[Archived] Realistic Summer Moves

[joey_big_nose]

The good thing about Farfan too is that he can play out wide. I don't think we have to inject pace up front as long as we add pace to the midfield. We have to have one or the other (although both would be nice). I still believe that RSQ and Benni can form a good pairing (they looked very good at the start of the season), they simply need a more productive midfield. I'd still like a pacey option up front, but I don't think an out-and-out speedster for up front is where we need to concentrate our money, which is why someone like Farfan would be good as he'd give us a bit of both.

If we lost Bentley as we well could do Farfan would be an obvious replacement.

He is the sort of player we could also look at if, say, Roberts and MGP left for decent fees. I doubt we can afford him in our basic budget as we are looking to lash out 5m on Bradley.

In many ways Farfan is our ideal player- fast, uses the width of the pitch very well, can shoot and supply. he would bring the best out of some of our other players.

But there will be a million clubs in for him and the not inconsiderble fact that he plays for a club who could be considered one of the lesser giants of European football. Not cheap.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Paul Ince

[philipl]

Sparky talking to the BBC

[Napoleon]

I like the look of Steven Defour at Standard Liege. Possibly a decent Tugay replacement.

[jny]

I like the look of Steven Defour at Standard Liege. Possibly a decent Tugay replacement.

Yeah me too young,fast and an eye for goal unfortunately though he'll probably have plenty of admirers but you never know

[Hughesy]

Could be the perfect foil for Santa Cruz

Walcott Interview

[Billy Castell]

Too expensive, but a seasons loan would be good.

I doubt Wenger would let it happen though, since he hates us touching his delicate little flowers.

[Hughesy]

Walcott starts today!!

Interesting news however - Nicky Shorey hasnt even travelled with the reading squad due to his contract talks that have stalled.

[ROVERS]

After the Man U match, I will like to hereby conclude.....................

We need speed speed speed

Right back is slow, Left wing is slow Striker is also slow.

We simply can't pull a fast counter attack ..........

Also, we need a carrick, lampard or alonso kinda central midfield.

However the over performance is still good.

Hope Hughes address these problems.

[philipl]

Its early days but that 4-2-3-1 worked a treat yesterday. I hope Hughes perseveres with it and also plays the best XI suited to it we already have at some point- replace Reid with Ooijer and Jason with Benni restored to the spearhead.

If this works then the shopping list this summer changes dramatically.

It becomes another holding midfielder (Huddlestone?) and a speed merchant (probably an MGP replacement as RSC looks a natural for that inside right role with Bents roaming free). Also need to pick up a fifth choice central defender for a mars bar and a pack of peanuts from somewhere. We now don't need another striker unless Cuevas comes in for Roberts on an opportunistic basis.

Suddenly the future is looking rather exciting even on a limited budget. It would mean bye bye Tugs and MGP, Reid and Dunn sitting on the bench next season barring injuries.

[tcj_jones]

While obviously effective, I very much doubt that Hughes will persist with this change in formation.

[Iceman]

I think players we should look at are:giles barnes,jimmy bullard,steve sidwell,tuncay sanli(think he would move if we made an offer)ugur boral,and kevin nolan.i do like the newcastle keeper as wel i think its steve harper.

[philipl]

While obviously effective, I very much doubt that Hughes will persist with this change in formation.

Why do you think that?

I think yesterday resolved a number of square pegs in round holes problems- above all it suits Rovers' most talented individual players which is critical not only to keeping Bentley but also to beating top ten teams when you need your special players to be special. Above all, I was impressed that for the first time this season, we had men arriving in numbers in the box.

Hughes used 4-5-1 when it suited then was willing to go 4-4-2 eventually. I would like to see a squad equally capable of playing 4-5-1, 4-4-2, 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 with Hughes deploying his resources according to the opposition's strengths and weaknesses but that is perhaps too utopian.

[dopper69]

I havn't read throught this from start to finish, so apologies if it has already been mentioned.

Luis Antonio Valencia and Palocios (spelling?) seem to be two crackning players at Wigan. Maybe worth a punt?

[joey_big_nose]

Why do you think that?

I think yesterday resolved a number of square pegs in round holes problems- above all it suits Rovers' most talented individual players which is critical not only to keeping Bentley but also to beating top ten teams when you need your special players to be special. Above all, I was impressed that for the first time this season, we had men arriving in numbers in the box.

