[Archived] Bradford City V Rovers

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

Have we sold out?

[AAK]

6 minutes ago, SIMON GARNERS 194 said:

Have we sold out?

Initial 1200 sold behind the goal, now selling seats on the side stand

[ruggles1995]

Just now, Blue blood said:

The weakness on the 4-2-3-1 system is that it very easily can have a lack of width if there is little movement from the 3 and be a very narrow formation, thereby asking a lot of the wing play to be done by our fullbacks. Aside from the fact our full backs don't have the offensive capabilities to do so, it also leaves them exposed and vulnerable to players getting in behind them. 

Mind you, looking at the players we've recruited that still seems to be the best system with what we've got.

My worry with 4-4-2 is that the cms are all quite deep lying. Only Evans (when fit) could be box to box, or potentially Bennett if moves inside. I'd also worry about Whittingham in a central 4 leaving too much for the other cm to do. Perhaps I'm mistaken as with 2 up top we may hold it up better allowing numbers to get forward in support of them. 

Another possibility is the 4-5-1 which can switch to 4-3-3 with two wide players pushing up or dropping back as necessary. This formation might suit the likes of Conway and Chapman out wide, but again is reliant on someone with a bit of an engine and a willingness to get forward somewhere in  the central 3. Again with Bennett inside it could work, and with 3 in the centre it may allow Whittingham to sit deep and just focus on his strengths. It also takes the onus of offensive play out wide from the full backs. 

Not quite sure how we've had a turnover of 20+ players and are struggling to find/discern a system that suits them mind...

Blue Blood, 4-2-3-1 is not a narrow formation. I set this formation for the team I manage and its just another formation for 4-5-1/4-3-3. 4-5-1 without the ball and its 4-3-3 with it. the 2 wide guys in the 3 are not narrow at all. They are there to be a winger/striker, not to be standing side by side with the striker, then when the team loses the ball they tuck in to become a 5 man midfield.  Then you have the most atticking midfielder behind the striker to link up. So you almost attack with a 4, and potentially a 5th and 1 of the 2 deep CMs hold to allow another to join in, while also letting your full backs push on as he will sit as cover with the 2 CBs. Its a very versatile formation tbf and the easiest for our team to use. Keep it basic. it may sound pretty with all the numbers, buts its basically 4-5-1/4-3-3

[AAK]

                    Raya

Bennett  Nyambe Mulgrew Willy

               Smallwood

Conway     Evans       Chapman

                   Dack

                Graham

[ruggles1995]

Raya
No Idea? No Idea? No Idea? No Idea?
               Smallwood Mulgrew
Conway         Dack                  Bennet
                    Samuel

[Bigdoggsteel]

1 hour ago, Blueandwhitemike said:

It was Mulgrew I think

I liked seeing that 

[Bigdoggsteel]

45 minutes ago, ChrisPriceBaldSpot said:

                   Raya

Caddis Mulgrew Wharton Williams

               Smallwood

       Evans                 Bennett

                   Dack

       Samuel   Graham

 

 

The famous Xmas tree. It's only August mate! 

[chaddyrovers]

2 hours ago, LewisF said:

I agree --- Gladwin at CM?

Played there for Swindon but I think it was part of 3 man midfield in 3-5-2 formation under Mark Cooper. 

2 hours ago, gazsimm said:

play an attacking team and we will win.

team should be

                          Raya

Nyambe Ward Mulgrew Williams

Feeney Evans Gladwin Conway (if Fit)

     Graham  Samuel

 

 

 

Feeney? Why? 

When you Chapman and Bennett in the squad. 

