what was that?

[DMR]

king generally can't get a 4-4-2 right so whatever the hell he tried last night was always certain to be a grand waste of time

discuss

[Johno]

i think it was a 3-5-2 he was playing as thats how they lined up from the goal kick.

im sure it was

Heaton

Reeves Platt Ifil

Shakes Whalley Heath Pook Smith

Thorpe Roberts.

[DMR]

oh dear andrew...

[Nils]

Agreed. I am sure that is the formation he tried then realised it wasn't working and changed it.

[Johno]

tbh, i can't see anything wrong with trying that formation out..players were playing rubbish, im sure that if they had of played well, you wouldn't be moaning about the formation.

[walrus]

I wouldn't criticise King for that formation - it's a reasonable team and shape.  Having not been there last night it's difficult to say, but judging on the Oldham performance where we switched formation with a huge degree of success it seems that the players aren't all tactically drilled as they should be.

I hope he goes 4-4-2 on Saturday, plays a nice solid team which is hard to score against.  At the moment we seem to be trying to play decent football (trying being the operative word) and looking to win games 4-3 ala Keegan style.  Typical of a manager who was an attacking player.

But what shape do we go with?  The 3-4-3 looked great vs. Oldham but would it genuinely work for 90 minutes?  In 03/04 we played 3-5-2 (or 5-3-2 whatever you want to call it) and switched to 4-4-2 at the Brentford away game around Christmas time.  In my opinion, if we play 4-4-2 Shakes or Roberts must be on the right wing, and Nicholau on the left.  No one else in the squad has convinced me they are a proper winger (assuming Buzzer's on his way out) and width is vital - particularly when playing with Fallon up front, who's height is an inevitable asset.  This kind of tactic worked wonders vs. Forest and made us look a good side, although after the Scunthorpe result I can't help wondering if it was Forest's ineptitude or our skill which made us look so strong.

One thing's for certain - a continual switching of formation is not helping anyone.  A late attacking change to 3-4-3/4-4-3 (or 2-3-5 if you play FM2K5!) is fair enough, but I really do think after 5 odd years in charge King should have a settled formation.

[Nils]

I think that we have good players but we need to choose a formation and get players in that suit that formation. TBH I know you are going to shoot me down on this cos Shakes was one of our best players last night but he is hardly the right player to be a wing back. I would rather him hogging the right touch line and being able to get forward nd being able to put ccrosses in with a 4-4-2 formation.

[I 8 Razor]

it's gotta be 4-4-2  shakes and nicolau hugging the touchline, simple.

[walrus]

I think that we have good players but we need to choose a formation and get players in that suit that formation. TBH I know you are going to shoot me down on this cos Shakes was one of our best players last night but he is hardly the right player to be a wing back. I would rather him hogging the right touch line and being able to get forward nd being able to put ccrosses in with a 4-4-2 formation.

I'm with you on that one.  He's the best right winger at the club on the evidence I have seen, although admittedly he's not played much so it's not a lot of evidence!  Unless Buzzer dramatically improves with fitness Shakes is a more exciting winger.  Obviously his defensive qualities are nil, but he's like a poor man's Shaun Wright-Phillips!

[BrightonRed]

I hope he goes 4-4-2 on Saturday, plays a nice solid team which is hard to score against.  At the moment we seem to be trying to play decent football (trying being the operative word) and looking to win games 4-3 ala Keegan style.  Typical of a manager who was an attacking player.

In my opinion, if we play 4-4-2 Shakes or Roberts must be on the right wing, and Nicholau on the left.  No one else in the squad has convinced me they are a proper winger (assuming Buzzer's on his way out) and width is vital - particularly when playing with Fallon up front, who's height is an inevitable asset. This kind of tactic worked wonders vs. Forest and made us look a good side, although after the Scunthorpe result I can't help wondering if it was Forest's ineptitude or our skill which made us look so strong.

One thing's for certain - a continual switching of formation is not helping anyone.  A late attacking change to 3-4-3/4-4-3 (or 2-3-5 if you play FM2K5!) is fair enough, but I really do think after 5 odd years in charge King should have a settled formation.

I agree with everything above, and I especially agree with the highlighted stuff.

[Ben Wah Balls]

We switched to 4-4-2 after about 20 minutes, on saturday we'll probably stick with the 4-4-2 we were using seeing as our league form has been good.

[sonicyouth]

We switched to 4-4-2 after about 20 minutes, on saturday we'll probably stick with the 4-4-2 we were using seeing as our league form has been good.

2 losses, a draw and a win against a crap Forest side? I wouldn't call that good!

[Ben Wah Balls]

A win against a side that were former European champions and favourites for promotion, a credible away draw and clean sheet, a close defeat to a team who are tipped for the title (Oldham) and a away defeat.

Not too bad and we have shown a marked improvement in the last couple of league games, we had a extremely difficult start on paper and a less than ideal pre-season, with this in mind we have done alright.

[janaage]

"a win against a side that were former european champions"

clutching at straws there Benjamin!!!

[larwood]

I applaude Bens optimism,but i'll have to agree with sy.