17 Feb 2013 14:30:20
I think we should play with two no. 10 s in a fluid 424 formation with holtby and siggy as the no. 10 s and bale and azza out wide. Gylfi offers good height and good set piece variety he will get more involved in play than ade or Defoe. He has a great strike and I reckon if the front four can get a good partnership going we could be in for a treat because siggy is a playmaker who will contribute to holtby. Dembele sitting deep can always go forward with his typical box to box runs. If things aren't working out bale siggy holtby and azza can switch positions for all can play anywhere in the 4 making marking difficult. The addition of an extra playmaker in siggy plus van dervaart like holtby will allow us to break even the stubbornest defenses. Siggy Lso fancies himself from range and is a good dribbler. Either him or holtby can also drop alongside dembele or swap positions with him. I also feel a player like siggy will benefit more than one
Like Defoe or ade when bale gets marked out because he is better with space.
Coys
You suggest 424, what's wrong with the simple 442 we are playing atm? nothing. exactly.
This is exactly what's wrong with modern day football, it's such a simple game yet there are people like this who want to make it far more complicated than it needs to be! 442 424 433 343 whatever, the teams that win leagues have the best players, simple as that!
KMB
One thing you are forgetting and that is siggy is crap and hopefully come summer, he will be replaced!
Davo
Top Top Post, Siggi is CRAP!
I don't think the problem is that people try to over complicate football, nor that the best players always win (although that is the most important thing).
Football is more complicated than just naming a formation, as not all players that play in the same position play the same way. Look at how Torres played much better for Liverpool when the ball was generally played direct and in front of him than he plays at Chelsea where the ball is played to his feet, often with his back to goal.
A good manager knows how to extract the best out of the best players. Ol' Harry said that a manager can only add about 10% to a team, but assuming he is true that is about the same as any single player adds. And although the best manager in the world can't get a team of poor players to beat a team of good players, neither can a single good player. And in a game where both teams are similarly matched a good manager can add that extra little thing that could win a game.
So I agree that the role of a manager (and the blame) is often grossly over-rated, but they and their systems do have an influence.
I don't see a lot of difference in the systems employed by Utd City Chavs Spurs and Ars, what seperates them is the quality of the players and strength in depth, most teams in the league play basically the same formation. Until we have a higher income to sustain the cost of the best players it'll be very difficult for any manager to vastly improve our current position as a whole. IMO
KMB