3-4-1-2So this new formation… is it a 3-5-2 or 3-4-3?
I take it we have 2 holding midfielders that allow 2 wide/attacking players to play off a single striker?
3-4-1-2So this new formation… is it a 3-5-2 or 3-4-3?
I take it we have 2 holding midfielders that allow 2 wide/attacking players to play off a single striker?
Similar comments were being made at the end of last season. i.e. we just lacked a cutting edge. You can have the best defence and midfield but ultimately you have to put your chances away to win matches. I appreciate Schey and Co are working hard behind the scenes to address the problem but surely to make new tactics work you need all players on board . How quickly will a new striker adapt?Schumacher has forgotten more about football than I'll ever know, but we didn't create 'really good opportunities.'
Miller got in for a good chance and that was it. The rest were weak efforts from outside a congested penalty area, the sort of position where you'd be lucky if one in twenty attempts go in. Had Argyle restricted the home side to those kind of pot shots on an away trip, we'd be pretty happy.
The Bristol City report posted above has it better - Argyle's extra bodies in midfield meant we were able to pass circles around them (at least while we had a stronger side out in the first half) but their keeper was 'rarely troubled' - partly because the extra numbers in midfield meant we couldn't get into the attacking third so quickly.
Despite the number of shots very few hit the target.Couldn’t agree more MGM, great post. What I really like is the tactical evolution by Schuey. Loved the fact that sometimes the furthest forward runners in the box were the full backs, And then we even had Jephcott tracking back covering Edwards after one quick counter attack by City, smart alert play by Jephers. The midfielders were also popping up all over the pitch. I can’t remember our midfielders having so many shots in a game. Randell, Aziz, Butcher all had 2 or 3 shots each.
I felt there was very little difference in the quality of the sides and watching Argyle felt as close as I can remember to total football as it was so fluid and interchangeable. Won’t get carried away but what is good is is that it was a glimpse into Schuey’s tactical quality and also a good showcase Of a smart recruitment policy.
Exactly that, think he will really grow with experience.Am not Jephcott's biggest fan but perhaps the Sheringham type role will work. The key to it is timing runs into the box to get on the end of things. Much more difficult for defenders to pick up than someone just hanging around on the edge of 6 yard box.
I remember watching Tynan and Kemp and thinking: 'Where the **** is he going?'.Has he got that nous though? It cannot be coached - the knack of clever movement, dropping to edge of the box when everyone's charging the six yard line and all the rest.
Players like Gascoigne, le tissier, lampard, Sheringham are a rare breed.
Oh for a striker of Sir Thomas of Tynans ability. We would win the league!!I remember watching Tynan and Kemp and thinking: 'Where the **** is he going?'.
Surely the ball is coming near post?
Next minute: Bang!! Back of the net!
In possession 3-4-1-2. Out of possession 3-4-2-1.3-4-2-1 ?
Absolutely, Tommy would often come deeper, link play and then ghost into the box to score yet another! Not a bad model for Jephers to try and emulate.I remember watching Tynan and Kemp and thinking: 'Where the **** is he going?'.
Surely the ball is coming near post?
Next minute: Bang!! Back of the net!
Bit like Camara then....How many clubs are we fighting off from taking Jephcott away from Home Park....because he's a natural goal scorer......one , two, three....or none.......I think the answer has four letters in it and not three.