Graham shouldnt be started after his recent 2 pathetic performances

[Blue blood]

49 minutes ago, ruggles1995 said:

Blue Blood, 4-2-3-1 is not a narrow formation. I set this formation for the team I manage and its just another formation for 4-5-1/4-3-3. 4-5-1 without the ball and its 4-3-3 with it. the 2 wide guys in the 3 are not narrow at all. They are there to be a winger/striker, not to be standing side by side with the striker, then when the team loses the ball they tuck in to become a 5 man midfield.  Then you have the most atticking midfielder behind the striker to link up. So you almost attack with a 4, and potentially a 5th and 1 of the 2 deep CMs hold to allow another to join in, while also letting your full backs push on as he will sit as cover with the 2 CBs. Its a very versatile formation tbf and the easiest for our team to use. Keep it basic. it may sound pretty with all the numbers, buts its basically 4-5-1/4-3-3

Very helpful that, thanks. I'm surmising it partly depends on who the wide players in the 3 are? Could that not have a big influence on the width. But that's very reassuring that in essence it's a 4-5-1.

 

[Bigdoggsteel]

3 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Played there for Swindon but I think it was part of 3 man midfield in 3-5-2 formation under Mark Cooper. 

Feeney? Why? 

When you Chapman and Bennett in the squad. 

Graham shouldnt be started after his recent 2 pathetic performances

? 

[Boaty]

59 minutes ago, ruggles1995 said:

Blue Blood, 4-2-3-1 is not a narrow formation. I set this formation for the team I manage and its just another formation for 4-5-1/4-3-3. 4-5-1 without the ball and its 4-3-3 with it. the 2 wide guys in the 3 are not narrow at all. They are there to be a winger/striker, not to be standing side by side with the striker, then when the team loses the ball they tuck in to become a 5 man midfield.  Then you have the most atticking midfielder behind the striker to link up. So you almost attack with a 4, and potentially a 5th and 1 of the 2 deep CMs hold to allow another to join in, while also letting your full backs push on as he will sit as cover with the 2 CBs. Its a very versatile formation tbf and the easiest for our team to use. Keep it basic. it may sound pretty with all the numbers, buts its basically 4-5-1/4-3-3

Fifa or football manager? What roles do you suggest for the 2 cms? Bbm and bwm?

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, Boaty said:

Fifa or football manager? What roles do you suggest for the 2 cms? Bbm and bwm?

PTFBF 

[RV Blue]

16 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Feeney? Why? 

When you Chapman and Bennett in the squad. 

You keep asking this, it is because he's quick and should be effective in league 1. Bennett isn't quick and Chapman is left footed. Feeney is an extremely limited footballer but if you give him one job, he can do it quite well. There is a reason he's played so many games in the Championship, and he did well in his one season in League 1.

[Bigdoggsteel]

11 minutes ago, RV Blue said:

You keep asking this, it is because he's quick and should be effective in league 1. Bennett isn't quick and Chapman is left footed. Feeney is an extremely limited footballer but if you give him one job, he can do it quite well. There is a reason he's played so many games in the Championship, and he did well in his one season in League 1.

I really don't get the Feeney hate. I think he can be one of our most effective players on his day. 

If only he could cross 

[RV Blue]

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

I really don't get the Feeney hate. I think he can be one of our most effective players on his day. 

If only he could cross 

It is probably because Coyle brought him in.

[RV Blue]

http://audioboom.com/posts/6213938-

Mowbray saying that there was nothing wrong with the formation against Doncaster, it was because we didn't run in behind their defence... what did you expect when you played Graham, Bennett and Whittingham as your most attacking players you F-ing halfwit! He also said that we played 3 up front, did we? I didn't see it. 

It pains me to say it, but the sooner this man goes the better.

[OJRovers]

Seems obvious from this thread that we haven't got a "starting XI" but a squad full of quantity over quality.

Promotion teams have a settled team and formation. 

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

? 

2 are wing backs and 3 man centre midfielders

46 minutes ago, RV Blue said:

You keep asking this, it is because he's quick and should be effective in league 1. Bennett isn't quick and Chapman is left footed. Feeney is an extremely limited footballer but if you give him one job, he can do it quite well. There is a reason he's played so many games in the Championship, and he did well in his one season in League 1.

