Our troublesome left side.....

[perseus]

What system allows you to play on both wings at the same time?

When one wing-back goes forward, the whole defence moves over a bit and then it is four at the back anyway.

However, when the other side is attacking down one wing, often gaining possiession and pumping the ball into the hole left by the advancing wing-back, our full-back on the other wing is out of the game being useless. Better to have the extra man in midfield.

 

[London Irish]

I would like a change of formation to the 5-3-2 that served us so well during our purple patch at the start of the year. However McGhee does not seem to want to revert to this formation

I'm convinced that we're only playing 4-4-2 because of Leon, because McGhee wants to manufacture some space for him. Leon doesn't fit into a 5-3-2 system. But with Leon out, I reckon we will revert to that rather than risk Jonah's inconsistent use of the ball, certainly at Burnley anyway.

 

[Lokki 7]

When one wing-back goes forward, the whole defence moves over a bit and then it is four at the back anyway.

However, when the other side is attacking down one wing, often gaining possiession and pumping the ball into the hole left by the advancing wing-back, our full-back on the other wing is out of the game being useless. Better to have the extra man in midfield.

Your post makes no sense to me. If the full back in a 5-3-2 is attacking and in possession then he IS an extra man in midfield. When defending, the remaining back 4 (in your example) cover the space. This is something they can do as I've seen it. Of course if they are rooted to the spot it leaves holes but that is true of any formation.

 

[Schrödinger's Toad]

When one wing-back goes forward, the whole defence moves over a bit and then it is four at the back anyway.

However, when the other side is attacking down one wing, often gaining possiession and pumping the ball into the hole left by the advancing wing-back, our full-back on the other wing is out of the game being useless. Better to have the extra man in midfield.

So the same as 4-4-2 then? When the opposition attack down either wing, the defender on the other side will always be "useless" by your reckoning.

 

[beorhthelm]

When one wing-back goes forward, the whole defence moves over a bit and then it is four at the back anyway.

What an absurd post. The defense only moves across a bit if either they dont have the discipline to stay in position or are instructed to do so in order to cover the advancing winger. Indeed, is that not the very purpose of the formation?

 

[Tom Bombadil]

Can any of Jarrets fans explain how he's going to be the answer when he can't even get into a non-league team.

 

[Paddy B]

Agreed. Even if you look at his early season performances can anyone honestly tell me one decent cross he put in.

Yes he has a bit of pace and did beat a couple of defenders but dis nothing with it

 

[perseus]

What an absurd post. The defense only moves across a bit if either they dont have the discipline to stay in position or are instructed to do so in order to cover the advancing winger. Indeed, is that not the very purpose of the formation?

If they don't move across there is a f***ing great hole where the full back used to be.

If they do move across it is more like 4-4-2 anyway.

If both teams play 4-4-2 it can end up turgid and boring.