442 v 442

We are OK as we've got good players and I think all of our wins have come against teams who play 442.

Even the last 2 home games we've thrown away we've taken a commanding lead 442 v 442 but our problems arise when we come up against sides who play a different formation wether that be from the start, or change in game. We just don't have that flexibility to adapt and it's costing us points.

This is starting to become a concern for me and Brentford Tuesday night should be a real test of Slades tactical ability and we'll find out if he's learned anything from last two home games as they do not play 442 they play 4231.

We are OK as we've got good players and I think all of our wins have come against teams who play 442.

Even the last 2 home games we've thrown away we've taken a commanding lead 442 v 442 but our problems arise when we come up against sides who play a different formation wether that be from the start, or change in game. We just don't have that flexibility to adapt and it's costing us points.

This is starting to become a concern for me and Brentford Tuesday night should be a real test of Slades tactical ability and we'll find out if he's learned anything from last two home games as they do not play 442 they play 4231.

spot on.
After 10 minutes of the second half we were comfortable and still having a go at them. In hindsight he could have gone all Italian and thought take off a striker chuck on another midfielder and protect what you've got. I don't blame him for not changing while we were on top but as soon as the goal went in we just surrendered possession and our midfield couldn't get a foot in.
If Brentford have done their homework they will be able to exploit theses failings.

We could and maybe should have brought Whitts on to help us keep possession of the football and get an extra body in the middle.

People say he slows the game down but maybe at 2 nil up that's what's required.

Our possession (42%) and passing accuracy (75%) was not great yesterday although conditions were not good but I do think with Whitts quality in there last half hour this would have been better.

We are OK as we've got good players and I think all of our wins have come against teams who play 442.

Even the last 2 home games we've thrown away we've taken a commanding lead 442 v 442 but our problems arise when we come up against sides who play a different formation wether that be from the start, or change in game. We just don't have that flexibility to adapt and it's costing us points.

This is starting to become a concern for me and Brentford Tuesday night should be a real test of Slades tactical ability and we'll find out if he's learned anything from last two home games as they do not play 442 they play 4231.

I agree with this but would add it is a concern to me when at the start of the game we have "Greater Quality" on the bench than we do in the starting 11. Manga, Fabio and of course Whittingham in terms of ability are miles ahead of those currently starting ahead of them and that must change. You can add Dickagoi and Ben Turner to that list when he returns in the new year.

We know RS will only ever play 442 but in a formation more suited to football in the 70's where it is actually more like 424 and, in my opinion, it is no coincidence that we have seen our best defensive performances with Whittingham and Dickagoi in the CM positions, Why? because they are better footballers with a better first touch and better control when in possession than yesterdays pairing. In my opinion since RS has started playing around with these positions it's no coincidence we have started shipping 2 goals a game.

When we won this league MM played with 1 up front and we relied heavily on players like Don Cowie working thier socks off to give players like Mutch, Noone and Gunnarsonn the freedom to get forward and support our lone striker. All this whilst our most gifted player set the tempo of the team.

Unfortunately RS will continue doing the only thing he knows and it won't be long before the bully boys turn on Ralls and Gunnarsonn as they have on Whittingham.

We are OK as we've got good players and I think all of our wins have come against teams who play 442.

Even the last 2 home games we've thrown away we've taken a commanding lead 442 v 442 but our problems arise when we come up against sides who play a different formation wether that be from the start, or change in game. We just don't have that flexibility to adapt and it's costing us points.

This is starting to become a concern for me and Brentford Tuesday night should be a real test of Slades tactical ability and we'll find out if he's learned anything from last two home games as they do not play 442 they play 4231.

I agree with this but would add it is a concern to me when at the start of the game we have "Greater Quality" on the bench than we do in the starting 11. Manga, Fabio and of course Whittingham in terms of ability are miles ahead of those currently starting ahead of them and that must change. You can add Dickagoi and Ben Turner to that list when he returns in the new year.

We know RS will only ever play 442 but in a formation more suited to football in the 70's where it is actually more like 424 and, in my opinion, it is no coincidence that we have seen our best defensive performances with Whittingham and Dickagoi in the CM positions, Why? because they are better footballers with a better first touch and better control when in possession than yesterdays pairing. In my opinion since RS has started playing around with these positions it's no coincidence we have started shipping 2 goals a game.

When we won this league MM played with 1 up front and we relied heavily on players like Don Cowie working thier socks off to give players like Mutch, Noone and Gunnarsonn the freedom to get forward and support our lone striker. All this whilst our most gifted player set the tempo of the team.

