PDA

View Full Version : The one man attack



ForestHills
18-01-2014, 11:51 PM
Its the bain of my life - watching us at home huff and puff with loads of possesion but little end product.

When we break we usually have one man up front surrounded by 4-5 defenders so we go up the wing slowly and maybe sling a pointless cross in or pass it back into midfield where we get bogged down.

We either need midfielders to make runs beyond our single forward - not pass the ball about midfield - or we need to get a second striker on so one can hold up the ball and the other make runs.

The one man up front works a lot of the time (were 2nd in the league) but at home too often its become a hinderance rather than a help.

On a seperate note - thanks to going down the wings lots we win loads of corners - yet do vitually the same corner each time and it almost never works. Time for a change there too.

torry_battery_ram
19-01-2014, 12:00 AM
Most worrying for me is we have no Plan B - it seems to be that we play with one striker and that's it. Vernon especially is much more effective in a 4-4-2 - look at how he scored much more goals when having Maguire up with him.

That said if we had a decent one man striker eg Billy McKay we would probably done a bit better.

We also have a problem with the 3 in midfield of Jack, Flood and Robson. Its too defensive at home with Jack and Flood sitting deep all the time and Robson no longer having the legs to get forward a lot.

boaby81
19-01-2014, 12:01 AM
Play one up front and you need a 10. Pawlett is ours. He doesn't get the ball enough. He finds wee pockets and is direct. Flood, Robson and Jack have to give him it.

Players stop moving when they don't think they'll get it.

Keys1903
19-01-2014, 12:13 AM
Play one up front and you need a 10. Pawlett is ours. He doesn't get the ball enough. He finds wee pockets and is direct. Flood, Robson and Jack have to give him it.

Players stop moving when they don't think they'll get it.


If were to play one running of the target man that needs to be mcginn, hes was more dangerous last season centrally and pawlett can operate on the wings aswell,mcginn has shown the past few games he isnt suitable as a winger, at the moment we should be playing robson and flood together in cm, flood has the legs to get in about players faces and robson is more the "gerrard" type with his passing range sitting deeper and playing from the back

sancho_panza
19-01-2014, 12:59 AM
If we play two up front then we're going to find it much harder to dominate possession. St Mirren away is one of the few occasions this season where we've played two strikers together (Vernon and Zola) and it just didn't work - St Mirren pressed us high up the park and we ended up punting it for most of the game.

I know the argument here is putting McGinn and Vernon together, but if you take someone out of midfield, particularly as we'll be playing against a 5 man midfield a lot of the time, we'll find it heavy going in my opinion.

Mason89
19-01-2014, 01:09 AM
Don't mind playing 1 up front away from home but it's Craig Brown b0llocks doing it at Pittodrie

Just play McGinn & Vernon and let those highland Huns try and beat us.

Celtic are the only team that come to Pittodrie and play for the win. We should be set up to beat the rest

Keys1903
19-01-2014, 01:15 AM
the 1 man up front isnt going to change, whether its vernon or zola,mcginn should be played as the CAM in the 5 man midfield. Can drop back when we dont have possesion but hes better suited centrally

hilton82
19-01-2014, 05:09 AM
Don't mind playing 1 up front away from home but it's Craig Brown b0llocks doing it at Pittodrie

Just play McGinn & Vernon and let those highland Huns try and beat us.

Celtic are the only team that come to Pittodrie and play for the win. We should be set up to beat the rest


jutes came for the win aswell apart fae that abody else is sitting in ,big compliment after teams coming here playing 3 up front the last few seasons and having go.

WestCoastDon
19-01-2014, 09:46 AM
When you have one man up front there needs to be a lot of running through the gaps.

Anyone see Robson give Vernon and ear full in the first half for not doing exactly that?

The longer it goes on with our strikers not scoring the longer this season will drag on for us and the more frustrated the fans will get.

In truth, we should not be this high up in DM's first season with us. Therefore, anything in the top 6 will be a bonus. A potential cup would be unimaginable at the start of the season also.

We need to keep things in perspective. It will be DM's signings that will ultimately mark him out as a good manager or a great manager.

ForestHills
19-01-2014, 10:10 AM
If we play two up front then we're going to find it much harder to dominate possession. St Mirren away is one of the few occasions this season where we've played two strikers together (Vernon and Zola) and it just didn't work - St Mirren pressed us high up the park and we ended up punting it for most of the game.

I know the argument here is putting McGinn and Vernon together, but if you take someone out of midfield, particularly as we'll be playing against a 5 man midfield a lot of the time, we'll find it heavy going in my opinion.


I dont mind the 1 up front as it generally works but as I an others on here have mentioned that striker needs people running off him and into gaps - this isnt happening. We are leaving the striker isolated.

Also at home if the 1 up front isnt working why not change to 2 up front? I felt against ICT early in the 2nd half was the time to do it so we could play football to the 2 strikers. Sticking

Tenerifered
19-01-2014, 10:29 AM
You need a damd Good striker for this to be effective :s

Tubilay
19-01-2014, 10:31 AM
I thought we'd gone beyond the Idea that a lone striker was defensive. Seems not.

Give Caley some credit, they pushed very high, making our wide players drop deeper. Going to a 4-4-2 would have been suicidal.

The formation wasn't the problem. You can get your tactics spot on, but if five or six of your players have an off day, it's very hard to accommodate. McGinn, Pawlett and Robson were all poor, so there wasn't any kind of support.

TedHankey
19-01-2014, 10:32 AM
You need a damd Good striker for this to be effective :s

agree with that, you need some footballing ability to play that role, Zola and Vernon do not have that, especially Zola.

yesterday was a bad day to judge as conditions were rank. looked like blow football at times so windy was it.