Hughes used 4-5-1 when it suited then was willing to go 4-4-2 eventually. I would like to see a squad equally capable of playing 4-5-1, 4-4-2, 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 with Hughes deploying his resources according to the opposition's strengths and weaknesses but that is perhaps too utopian.

I think we shoul pursue the same set up as we had against Man Utd over the last three games. To be honest we have a lot of good strikers and not many good midfielders so it suits us. If we can get three or four into the last third regularly it will cause all kinds of problems to those we play.

As a little bit of a caveat though- Man U did only play three in midfield which gave us more freedom in those attacking positions than otherwise would be the case. But screw it. I would rather see us go for it in the last few games with little to play for. we have the attacking players so we might as well use them. For the likes of Birmingham it will be a daunting prospect to compete against Cruz, Roberts, Dunn and Bentley with McCarthy, Derbyshire and Pedersen comng off the bench.

[LeChuck]

I think yesterday resolved a number of square pegs in round holes problems

In my opinion it's quite the opposite; we have to play players out of position to play 4-2-3-1...Reid and full-back, Emerton defensive midfield, Santa Cruz right wing, none of those players are in their natural position. With a 4-4-2 we don't have to play anyone remotely out of position (unless we persevere with Reid at RB).

As well as that formation worked, I feel Hughes is jumping on the 4-2-3-1 (or whatever you want to call it) band-wagon. He obviously hasn't built the squad with that formation in mind, we certainly don't have the personnel to suggest that. And, as well as Roque did yesterday, I'd be very wary about playing him on the wing consistently because I think that would be a great waste. I'm not sure playing in the centre is doing Bentley any favours with England either.

[joey_big_nose]

In my opinion it's quite the opposite; we have to play players out of position to play 4-2-3-1...Reid and full-back, Emerton defensive midfield, Santa Cruz right wing, none of those players are in their natural position. With a 4-4-2 we don't have to play anyone remotely out of position (unless we persevere with Reid at RB).

As well as that formation worked, I feel Hughes is jumping on the 4-2-3-1 (or whatever you want to call it) band-wagon. He obviously hasn't built the squad with that formation in mind, we certainly don't have the personnel to suggest that. And, as well as Roque did yesterday, I'd be very wary about playing him on the wing consistently because I think that would be a great waste. I'm not sure playing in the centre is doing Bentley any favours with England either.

It worked better than anything we have tried recently. Why not give it a shot? We get contained very easily in a 442.

RSC played on the right often for Munich. Bentley likes the floating role. Reid at RB is dodgy I agree I would reinstate Emerton to there and bring in Dunn or Reid to play DM alongside Vogel.

I want to see what we can do with this formation. It is a nightmare for the opposition to mark anybody.

[philipl]

A thought about Emerton- we know from three years of frustration that he is not ideal on the right wing and that he has limitations whilst generally being good at right back. Is DM possibly going to prove to be his real role?

I agree with jbn- let's give this new formation a go as it stood up to the biggest test it could have on Saturday.

The problem with 4-4-2 has been we have got too many players not 100% comfortable in the positions it gives them.

We don't have a good pairing as the 2 up front despite having four of the better strikers in the Prem. Neither Bentley nor MGP are traditional out and out wide men. We don't have a pairing of box-to-box central midfield players despite having a reasonable choice there either. We are reasonably well served with the 4 at the back apart from the fact we played the Admiral for weeks when we should not have done and we get taken apart at set pieces far too often but the 4 at the back stays regardless of system selected.

One of the freedoms 4-2-3-1 gives is for players to keep moving forwards if they are going forwards- it was Nelsen unmarked at the back post whom MGP gave no chance to score the goal with his driven cross from inside the box in the 73rd minute against the Mancs.

[Eddie]

We need to realise that this was a perfect tactic to help break up play and stay solid at the back against a side like United, it shouldn't be employed against every team we face. Not only could we probably not do it as well as we did on Saturday, we also didn't create that many chances in the game (luck of the bounce for the goal and there were probably only 2-3 goodish half-to good chances) and I don't think we'd create that many more even against a weaker side.

[S15]

It bewilders me that people can obide by the theory that if a system works against the best team in europe, it will work against everyone.

We have proved time and time again we don't have the players to play a system which requires alot of flair to work when playing against deep lying teams and 5 men midfields.

When a team comes and sits back and we're set up to be solid, what do you think's gonna happen?

[philipl]

I think it is worth persevering with as an experiment as it potentially gives us more flexibility and options in opening up the set-ups you describe than 4-4-2 does.

