formation

[Gerryhatrick]

Our formation of 4-2-3-1 that NW pushes works very well away from home because the team we play push on and try to beat us.

But at home, when teams play for a draw with a 'flat back 6' like BristolC did, should we not revert to 4-3-3 or 4-4-2?

Hulse was getting to the forward ball well, but laying off to the invisible man yesterday, not enough getting in the box from Mackie, Smith and Tarby

[QPR1234]

hulse for me was unlucky. done great holdup work but needed that partner to go beyond him.. making runs. never happened with mackie or smith all game. wont happen with tarbs

[Gerryhatrick]

hulse for me was unlucky. done great holdup work but needed that partner to go beyond him.. making runs. never happened with mackie or smith all game. wont happen with tarbs

exactly

[Goddard]

It's a tricky one.

We had so much of the ball yesterday because we outnumbered them in midfield, and had options to pick... that allowed us to get the ball forward so much.

But when it entered the area, Hulse was often isolated.. and his flick-ons found nobody, because he had nobody within 10 yards of him.
Mackie played very wide, so did Smith.

Taarabt isn't the type to bomb into the area to support his CF, looking for pull backs and knock downs... unlike someone like Ben Watson.

The tricky thing is.... our formation totally revolves around Adel Taarabt.
Without him, we could play 4-4-2.
With Taarabt in the team, 4-4-2 could leave us wide open too often... which would be ok if we had four Kyle Walkers. We don't even have one Kyle Walker now.

But when he does the things he does, how can you not play him?

[sw66]

At home i would play 4 - 1 - 3 - 2

5 defensive players - 5 attacking
With the present squad my team would be

Orr connolly Gorkks Hill

Derry

Mackie Faulrin buzsaky

Tarbs Hulse

[FurtiveFox]

It's a tricky one.

We had so much of the ball yesterday because we outnumbered them in midfield, and had options to pick... that allowed us to get the ball forward so much.

But when it entered the area, Hulse was often isolated.. and his flick-ons found nobody, because he had nobody within 10 yards of him.
Mackie played very wide, so did Smith.

Taarabt isn't the type to bomb into the area to support his CF, looking for pull backs and knock downs... unlike someone like Ben Watson.

The tricky thing is.... our formation totally revolves around Adel Taarabt.
Without him, we could play 4-4-2.
With Taarabt in the team, 4-4-2 could leave us wide open too often... which would be ok if we had four Kyle Walkers. We don't even have one Kyle Walker now.

But when he does the things he does, how can you not play him?

Precisely. Taarabt is a luxury player and doesn't fit into a standard formation. That is why he didn't get on at Spurs and I think would put a lot of top teams of signing him. By playing him you do sometimes lose a sense of balance in the side.

In the context of scoring goals we have scored more than most but are struggling at the moment because we have no out and out goal scorer and not enough coming from elsewhere in team. Hulse is a target man and I think can potentially be a good one for us but if there is nobody there to receive the knock downs and support him then it is a pretty thankless task.

Bottom line is Taarabt will win us a lot of points. There is nobody anywhere near his ability in the Championship. We cannot say limit him to left wing as it is his free role which makes him so effective so we are limited in what we can do. My preference would be to encourage Smith and Mackie to make more central runs. They do try but it is not working enough leaving Hulse isolated.

No easy answer. It will be frustrating sometimes, such as yesterday, but that is the price we pay for accommodating a luxury player. Without him we have a top 10, maybe top 6 side. With him and with the lack of any team near the top looking like really dominating we have a chance of automatic. Hope we take it as can't see league being so weak next season. When was the last time the 3 relegated from the Premiership were all so poor?

[Gerryhatrick]

I was thinking more along the lines of a diamond formation in midfield, so:
Orr - Connelly - Gorksy - Hill
Derry
Mackie - Smith
Tarbs
Hulse or HH - *Austin* (tba)

Then bring Faulin on after 70 mins for a knackered Derry

[rockandroll]

I think we need just to have very good defenders and 3 DM and let the tarbs &Co do their business , 4-3-3 a la Arsenal.
just knock the ball forwards and let the 3 up there run at the opposite defenders.

[Shania]

It's a tricky one.

We had so much of the ball yesterday because we outnumbered them in midfield, and had options to pick... that allowed us to get the ball forward so much.

But when it entered the area, Hulse was often isolated.. and his flick-ons found nobody, because he had nobody within 10 yards of him.
Mackie played very wide, so did Smith.

Taarabt isn't the type to bomb into the area to support his CF, looking for pull backs and knock downs... unlike someone like Ben Watson.

The tricky thing is.... our formation totally revolves around Adel Taarabt.
Without him, we could play 4-4-2.
With Taarabt in the team, 4-4-2 could leave us wide open too often... which would be ok if we had four Kyle Walkers. We don't even have one Kyle Walker now.

But when he does the things he does, how can you not play him?

I hope Vaagan Moen,Akoz Buzaky or a "fox in the box" player can sort out this problem.
From the games I have seen we are very mutch in need of an inspired Taarabt, yes! If he has an "offday" or not much involved in the play, we are in trouble.