The way they play isn't related. Problems in the past have come because we played Tadic, Redmond AND Boufal, leaving the central pairing exposed. But Tadic was always the central player in that three I believe, and he isn't industrious enough to make that position work in how we need him to.

 

I was just about to argue that 4-4-2 can work as long as one of the strikers drops back at times. Which is about the same as saying "myth".

 

We had the same problems against Newcastle at home, where Long & Gabbiadini both stood up front waiting for the ball. It was effective for 15-20 mins when we were on the front foot and focusing all our attacks down the wings and getting crosses in, but eventually Newcastle sussed it and it didn't work from then on out.

[Unbelievable Jeff]

3-5-2 needed,

 

McCarthy

 

Yoshida Stephens Hoedt

 

Cedric Lemina Boufal Hojberg Bertrand

 

Austin Gabbi

 

 

Obviously Boufal could be swapped for Tadic, Romeu for Hojberg/Lemina as and when, or possibly play Romeu in the centre of the back 3 and allow him to bring it out. Could even try Ward Prowse at WRB.

[mrfahaji]

3-5-2 needed,

 

McCarthy

 

Yoshida Stephens Hoedt

 

Cedric Lemina Boufal Hojberg Bertrand

 

Austin Gabbi

 

 

Obviously Boufal could be swapped for Tadic, Romeu for Hojberg/Lemina as and when, or possibly play Romeu in the centre of the back 3 and allow him to bring it out. Could even try Ward Prowse at WRB.

 

Yep, I'd much rather try that than a standard 4-4-2. Especially as we don't seem to get much width from our 'wingers' anyway.

[Saint Pete]

I don't think two strikers is necessarily the way for us to go, because we don't have the quality throughout the squad to cater for it. However, I think it was definitely needed yesterday because it gave everyone a lift before the game knowing we were going for it and that we were prepared to compromise stability for attacking intent. Psychologically, it was spot on from a fans' point of view I think, and thankfully it paid off on the pitch too.

I agree it was a smart move and a statement that we need to be more forward thinking and on the front foot from now on. That doesn't necessarily mean it's the formation we will go with in premier games or not with the same personnel.

 

I could see us possibly trying it with Long instead of Carrillo, dropping back to help in the middle defensively when we lose the ball. This would also give more pace in the middle. I would also swap JWP in for either Tadic or Boufal for a bit more cover in the centre.

 

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

[stu0x]

3-5-2 needed,

 

McCarthy

 

Yoshida Stephens Hoedt

 

Cedric Lemina Boufal Hojberg Bertrand

 

Austin Gabbi

 

 

Obviously Boufal could be swapped for Tadic, Romeu for Hojberg/Lemina as and when, or possibly play Romeu in the centre of the back 3 and allow him to bring it out. Could even try Ward Prowse at WRB.

 

It's weird isn't it... our squad is pretty much perfectly suited to a 3-5-2, more by luck than judgement it seems. Boufal for example is tailor made to be a 'proper' 10. Stephens and Hoedt are just not good enough as a back 2, and Hoedt (surprisingly) does seem to want to bring the ball out of defence quite often. Hojbjerg and Lemina aren't defensive enough as a midfield 2 in front of a back 2, but with the extra insurance of a 3rd centre back it gives us more dynamism centrally than if we sacrifice one for Romeu. It's even arguably the best formation to get the most out of Carillo, if we are going to.

 

My only concern is at the full back positions... Cedric and Bertrand are both capable enough, but it's an exhausting position. Pied would be ideal backup at right back being a converted winger but can't stay fit, and McQueen seems to have totally fallen out of favour.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[Dark Munster]

Same myth as

 

“We’ll start scoring if we buy another non-scoring striker”

 

It’s rubbish. It’s how the team sets up and plays under the guidance of the manager which determines how free flowing the goals are mostly. Obviously, quality of player also plays a part but just playing two strikers without a decent supply line or tactical set up offensively won’t guarantee anything other than stagnant sideways stuff and being light in midfield.

Corrected for you.

Here's a fact: We’ll start scoring if we buy a striker who can score goals.

Something Les Reed seems incapable of understanding.