Footnote
20-01-2014, 10:32 AM
Its the bain of my life - watching us at home huff and puff with loads of possesion but little end product.

When we break we usually have one man up front surrounded by 4-5 defenders so we go up the wing slowly and maybe sling a pointless cross in or pass it back into midfield where we get bogged down.

We either need midfielders to make runs beyond our single forward - not pass the ball about midfield - or we need to get a second striker on so one can hold up the ball and the other make runs.

The one man up front works a lot of the time (were 2nd in the league) but at home too often its become a hinderance rather than a help.

On a seperate note - thanks to going down the wings lots we win loads of corners - yet do vitually the same corner each time and it almost never works. Time for a change there too.

Echoes my thoughts. Yes, this 4-2-3-1 system has given us our best season in ages BUT how many more home games could we hav

bloodrunsred
20-01-2014, 10:43 AM
if pawlett is the attacking midfielder/support striker shouldnt he be scoring more or working more in combination with the sole striker so the lone striker isnt so isolated?

afc_1983
20-01-2014, 10:44 AM
You need a damd Good striker for this to be effective :s

Spot on.

There's nothing wrong with the idea of 1 up front, it's just our strikers are honking. A lot of our success this season has based on packing the midfield and retaining the ball. I don't see necessarily why we should abandon that, particularly when our best players are our midfielders.

I'd like to see Cammy Smith play as the main striker to see what he could do. He's nippy, intelligent and a decent player on the ball. He's also more than capable in the air.

It'd be a different option for us to try because watching Vernon trudge around is pushing me towards the wrist-slitting stage.

PitchMick2013
20-01-2014, 11:07 AM
I too don't see 1 man up front on his own as a problem but as others have said it depends on how other players support him.

When we've been at our best this season the ball has been played through the midfield and on to Pawlett, McGinn and Hayes bombing forward towards Vernon.

I think the biggest problem we have at the moment is how to find a place in the team for Robson. For me the ideal line up involves Flood and Jack bossing the midfield and playing it to the aforementioned 3 attacking players who are all skillful and speedy.

Robson is ace for set-pieces but apart from that it's difficult to see how he fits in :?

thestooge
20-01-2014, 11:12 AM
I thought we'd gone beyond the Idea that a lone striker was defensive. Seems not.

Give Caley some credit, they pushed very high, making our wide players drop deeper. Going to a 4-4-2 would have been suicidal.

The formation wasn't the problem. You can get your tactics spot on, but if five or six of your players have an off day, it's very hard to accommodate. McGinn, Pawlett and Robson were all poor, so there wasn't any kind of support.

Agree with that but also think Mcinnes takes a lot of flak for this one for the selection of Conso and Tate. Both have similar limitations at full back, neither are fully match fit. One or the other was understandable, both was costly.

Also think there's a lack of respect for Caley. They played the better football.

CaddyCarhandle
20-01-2014, 11:16 AM
We need to get away from playing only 3 attacking players at home. On Saturday we had Pawlett, McGinn and Vernon. The other 7 were either sitting midfielders or centre backs.

We should be playing with Pawlett in behind the striker and with Hayes and McGinn either side of him.

Even with that, we're going to stuggle to create much with an Easter Island back four.

P!ssed off with the amount of times you can throw a blanket over our Robson-Jack-Flood in midfield.

Saturday was in the post. Let's force the pace a bit more at home.

ForestHills
20-01-2014, 11:38 AM
I thought we'd gone beyond the Idea that a lone striker was defensive. Seems not.

Give Caley some credit, they pushed very high, making our wide players drop deeper. Going to a 4-4-2 would have been suicidal.

The formation wasn't the problem. You can get your tactics spot on, but if five or six of your players have an off day, it's very hard to accommodate. McGinn, Pawlett and Robson were all poor, so there wasn't any kind of support.

I disagree - I also question you analysis that I suggest a lone striker is defensive. I never said it was however if you do not have players supporting and making runs past that striker then yes it most certainly is a defensive tactic - and that's what it often is for us at home.

As for 4-4-2 being suicidal I have no idea how you come to this conclusion. Are you suggesting that with those players on the pitch ICT would have hammered is with a 4-4-2?

Suicidal is a strong word so I assume that is w

caleebra
20-01-2014, 11:41 AM
I don't know if it's the one man attack but at home lately it's been poor to watch, and we're not creating clear cut chances.

On Saturday, 2 shots on target.
Against Hibs, 2 shots on target.
Against Ross County, 4 shots on target.
Against Motherwell, 3 shots on target.
Against St Mirren, 5 shots on target (2 goals).
Against Hearts, 4 shots on target (inc miss pen)

Compared to away games:
Away at Killie - 6 shots on target.
Away at DU - 6 shots on target.
Away at ICE - 9 shots on target.

CoveKreep
20-01-2014, 12:02 PM
an Easter Island back four


XD

Tubilay
20-01-2014, 07:45 PM
Ok...



I disagree - I also question you analysis that I suggest a lone striker is defensive. I never said it was however if you do not have players supporting and making runs past that striker then yes it most certainly is a defensive tactic - and that's what it often is for us at home.

We have players who *should* get beyond the striker. McGinn should. Pawlett should. Both of them had really poor games. Vernon didn't get anything from their centre backs, so even when the ball was up at him, he didn't have any time to hold the ball up so anyone could get beyond.

[quote="ForestHills"]As for 4-4-2 being suicidal I have no idea how you come to this conclusion. Are you suggesting that with those players on the pitch ICT would have hammered is with a 4-4-2?

Suicidal is a strong word so I assume that is what you suggest. Try backing up your statement ;) The outcomes were get 3 points, 1 point or 0 point