Talking 'bout formations

[tavyred]

Don’t get the Grounds criticism. He’s a bleddy good CB, comfortable (ish) on the ball with a pass in him and pops up with the odd goal.

 

[Ian Tarr]

The two premises are, that White must play and Diabate mustn't, until he's improved.

And how will he improve without game time?
He's done OK the last two matches, let's stick with him for a spell, and he will rise to the challenge.

 

[Bridgy 81]

I don’t think Chieck played badly on Saturday.
He was strong in the air and kept it simple on the ground.
He did seem to be ‘man handling’ his opponent quite often, but was rarely penalized, so why not.
He’s still young and inexperienced.
I think he’s doing a good job for us.

 

[budegrecian]

Well said Bridgy. In the last couple of games he appears to be getting his form and confidence back.
He’s also having to learn to play a bit more now, as GC looks to play it out from the back more than his predecessor.

 

[AndyR]

Formation 3-5-2 with wingbacks:

Blackman

Sweeney Diabate (or Stubbs) Hartridge

Key Kite Collins White Sparkes (or Caprice)

Nombe Jevani

Subs : Lee, Stubbs (or Diabate), Caprice (or Sparkes), Grounds, Kegs, Harper, Stanno.

 

[Alistair20000]

I don’t think Chieck played badly on Saturday.
He was strong in the air and kept it simple on the ground.
He did seem to be ‘man handling’ his opponent quite often, but was rarely penalized, so why not.
He’s still young and inexperienced.
I think he’s doing a good job for us.

Yes he was “man handling” opponents and the Referee did have a word in his shell like. Diabate would have been carded on Saturday with a less lenient referee.

 

[Bridgy 81]

Yes he was “man handling” opponents and the Referee did have a word in his shell like. Diabate would have been carded on Saturday with a less lenient referee.

Maybe.
But I've heard and read people frequently say in the past that opponents have physically bullied us and that referees have let it go.
So on Saturday Check did it and got away with it, so he carried on doing it.
That's ok with me, provided he's sufficiently savvy to judge whether specific referees are lenient enough to allow it in the first place and modify his game accordingly if he gets a yellow.
Sometimes you've got to play right up to the edge of what you can get away with and I'm ok with that too.

 

[Colesman Ballz]

Maybe.
But I've heard and read people frequently say in the past that opponents have physically bullied us and that referees have let it go.
So on Saturday Check did it and got away with it, so he carried on doing it.
That's ok with me, provided he's sufficiently savvy to judge whether specific referees are lenient enough to allow it in the first place and modify his game accordingly if he gets a yellow.
Sometimes you've got to play right up to the edge of what you can get away with and I'm ok with that too.

And it may well be something that GC is encouraging him to do in order to add more steel to his game ?

 

[ryancooper327]

GC has always played 3412 so that won’t change unless he goes 352.

My preference (with everyone fit) would be:

JB
Sweeney Stubbs Hartridge
Key Collins Kite Sparkes
Brown
Nombe Stanno

White may replace Stanno and playing behind Jev/Sam in time…

 

[Rosencrantz]

To be fair, Stubbs is very physical with any opposing striker as well. There is nothing wrong with standing your ground and making sure you are not bullied out of position by the opponent. However, I would like Cheick to take more notice of the ball when having a tussle. A few times he is letting the ball drift behind him and still tussling with the centre forward as they turn to chase the ball, which could and probably should be a free kick. He is also very reliant on Sweenz or Alex covering in behind him in those situations or Jamal coming out.

Basically, have a tussle and stand your ground, but deal with the ball.