During the first part of Keith Hill's reign, when he was successful, he identified Jacob Butterfield as a major talent who did not defend well. Nevertheless, he decided to build a team around him and to use 4-4-1-1, a system that allowed Butterfield to utilise the space between the lines and to get back into a defensive formation in his own time. During the first part of David Flitcroft's reign, he recognised that in John Stones and Scott Golbourne, he had two players with the skill and endurance to play wing back, that is to increase the midfield to five when we had the ball and increase the defence to five when the opposition had it. The key to the success of both systems was that they were designed around our strengths. Many posters are calling for a return to the wing back system, even though there is no evidence that the club has two top quality wing backs any longer. Surely the lesson from the first two paragraphs is that the system that the team uses should be based around the team strengths, rather than simply reverting to a system that was successful in the past for reasons that no longer apply. The question that posters need to answer, before they start to shoehorn existing players into any system is where are we strong, that is which players should we build our team around, and which system best takes advantage of their strengths, whilst at the same time recognises their weaknesses and compensates for them. For example, if you think that the team should be built around Jacob Mellis, you have to recognise that he cannot play in the centre of midfield because he just does not follow the runners and does not work hard enough to get goal side. Playing him on the wing means that he is marginalised going forward and does not protect the full back well enough when defending. Consequently, if you absolutely must have Jacob Mellis in your team, you must play him in the hole in a 4-4-1-1. Unfortunately, that is where my logic finishes because, in my view, the team lacks quality and no player stands out, so no system presents itself above any other.
Against Wigan we started 4-4-2 - didn't work, got overrun. Against Watford we started 4-4-2 - didn't work got overrun. Against Charlton and Huddersfield (the only points we've gained) we started 3-5-2 so I would suggest that this system suits us better. We also played much better against Watford when we reverted to 3-5-2. Both JOB and RNL work hard and track back as well as offering something going forward, with two defensive midfielders it would also allow one creative/lazy player to have a free role e.g. Mellis or McCourt.
O'grady hold up play is superb. We have some talented midfielders. I would play 4-5-1 with Tommy Polish, Mellis, Jennings pushing on and encouraged to shoot on sight, playing off COG.
I find it very strange that Flitcroft has had since May to decide on what system he wants to play and bring in the players that fit bthat system. Instead he has signed a bunch of players and has no idea where they are best suited! I am sure that you will remember that Glavin was not the best defender, but he still played in the middle, not as a 1 behind a lone striker. Yet you seem to suggest with your argument that is the only place he should have played? We have enough defensive midfield battlers in the squad to cover for any lapses from the flair players. We dont need 3 defensive players in midfield as it stifles any attacking threat we may possess. Even with so many in there we are still shipping bucket loads in every week ! So why not at least give the flair players some chance and try and out score the opponents, rather than just trying to stifle them.
The "Butterfield couldn't defend" myth. Prior to his last appearance for us, he topped the charts for successful tackles, topped the chart for percentage of successful tackles attempted, and had an 82% pass completion rate. He was behind only Perkins for metres travelled without the ball over 90 minutes. I think he did a lot more defensive work than he was ever credited for. But then, I am a wee bit biased.
Unfortunately, the game has moved on since Glavin played. As I recall it, we were forced to bring in a defensive midfield player in order to cover the holes that Glavin used to leave. Even so, I still recall McCarthy's accusatory finger pointed in the direction of Glavin on more than one occasion. Do we really have the players to take part in a shoot out. If you remember, Glavin was supported by one of the best attacks ever to turn out in the red of BFC. The current team is not equipped for a shoot out. Do you really believe that we would have beaten Watford on that basis, remember, we lost the second half by two clear goals.
Well if those are the figures, they do not correspond to the impression that I got from watching him play. Perhaps I will get the chance to confirm your figures if he plays in the centre of a four man midfield for Middlesbrough later in the season.
Glavin - so am told - could win a game by himself. As could Redfearn, Hignett, Howard, Vaz Te, Hammill and Butterfield. I believe Mellis has demonstrated that ability, too. I also believe Reuben has that also. We need to throw off the shackles and play. Because the defensive setup is far from working. Dawson, Etuhu and Perkins cannot win a game on their own. They are great at helping others do that. The answer is in there somewhere.
Whatever formation we play , we have to go back to pressing opposition all over the pitch , no more sitting back , no more tip tapping midfield and in defence , and look to not just get a draw away from home but 3 points
We had Ray McHale in behind Glavin, put Tutu/Dawson/Perkins behind Mellis, see what happens, but I will tell you this much, we will have more chance of winning a game set up that way than how we are now ! No-one ever said that Glavin never made a mistake, but without him in the side we were only half as good. Imagine if we had played 3 players like McHale and left Glavin as a left winger, do you think we would have seen the best of Glavin then?
If you watch the Boro highlights from Saturday - The FLS is on iPlayer - you will notice the third goal. Where Jacob dispossesses his midfield opponent before assisting the Leadbitter goal. He also set up Carayol's goal. And was MOTM. But they did concede three so what do I know? The answer is not much.
What we need to do is complicate a simple game as much as we possibly can, and be so obsessed with the opposition that we pick different players in a different formation every fcking week. Just because we might pick 4 midfielders it doesn't mean they have to play in a straight line for the 90 minutes. Steele, Hassell, Crainie, Ramage, new left back, RNL, Etuhu, Mellis, O'Brien, CoG, Pedersen and stop pissing about.
But whilst that side may score more goals, we may end up conceding four or five a game, and that is why we are playing the toilers... oh, hang on...
Although I think the OP might be onto something, I think we look best both defensively and offensively in a 3-5-2. However, perhaps without Peds we could go with a 3-6-1 / 5-4-1 / 3-4-3 which ever way you want to look at it and maybe bring Scotland on if we want to revert to 352. This is nothing against Scotland who I think is a great player, I just like the look of this formation. ......................Steele ............Cranie M'Voto Nyatanga Wiseman................................Noble-Lazarus ................Etuhu....Perkins .........Mellis.......................Cywka .....................O'Grady We have plenty of cover for all the positions, particularly at the back obv and behind COG most noteably, with McCourt and Jennings as other options. Of course, this system only works if you have good wing-backs and in RNL I think we definitely have one. The other side is a little weaker with neither Wisey or JOB bringing everything required but at least you have a defensive and an offensive option. If Flicker is given more backing for players (and I'm not sure he should be), the area I'd target is RWB. We could also do with a proper left full-back if we were to revert to a back 4 and a new CM to shake things up - but that would be being picky We definitely need to move some on though if we are to bring anymore in - the squad is too large as it is.
Think all fans agree we can't play with the present formation and team selection, hope flicker realises this and changes it before it's too late
-----------Steele -----Craine Mvoto Ramage O'brien--------------------RNL ---------Etuhu Digby------- ------------Mellis------------ -------Pedersen O'grady
4-2-3-1 for now if Pedersen is fit he could play either instead on Mellis in the hole or up top instead of COG. There's very few successful teams play with 2 recognised strikers these days! ------------Steel Crainie Nyatanga Ramage RNL ---------Etuhu Digby ----Jennings Mellis McCourt ------------COG