Sorry, Feeney isnt good at all. 

Like I said before Chapman and Gladwin wide with Dack in the 10 role behind Samuel. 

Between Those 4 give you skill, pace and tricky which we are lacking going forward. 

30 minutes ago, RV Blue said:

It is probably because Coyle brought him in.

Nothing to do with Coyle. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, chaddyrovers said:

2 are wing backs and 3 man centre midfielders

Sorry, Feeney isnt good at all. 

Like I said before Chapman and Gladwin wide with Dack in the 10 role behind Samuel. 

Between Those 4 give you skill, pace and tricky which we are lacking going forward. 

Nothing to do with Coyle. 

Sorry Chaddy but in 3-5-2 there are definitely 5 midfielders. Hence the 5 part  So Gladwin has played centre in a 5 man midfield. 

Come here, what would your starting 11 be? 

[chaddyrovers]

40 minutes ago, RV Blue said:

http://audioboom.com/posts/6213938-

Mowbray saying that there was nothing wrong with the formation against Doncaster, it was because we didn't run in behind their defence... what did you expect when you played Graham, Bennett and Whittingham as your most attacking players you F-ing halfwit! He also said that we played 3 up front, did we? I didn't see it. 

It pains me to say it, but the sooner this man goes the better.

After listening to that interview, this the team I think Mowbray will play

                         Raya

          Nyambe Ward Mulgrew 

BennettSmallwoodWhittinghamWilliams

                          Dack

            Antonsson Samuel

And before anybody jump on me this is what I think Mowbray will play after listening to his interview

[Bigdoggsteel]

19 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

After listening to that interview, this the team I think Mowbray will play

                         Raya

          Nyambe Ward Mulgrew 

BennettSmallwoodWhittinghamWilliams

                          Dack

            Antonsson Samuel

And before anybody jump on me this is what I think Mowbray will play after listening to his interview

What team would you play? 

[chaddyrovers]

4 hours ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

What team would you play? 

My team would be

                          Raya

Nyambe Lenihan/new Mulgrew Doyle

                 Evans Smallwood

Chapman         Dack            Gladwin

                        Samuel

Subs:- Luetwiler Williams Caddis Whittingham Bennett Antonsson Graham

With Lenihan injured and no new signing sign It a very tough call who to replace him. Thats why I think Mowbray will play 3 at the back. Also Mowbray talked in interview about movement and getting in behind leads to think that Samuel and Antonsson will play to run in behind their defence. Dack in the 10 role

[Irishrover213]

58 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

After listening to that interview, this the team I think Mowbray will play

                         Raya

          Nyambe Ward Mulgrew 

BennettSmallwoodWhittinghamWilliams

                          Dack

            Antonsson Samuel

And before anybody jump on me this is what I think Mowbray will play after listening to his interview

Wasn't at the game so can't comment but what I saw of high lights two of the goals were preventable. I think you have to start samuel after scoring last week. Expecting us to set up not to concede and hold out for a draw 

[Lancaster Rover]

I really hope Whittingham is nowhere near the starting 11, I was pleased with his signing but after watching the opening games and a few friendlies I am convinced his legs have gone. 

I don't doubt he is trying but his legs aren't running at the same speed as his head.

[blueboy3333]

3 hours ago, RV Blue said:

http://audioboom.com/posts/6213938-

Mowbray saying that there was nothing wrong with the formation against Doncaster, it was because we didn't run in behind their defence... what did you expect when you played Graham, Bennett and Whittingham as your most attacking players you F-ing halfwit! He also said that we played 3 up front, did we? I didn't see it. 

It pains me to say it, but the sooner this man goes the better.

That interview is Kean-esque. Saying we played 3 up front is just a bare-faced lie.

To then start going on about Atletico Madrid as a way of justifying his formation.....

Venky's have picked another clown