TWO UP FRONT/Griffiths

[Nobby]

Anything less than two up front is not setting an attacking team. It's more defensive.

Depends on the players in the formation. Atletico Madrid play Falcao as a lone striker and he has 40 goals in 48 games. For a more realistic comparison, Cardiff City only play 1 up front and they're top of the Championship.

 

[GreenSam]

Anything less than two up front is not setting an attacking team. It's more defensive.

Depends on the players in the formation. Atletico Madrid play Falcao as a lone striker and he has 40 goals in 48 games. For a more realistic comparison, Cardiff City only play 1 up front and they're top of the Championship.

Just what I've been trying to say for about the past year. Football's more complex than "2 up front=good, 1 up front=bad". 4-2-3-1 for example is a means of flooding the midfield yet still having 3 attacking players in close proximity with the striker.

 

[Nobby]

Anything less than two up front is not setting an attacking team. It's more defensive.

Depends on the players in the formation. Atletico Madrid play Falcao as a lone striker and he has 40 goals in 48 games. For a more realistic comparison, Cardiff City only play 1 up front and they're top of the Championship.

Just what I've been trying to say for about the past year. Football's more complex than "2 up front=good, 1 up front=bad". 4-2-3-1 for example is a means of flooding the midfield yet still having 3 attacking players in close proximity with the striker.

4-2-3-1 is the best formation going, if you have the personnel. Allows fluid attacking, pressure in midfield and cover at the back. Hence why Dortmund went to the Etihad and Bernebau and came away undefeated.

 

[GreenSam]

Anything less than two up front is not setting an attacking team. It's more defensive.

Depends on the players in the formation. Atletico Madrid play Falcao as a lone striker and he has 40 goals in 48 games. For a more realistic comparison, Cardiff City only play 1 up front and they're top of the Championship.

Just what I've been trying to say for about the past year. Football's more complex than "2 up front=good, 1 up front=bad". 4-2-3-1 for example is a means of flooding the midfield yet still having 3 attacking players in close proximity with the striker.

4-2-3-1 is the best formation going, if you have the personnel. Allows fluid attacking, pressure in midfield and cover at the back. Hence why Dortmund went to the Etihad and Bernebau and came away undefeated.

It's certainly up there- other formations fit certain personnel of course but I liked how it got us 3 wins on the bounce and an unlucky loss at Cheltenham. Then one bad game with it at Rotherham and we dropped it like a hot potato. Shame really.

 

[Deacster]

Bottom line is if the manager wants to play one up front he needs to learn how to use Griffiths effectively. He's not mobile but is very good in the air and needs runners around him. That cameo against Northampton is looking more like a flash in the pan but in fairness we arnt doing him any favours by not utlising his strengths and exposing his weaknesses.

 

[Mannamead Green]

I really don't think you can make these judgements based on 1 game. Our patch of good form around September/October came with Madjo playing on his own up front with Gurrieri in the hole. Also, 1 up front is not necessarily more defensive than 2 up top, despite what English football pundits say. That said, I do think Griffiths is better when paired with another striker.

I would like us to play this team:
Gilmartin

Berry
Nelson
Purse
Bhasera

Young/Lennox
Molesley
Hourihane
Gurrieri

Griffiths/Feeney
Cowan-Hall