[DrunkenSaint]

3412, 3421 or 4231 formations are the best, it allows more midfielders to try and win the midfield battle. The 4231 formation was made to counter the 442 formation so that's why you will normally see teams use that formation now. Problem is our attacking players behind the lone striker are not good enough to cause any real threat unlike when we had Lambert, Lallana, Jrod etc.

 

Drop Tadic and Carillo add Sims down the right and maybe Mcqueen down the left and we'll probably see a big difference as those 2 can beat players with pace, put good balls into the box and are more direct. Helps both also tracks back and both have something to prove, Tadic played **** for 2 seasons and still gets into the first 11.

[Adkins' Bus]

Don't really understand how Tadic and Boufal "can't play together" when they play on opposite wings. The way they play isn't related. Problems in the past have come because we played Tadic, Redmond AND Boufal, leaving the central pairing exposed. But Tadic was always the central player in that three I believe, and he isn't industrious enough to make that position work in how we need him to.

 

I was just about to argue that 4-4-2 can work as long as one of the strikers drops back at times. Which is about the same as saying "myth".

 

We had the same problems against Newcastle at home, where Long & Gabbiadini both stood up front waiting for the ball. It was effective for 15-20 mins when we were on the front foot and focusing all our attacks down the wings and getting crosses in, but eventually Newcastle sussed it and it didn't work from then on out.

 

I agree that 1 of the strikers needs to drop in which pretty much makes it a 4-2-3-1 anyway! It shows how stupid it is to get too hung up on formations. It all depends on the types of players you have and what freedom they are given to get forward.

 

If we are going to play with 2 players that are naturally strikers then I think one of them needs to be long and we need to instruct him to play in a role similar to how okazaki does at Leicester. He drops in when defending and makes good use of his high work rate.

[Kingsbridge Saint]

Lots of 'I know football tactics better than you' virtue signalling on this thread. Two up front did the business at the weekend. It needs to be in the armoury. What we don't want to do is get stale and predictable fielding one up front every week without change, ever, like the previous Goon. I trust Sparky to get it right more often than not. Great that our second goal was scored by an overlapping fullback - that hardly ever happened under Iron Pants Pellegrino. Two up front last Saturday was more about making a statement that we are prepared to change things.

[doddisalegend]

It's not just about how many strikers you have but the quality of the ones you have.

 

Last season we finished bottom of the shots to goals conversion rate table with 10.7% of our 384 shots converted into goals

 

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/chancenverwertung/wettbewerb/GB1/saison_id/2016

 

This season we've improved and are second to bottom with 11.1% of 262 shots

 

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/chancenverwertung/wettbewerb/GB1/saison_id/2017

 

Koeman's last season we had a conversion rate of 15.5% and 380 shots (four less than under Puel)

 

http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/premier-league/chancenverwertung/wettbewerb/GB1/saison_id/2015

[Cabrone]

I don't mind 1 up front provided it delivers but It depends on what players you have and I don't think we have the players for it.

 

With the players we have I prefer 442, Long is useless alone but becomes a useful player with a goal scoring partner and Gabbi really needs confidence after the dismal way he was treated. Not sure where Carillo fits TBH, he's not terrible but is down the pecking order for me. The only player who can function as a lone spearhead is Charlie but its a moot point if he's perpetually injured.

 

I also just personally like to see 2 strikers carrying a threat, gives the oppo something to worry about. Anyway Sparky will pick what he sees fit.

[alpine_saint]

Difference was:

 

- Playing tired L1 opposition who threw a lot of players forward towards the end leaving space to exploit.

 

- Playing against a team of inferior quality more generally which is different to much of the rest of the season

 

- Probably better prepared or focused under Hughes

 

- Took some of our chances

 

Difference wasn't:

 

- Having two up front (as that was the same in the first half when we were woeful).

 

Well, I reckon you are being completely unfair about Wigan.

 

And you forget the 2 were Gabbi and Carillo. Gabbi is low on confidence and Carillo appears to be, well, pish.

 

What if that had been Austin and Long / Gabbi ??

