For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

User avatar
LoyalRoyal22
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2608
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 20:06
Location: Derbyshire

For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by LoyalRoyal22 » 07 Dec 2013 21:58

First half was 433. Second half was a diamond.

That is all.

AthleticoSpizz
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 23971
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 19:49
Location: A Hicks Hoof from Coley Park

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by AthleticoSpizz » 07 Dec 2013 22:00

You listened and watched?

User avatar
LoyalRoyal22
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2608
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 20:06
Location: Derbyshire

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by LoyalRoyal22 » 07 Dec 2013 22:02

AthleticoSpizz You listened and watched?


Heard him on the radio after the game.

AthleticoSpizz
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 23971
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 19:49
Location: A Hicks Hoof from Coley Park

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by AthleticoSpizz » 07 Dec 2013 22:02

Oh

User avatar
LoyalRoyal22
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2608
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 20:06
Location: Derbyshire

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by LoyalRoyal22 » 07 Dec 2013 22:03

Mick Gooding couldn't seem to work it out either. Embarrassing.


User avatar
LoyalRoyal22
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2608
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 20:06
Location: Derbyshire

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by LoyalRoyal22 » 07 Dec 2013 22:04

Only thing majority RFC fans can understand is 442 hoofball

User avatar
SPARTA
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4742
Joined: 23 Sep 2012 17:40
Location: If you give us 90 minutes, we'll give you a lifetime

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by SPARTA » 07 Dec 2013 22:04

LoyalRoyal22 First half was 433. Second half was a diamond.

That is all.


Who cares? The problem is it changes every game, and just lately we see 2-3 different systems in the same game. There's no chance for the team to get any consistency or confidence in one particular formation, and the team changes just as often. Dropping Pogrebnyak today when he linked up so well with Sharp on Tuesday was a bizarre decision.

User avatar
LoyalRoyal22
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2608
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 20:06
Location: Derbyshire

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by LoyalRoyal22 » 07 Dec 2013 22:06

SPARTA
LoyalRoyal22 First half was 433. Second half was a diamond.

That is all.


Who cares? The problem is it changes every game, and just lately we see 2-3 different systems in the same game. There's no chance for the team to get any consistency or confidence in one particular formation, and the team changes just as often. Dropping Pogrebnyak today when he linked up so well with Sharp on Tuesday was a bizarre decision.


Agree he should stick with one formation, although anything but 442.

sandman
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 12449
Joined: 01 Oct 2008 18:25
Location: Slaughterhouse soaked in blood and betrayal

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by sandman » 07 Dec 2013 22:08

Boo, LoyalRoyal22, boo.


Cureton's Volley
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1632
Joined: 08 Jan 2013 23:58

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by Cureton's Volley » 07 Dec 2013 22:26

LoyalRoyal22 misses the point again. The reason they were talking in that manner was because the players were not acting as if they knew what formation to be in, or even if they did, exactly where to be positioned and where that would be in relation to team mates.

From my perspective it was not as clear cut as you made out because in the first half for the 1st 20 mins we played more of a 4-5-1 with the wingers out wide hitting the byline, but after that they stayed forward and tucked in tight for a more narrow traditional 4-3-3. Second half there was hardly any structure for either team as it got pretty desperate, and formations became even more fluid towards the final whistle.


sandman Boo, LoyalRoyal22, boo.


We should definitely get this chant started next match...

User avatar
AirRaidSiren
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1032
Joined: 13 Oct 2012 13:17
Location: where the sun shines all night

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by AirRaidSiren » 07 Dec 2013 22:29

Cureton's Volley LoyalRoyal22 misses the point again. The reason they were talking in that manner was because the players were not acting as if they knew what formation to be in, or even if they did, exactly where to be positioned and where that would be in relation to team mates.

From my perspective it was not as clear cut as you made out because in the first half for the 1st 20 mins we played more of a 4-5-1 with the wingers out wide hitting the byline, but after that they stayed forward and tucked in tight for a more narrow traditional 4-3-3. Second half there was hardly any structure for either team as it got pretty desperate, and formations became even more fluid towards the final whistle.


sandman Boo, LoyalRoyal22, boo.


We should definitely get this chant started next match...


:roll:

User avatar
bcubed
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 11488
Joined: 30 Oct 2004 18:16
Location: Would do better with a stick of rhubarb

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by bcubed » 07 Dec 2013 22:44

Cureton's Volley LoyalRoyal22 misses the point again. The reason they were talking in that manner was because the players were not acting as if they knew what formation to be in, or even if they did, exactly where to be positioned and where that would be in relation to team mates.

From my perspective it was not as clear cut as you made out because in the first half for the 1st 20 mins we played more of a 4-5-1 with the wingers out wide hitting the byline, but after that they stayed forward and tucked in tight for a more narrow traditional 4-3-3. Second half there was hardly any structure for either team as it got pretty desperate, and formations became even more fluid towards the final whistle.


