I think it was Geysir who said in another thread that playing with two wingers is out of date. I'm not sure this is strictly true but either way there are a few puzzles to solve in how we line up or what players we pick.
451 / 433 or variations thereof:
* It gives us better numbers in midfield
* Long as the lone forward: does the number 9 stuff well but can't be trusted as a finisher. Last night was nothing new.
* Keane as a lone forward: there's a school of thought that he can't lead the line. But is a line-leader necessary? Not necessarily if the team can play football. He'd have relished Wes' service last night.
* It still allows us two traditional wide men which we are ideologically wedded to.
442
* Does it leave us light in numbers in midfield?
* It allows us two upfront which suits our players better
* It allows us two traditional wide men
* The idea of Keane dropping deep to make it a 451 of sorts has never worked.
It would seem to me that if we are to retain the best of our forward options and the best of a 3 man midfield maybe then we must drop our reliance on classic wide men.
So, this suggests to me that 4-3-1-2 might be better. And maybe there's room for both Reid and Hoolahan. Example: McCarthy deeper, Reid, Hoolahan and Gibson in a narrower midfield, Keane and Long upfront. Coleman provides width on one side at least.
I like the idea of McCarthy, Gibson, Reid and Hoolahan all being on the pitch together.
Bookmarks