[bellamy11]

I think Hughes ultimately wanted to play this system a lot earlier. Our best run of the season, when we won 7 in a row, saw us play the 4-5-1/4-3-3/4-2-3-1 in a few of the matches. The problem was, whilst we ground out some of the results, we didn't necessarily play well, and in the long-term that's too much of a problem to overlook because results turn sour very quickly and easily.

Therefore, if Sparky does want to play this system. he needs to buy accordingly in the summer. There is no way this team, in its present incarnation, can handle playing 4-2-3-1. The acquisition of Vogel may well be the first step, as he looks pretty handy in the sitting midfield role.

I'd also wonder how happy RSC would be playing on the right hand side permanently. Players can be funny about not playing in their favoured positions. He has the right ethic and attitude but so far we've played entirely to his strengths and preferences. The right hand side of the 3 is not his best position and I find it hard to believe it's where he'd want to play.

[tcj_jones]

Philip, the reasons why I don't think that Hughes will continue with this formation have already been mentioned, for the most part.

Firstly, the formation was obviously designed to frustrate and break up the play of arguably the best team in the world. Hugehs wanted us to be solid above all. When we come up against a team with less talent and one who is more comfortable sitting back, then the formation just isn't strong enough in an attacking sense.

Secondly, you cannot keep Santa Cruz, our best out field player and top scorer on the right hand side of a front three / midfield because you're immediately taking away the teams best source of goals.

Thirdly, Bentley is clearly a right midfielder and not somebody who roams across the pitch behind the striker or a central midfielder. Although he can play here and do an excellent job, you again take away his crossing, the best part of his game, and a clear source of goals.

[joey_big_nose]

It bewilders me that people can obide by the theory that if a system works against the best team in europe, it will work against everyone.

We have proved time and time again we don't have the players to play a system which requires alot of flair to work when playing against deep lying teams and 5 men midfields.

When a team comes and sits back and we're set up to be solid, what do you think's gonna happen?

That a fair point. Man Utd pushed very far up, somtimes only leaving two at the back, and never had less than three strung across our back line. This in turn gave us an enormous amount of space in midfield, in the channels and behind their defence. When we play any other team that is not going to be the case. Even more so with the quality counter attacking teams like Pompey and Villa who will not only be able to stop us playing but then hurt us on the counter.

However I would like to point out that in a 442 we rarely look threatening either at the moment. So, with nothing much to play for now, I think it is very important we look at this option and see what we can do with it. Take this lineup:

---------------------Roberts

Dunn--------------Bentley-----------Cruz

-----------Vogel-------------Reid

Warnock---Nelsen---Samba----Emerton

------------------------Freidal

Compared with:

-------------------Roberts---Cruz

Pedersen-----Reid--------Vogel-----Bentley

Warnock----Nelsen----Samba------Emerton

-------------------------Freidal

For me the first option, provided we are willing to gamble a bit and get those top four players into the final third, will allow us to cause any defence to sweat. That quartet has a lot of skill, flair and power between them. Sure Reid (or Emerton) and Vogel will need to shoulder an enormous burden to shield the defence but they are both good at that. Especially against less pacy teams like Brum and Derby it could prosper.

The standard second option just makes us look flat to me. Bentley can create but the rest of the midfield just doesn't look like it will cause defences problems. Pedersen, Vogel and Reid can tackle but are not going to thread the passes. An opposition defence can just line up in front of then and expect to hold them off.

All that said It will interesting to see if Hughes has the balls to try it against a Pompey side that is compact and full of pace and power though.... However as we can't beat them at their own game (as we have no pace) we might as well try something that will give their defence something to think about. As opposed to playing in front of them and waiting for the inevitable counter.

At any rate 'arry won't know how the team he is going to face will be set up.

[Brfcrule1]

hi all,

I thought today could not get much worse what with the weather and things but this really cheered me up no end after his gaff on saturday against Man. Utd but I see in the press there are 2 premier league clubs after the axe check out the link below

http://www.teamtalk.com/football/interacti...98,3209,00.html

I hope this is true this year he appears to have been one of our worst performers and at 27 is not getting any younger we could use the cash to add a bit more dosh and buy a quality midfield playmaker or there is another way as the Latics are interested we might be able to do a swap deal Koumas for Mokoenaas sparky knows him he can't be any worse than the axe and we would get a creative midfielder that our team desperately needs any thoughts?

Laters all.