Agree with this though I think Bournemouth structure was pretty consistent and effective
The plan was to out think them by NOT playing two up front which is what they expected _ well that worked a treat!
Even so if playing 5 in midfield why that 5? Better to have McCleary and Obita out wide and bring Jobi in instead of Kanu, who was poor today
moving to 433 was definitely the right thing to do if not too late
Second half did degenerate from reading pov though, e.g. Gunter was on his own on right side for most of second half

Man Friday
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2856
Joined: 20 Nov 2005 13:45

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by Man Friday » 07 Dec 2013 22:46

So to sum up, Adkins likes playing 'Chumpionship Manager' but isn't very good at it. Great.


User avatar
Royal Prince
Member
Posts: 338
Joined: 07 May 2011 21:30

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by Royal Prince » 07 Dec 2013 23:15

LoyalRoyal22 First half was 433. Second half was a diamond.

That is all.


You sure?

I thought first half was 4-2-3-1, with Sharp the loan striker, and the three 'wingers' playing behind him, with Hal in the middle of the three but swapping with the other two on a regular basis as they moved inside.

User avatar
Royal91
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1391
Joined: 09 Oct 2012 19:04

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by Royal91 » 07 Dec 2013 23:17

Essentially the team is unbalanced and that is causing the team to change every week and the team needs to be rebuilt. Adkins will do that slowly.

The formation is not massively important it's the pattern of play that seems to be wrong. Against Watford we were brilliant and the reason being we had more players in the middle and you can do that by playing any formation.

For some reason yesterday (2nd half especially) all we did was look to cross and for the full backs to chip it down the wing. We were not prepared to shoot, never wanted to drive inside, never looked to creative through the middle and the strikers never dropped short (Billy did a couple times).

Problem is Guthrie comes short to tick it over but then nobody comes short to then give him an option. Wingers should be drifting inside (McCleary has in the past and looked very dangerous) to support Guthrie, one a striker should be looking to come short (Pog) and then Williams and Obita should be playing closer together with Guthrie)

Our three in midfield yesterday we so flat, one of them has to be playing at the top of the triangle to give us more creativity through the middle.



I would go.


===============McCarthy===============


===========Pearce=======Gorkss============

Gunter==============================Cummings


===========Guthrie====Williams=================



=====McCleary==============Drenthe===========



================Pog===========================



================Sharp========================



McCleary, Drenthe and Pog/Sharp should be looking to drift inside to support Guthrie and Williams having taking it from defence.

Width needs to be coming from Gunter and Cummings.


Won't happen but in the summer we need a ball playing CB, LB, CAM

User avatar
LoyalRoyal22
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2608
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 20:06
Location: Derbyshire

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by LoyalRoyal22 » 07 Dec 2013 23:19

Royal Prince
LoyalRoyal22 First half was 433. Second half was a diamond.

That is all.


You sure?

I thought first half was 4-2-3-1, with Sharp the loan striker, and the three 'wingers' playing behind him, with Hal in the middle of the three but swapping with the other two on a regular basis as they moved inside.


No, Guthrie sitting, Obita to the left & Williams to the right. Then front 3 with Sharp in between Hal & Gmac
Last edited by LoyalRoyal22 on 07 Dec 2013 23:22, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
LoyalRoyal22
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2608
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 20:06
Location: Derbyshire

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by LoyalRoyal22 » 07 Dec 2013 23:20

Cureton's Volley LoyalRoyal22 misses the point again. The reason they were talking in that manner was because the players were not acting as if they knew what formation to be in, or even if they did, exactly where to be positioned and where that would be in relation to team mates.

From my perspective it was not as clear cut as you made out because in the first half for the 1st 20 mins we played more of a 4-5-1 with the wingers out wide hitting the byline, but after that they stayed forward and tucked in tight for a more narrow traditional 4-3-3. Second half there was hardly any structure for either team as it got pretty desperate, and formations became even more fluid towards the final whistle.


sandman Boo, LoyalRoyal22, boo.


We should definitely get this chant started next match...


You've got it all wrong

User avatar
LoyalRoyal22
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2608
Joined: 18 Jan 2005 20:06
Location: Derbyshire

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by LoyalRoyal22 » 07 Dec 2013 23:23

Cureton's Volley = clueless

sandman
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 12449
Joined: 01 Oct 2008 18:25
Location: Slaughterhouse soaked in blood and betrayal

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by sandman » 07 Dec 2013 23:27

Booooo! Boo Loyal. Boo LoyalRoyal22, boo.

AthleticoSpizz
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 23971
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 19:49
Location: A Hicks Hoof from Coley Park

Re: For those that don't understand formations (Tim dellor)

by AthleticoSpizz » 07 Dec 2013 23:28

fwiw, I would've quite happily have also seen LoyalRoyal22 as our manager today

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Royals and Racers, Snowflake Royal, windermereROYAL and 546 guests

It is currently 28 Apr 2024 13:20