Unfortunately RS will continue doing the only thing he knows and it won't be long before the bully boys turn on Ralls and Gunnarsonn as they have on Whittingham.

My thoughts entirely

Yep spot on CB. It's the system that's the issue not the players and Whitts has become the scapegoat for Slades failings.

I don't believe it's just about the tactics that we can't close games down but I think there is not enough commitment to see out the games Russ sort it out!

I don't believe it's just about the tactics that we can't close games down but I think there is not enough commitment to see out the games Russ sort it out!

Players are on win bonuses, however much you have you always want more !!!! They care more than us

Nothing about commitment,its all about tactics, they go shit or bust and we remain "resolute".

He'll have no answers to Brentford playing in between the spaces between the midfield and and defence.

I don't believe it's just about the tactics that we can't close games down but I think there is not enough commitment to see out the games Russ sort it out!

Players are on win bonuses, however much you have you always want more !!!! They care more than us

Nothing about commitment,its all about tactics, they go shit or bust and we remain "resolute".

He'll have no answers to Brentford playing in between the spaces between the midfield and and defence.

I dont have a good feeling for Tuesday night. He wont waiver from his 442 so we need to put it on them early as the home team dont give them time to settle otherwise it could be a repeat of last years home game against them.

I don't believe it's just about the tactics that we can't close games down but I think there is not enough commitment to see out the games Russ sort it out!

Players are on win bonuses, however much you have you always want more !!!! They care more than us

Nothing about commitment,its all about tactics, they go shit or bust and we remain "resolute".

He'll have no answers to Brentford playing in between the spaces between the midfield and and defence.

I think we will win because we are good attacking wise now just need to score 3 or more on a regular basis.

We could and maybe should have brought Whitts on to help us keep possession of the football and get an extra body in the middle.

People say he slows the game down but maybe at 2 nil up that's what's required.

Our possession (42%) and passing accuracy (75%) was not great yesterday although conditions were not good but I do think with Whitts quality in there last half hour this would have been better.

Although i agree there are issues the conditions were horrendous so i wouldnt take the passing % as a barometer in this one game. Do you know what theirs was out of interest?

We could and maybe should have brought Whitts on to help us keep possession of the football and get an extra body in the middle.

People say he slows the game down but maybe at 2 nil up that's what's required.

Our possession (42%) and passing accuracy (75%) was not great yesterday although conditions were not good but I do think with Whitts quality in there last half hour this would have been better.

Although i agree there are issues the conditions were horrendous so i wouldnt take the passing % as a barometer in this one game. Do you know what theirs was out of interest?

80% although they also attempted over 30% more passes than us. We attempted 375 and they attempted 493.

Also slade being "tactically inept" is the new soundbite on here now, someone has said it so naturally rydog is like a dog with a bone on the subject despite never bringing it up before and others too.


There isnt really a plan b with slade we know this. But i think there should be credit put his way for some of the game. We set up quite attack minded with pilkington playing narrow and he and gunnarsson were constantly looking to run in through the centre. Ralls had his head up all game trying to play positive football. Noone the same, watt too, positivity of actively trying to get the ball, move it forward and create chances.

Despite kenwyn playing we didnt just knock it long and actually tried to play through a side that came here to also play football, they were aggressive and attacked well and certainly didnt come here looking for the point.

I know people dont like slade and im far from convinced myself, but rather than just always looking to point the finger straight at him why not look to what else happened.

I noticed carl didnt just jump straight on slades back with his post and i agree, i think the players have to take their share. We had numerous chances to put the game to bed before foresteris goal. His movement for the goal was good and that got them back into the match.

Not everything that happens here is down to slade and i wish people would just look on things before jumping down his throat straight away

We could and maybe should have brought Whitts on to help us keep possession of the football and get an extra body in the middle.

People say he slows the game down but maybe at 2 nil up that's what's required.

Our possession (42%) and passing accuracy (75%) was not great yesterday although conditions were not good but I do think with Whitts quality in there last half hour this would have been better.

Agree, Whitts for Kenwynne instead of Ameobi for Kenwynne.

Obviously the players have to share some of the blame. Ralls didn't close Foresteri down quick enough, Marshall should have done better and Pilkington got wrong side of his man for the equaliser.

However, we were under the cosh because Slade made the same fundamental error yesterday that he made in just last home game ands that's failing to address the change in oppositions formation and obvious shift in the balance of play.

Burnley and Sheff Weds management addressed the issue they were having when we were on top against them yet Slade continuously just buries his head in the sand when it comes to addressing things when the opposition are on top.

To me that is being tactically inept.