[verlaine1979]

Bit weird that Wigan is being seen as a vindication of playing two strikers. They hardly linked up at all, and the two best chances we didn't take were a calamitous back pass, and a nice through-ball and run from Gabbi, exactly like the ones he made last season as a lone striker. In return for the two strikers barely noticing each other were there, we got a massive hole in the midfield, through which Wigan marched at will until they gave up a set-piece goal and started to get tired/lose faith.

[Saint IQ]

If you play one up front you need a centre mid and the two wingers to be close to them when attacking which hasn't happened in the last two seasons.

[Saint IQ]

Having no Strikers that can hold the ball up hasn't helped this situation, from what I've seen of Carrillo he can't hold it up as well as Austin and Austin isn't even very good at it.

[mrfahaji]

Bit weird that Wigan is being seen as a vindication of playing two strikers. They hardly linked up at all, and the two best chances we didn't take were a calamitous back pass, and a nice through-ball and run from Gabbi, exactly like the ones he made last season as a lone striker. In return for the two strikers barely noticing each other were there, we got a massive hole in the midfield, through which Wigan marched at will until they gave up a set-piece goal and started to get tired/lose faith.

 

I hear you verlaine, you want Steven Davis back, don't you?

[once_bitterne]

You can't play 4-4-2 in the PL.

 

We would be best playing 4-3-3

 

JWP Lemina Hoijburg

Simms Austin Redmond

[Dusic]

Well, I reckon you are being completely unfair about Wigan.

 

And you forget the 2 were Gabbi and Carillo. Gabbi is low on confidence and Carillo appears to be, well, pish.

 

What if that had been Austin and Long / Gabbi ??

Wigan played very well but it was a cup tie. They gradually took off misfielders and put on strikers which gave us much more space.

 

In regulation play they often exploited our midfield two but just didn't have the quality to really capitalise, but PL teams will.

 

Not sure its relevant that it was Gabbi and Carrillo. I remember Koeman playing Austin and Long together at Bournemouth and they were hopeless as a pair because neither has any technical quality. In fact, Long isn't the answer to any question when it comes to goalscoring.

[Mystic Force]

I have always thought that the point of 2 up top is to pin back the full backs so the central defenders are not left being individually one on one with the 2 strikers. This then lessens the being overwhelmed in the center of the park as the FB cannot be as attacking. (1 additional attacker removes 2 opposing potential attackers) This only works if

 

1) You have enough possession in the opponents half (to scare them)

 

2) You have strikers to exploit 1 on 1 ie very quick or 2 on 2 skilled or physically dominating.

 

And if they do not look like being able to hit barn doors with bangos it is not going to stop the FB raiding, as even if you breach you will do nothing.

[GGalpin]

You can't play 4-4-2 in the PL.

 

We would be best playing 4-3-3

 

JWP Lemina Hoijburg

Simms Austin Redmond

 

You could, theoretically at least, play 4-3-3 and have two strikers if we played Shane Long on the right.

 

Just feel his pace and work rate could give us a decent outlet, plays to his strengths, and he had a few assists with crosses in his first season when he played wide right. He'd also give the left winger two targets to aim for when putting in crosses, and his strength in the air makes him a fairly decent option at the back post.

 

I'm not a huge fan of him as a striker but feel it might just work on the wing as a sort of Thomas Mueller style wide forward.

[Lighthouse]

It doesn't have to be two up top, old school Mike Bassett style but at least one of the three in behind the main striker has to be in the mindset of getting into the box and having a pop. When we had Lambert, it was Jay Rod. When we had Pelle it was Mané. Now we could have Austin and Gabbi, or even Gabbi and Sims.

[doddisalegend]

Conversion rates for shots to goals for our strikers this season mmmm...

 

Shane Long 4% (25 shots in 1300 minutes)

https://southamptonfc.com/first-team/shane-long

 

Gudio a big fat 0% (9 shots in 618 minutes)

https://southamptonfc.com/first-team/guido-carrillo

 

Gabbi 20% (20 shots in 1100 minutes)

https://southamptonfc.com/first-team/manolo-gabbiadini

 

Austin 26% (23 shots in 675 minutes of football)

https://southamptonfc.com/first-team/charlie-austin

 

says it all.

 

It doesn't really matter if you play 1 up or 2 up just as long as who ever is up there is Austin it seems.