I'm not convinced that wing backs are something you necessarily go shopping for like any other position. It's a system that favours the right personnel, like finding yourself with Golbourne and Kennedy on your books. Kennedy was on a one week contract when this system was first implemented at Peterborough and it was evident then it had potential. Stones was not a wing back as such, he was just a very good defender who could carry the ball forward at a decent pace. He certainly kept us on the front foot, but he rarely put a cross in and I never saw him beat a full back on the outside. I think it is a system that rarely works perfectly for anyone. The personnel will dictate to what percentage it works, rather trying to plug gaps in the system with the wrong players. To shop for a wing back you first have to his appropriate counterpart behind him. It's like a partnership and Golbourne/Kennedy had just about enough quality between them to make it viable. With Golbourne out it really is a non-starter. The system has got us results in the short term but with Stones gone too, we have to go more conventional with what we have or it will be back to Hill's deluded notion of complete footballers playing anywhere you ask them to. Doesn't work. Until the personnel are there, it will have to be a flat back four with Hassell at right back. I've every confidence Flicker and the players can get the level of performance and the remaining points we need. Do us proud at City, grind out 4 or 5 more wins and let's quietly close down this season and prepare for next.
I have to admit mate I disagreed with you on this before yesterday, but we were infinitely better second half with 4 at the back, and the main reason being neither players in the position could play wing back. That, and for some reason we decided not to pass the ball and O'Brien was completely ineffective in the creative role. The only thing I would say, the reason we looked better is that both full backs pushed on and overlapped. That's what gave us width. Kennedy made a great run for cywka's goal.
Definitely agree - for me it's got to be Hassell, Cranie, Foster & Kennedy at the back on Tuesday. Though in all likelihood it will be this but with Wiseman instead of Hassell. May be a slightly controversial view but in a lot of the games I saw we didn't play all that badly with 4-4-2 (though this may be by virtue of getting to more away than home games this season). We kept possession well but failed to turn it into chances most of the time. If we can go back to this system but keep with the new philosophy of trying to play more in the opponent's half and being a bit more direct it may still pay dividends.
I disagree almost totally, apart from the fact that John Stones wasn't an ideal right wing back; for me he should be right side central defence. But on the 3 - 5 - 2 formation, this was what gave us the really good run and the belief; when we changed it due to Golbourne's injury look what happened. The fact that we played this formation, took the game to the opposition and let them worry about us rather than vice versa gave us the impetus to move forward and we should stick with it; and without trying to tell Uncle David and his family how to do things, why not try Cwyka at wing back?
Thank you for illustrating my point. Though I did suggest Cywka may grow into this role next season, on another thread.
hi Paul with ou on this but I still talk in old money cannot see how any team can play without 2 dedicated fullbacks
We didnt do too badly in 96/97 with this system, When Tommo was injured Sheridan dropped in there, maybe we could play Perkins in the wingback role? He certinly is fit enough to get up and down the wing, he can use his left foot too. We have Dawson coming back into the squad too. I realise that my views are not valid in any way at all though, but there they are anyway!!
Yup, I'd go along with that If we're able to bring in someone who is comfortable and capable of playing in Golbourne's place, then great. If not, then a flat back four with the quartet you mentioned is probably as good as we can manage. Now's not the time to start panicking, though, just because after winning eight and drawing one out of the previous nine we've now lost two on the bounce. Provided we remain focussed, I believe we can still avoid the drop. I only hope none of the players & management have thrown in the towel and accepted relegation like some have done.
I like the system, particularly in 96/97 as Mark mentions and I've enjoyed watching us use it recently. As Noel (from Jump!) points out, it begins with dedicated full backs. It was more by chance that we had two in the side who were decent at getting forward and had the pace and stamina to get back and defend. When you have that it becomes a viable system with the addition of the extra centre half or sweeper, or even defensive midfielder like Bobby falling back as required. But if you don't have the right players, which we don't now, there is no point in perservering with that system with players that simply don't fit. Bobby and TK are never wing backs, they may have the odd sorte up the wing, but that is not their role. Wiseman could do it, just not in this league.
