+ Visit Notts. County FC Mad for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Starting 11 when all fit

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    5,355

    Starting 11 when all fit

    Assuming IB doesn’t move from the 3-5-2, what would your starting 11 be?
    Chicksen has added a balance to the back 3 with his left foot and his distribution has been decent.
    I think the last two games have shown that if we can’t move the ball fast, then the players need to be fast.
    For me it would be-
    Slocombe
    Lacey, Ellis, Chicksen
    Doyle
    Enzio, RR, Robert’s, Barnett
    Wootton, knight

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,961
    That centre midfield gets overrun and won't defensively track runners, they'll also all want to be ahead of the ball too.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    7,301
    That midfield would be absolute carnage haha.

    I think for now the 3-5-2/3-4-3 stays, something like:

    Slocombe
    Rawlinson Ellis Lacey
    Boldewijn Reeves O’Brien Barnett
    Roberts Wootton Knight

    But it kind of depends on the opposition - against sides more likely to sit back, you’d want Rodrigues in there. The Doyle/Reeves midfield partnership only has a hope of working with Knight and Roberts in the team to make the opposition sit deep and give them space. For tougher games you might want a Doyle or Griffiths in there as well.

    Ideally I think we still want 4-2-3-1 really so we can have three of Roberts, Enzio, Rodrigues and Knight playing in behind Wootton. So if everyone is properly fit it’s probably more like:

    Slocombe
    Brindley - Rawlinson - Lacey - McCrory (Barnett)
    Reeves - Doyle
    Roberts - Rodrigues - Boldewijn
    Wootton

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,961
    Quote Originally Posted by jacobncfc View Post
    That midfield would be absolute carnage haha.

    I think for now the 3-5-2/3-4-3 stays, something like:

    Slocombe
    Rawlinson Ellis Lacey
    Boldewijn Reeves O’Brien Barnett
    Roberts Wootton Knight

    But it kind of depends on the opposition - against sides more likely to sit back, you’d want Rodrigues in there. The Doyle/Reeves midfield partnership only has a hope of working with Knight and Roberts in the team to make the opposition sit deep and give them space. For tougher games you might want a Doyle or Griffiths in there as well.

    Ideally I think we still want 4-2-3-1 really so we can have three of Roberts, Enzio, Rodrigues and Knight playing in behind Wootton. So if everyone is properly fit it’s probably more like:

    Slocombe
    Brindley - Rawlinson - Lacey - McCrory (Barnett)
    Reeves - Doyle
    Roberts - Rodrigues - Boldewijn
    Wootton
    This for me if they are encouraged to move the ball quickly, looking to isolate RR, Enzio and Roberts in 1 on 1 situations would be very difficult to defend against.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    5,355
    Quote Originally Posted by Carlton_Pie View Post
    That centre midfield gets overrun and won't defensively track runners, they'll also all want to be ahead of the ball too.
    I disagree. Doyle sits deep and RR is a much better ball winner than Reeves IMO. It’s then a straight swap Robert’s for Griffiths.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,961
    Doyle sitting deep would make absolutely no difference as opposition midfielders bomb passed him

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    5,355
    I agree the 4-2-3-1 suits us best when all fit.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    7,301
    Quote Originally Posted by kill_the_drum View Post
    I agree the 4-2-3-1 suits us best when all fit.
    It’s very dependent on Lacey, though, as any combination of Rawlinson/Ellis/Turner in a two is too slow and clumsy. Also forgot about Chicksen who’s had two very decent games out of nowhere, would probably have him ahead of Barnett as the left back in a four as the latter is extremely suspect defensively. Decent wing back, though.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3,961
    Quote Originally Posted by jacobncfc View Post
    It’s very dependent on Lacey, though, as any combination of Rawlinson/Ellis/Turner in a two is too slow and clumsy. Also forgot about Chicksen who’s had two very decent games out of nowhere, would probably have him ahead of Barnett as the left back in a four as the latter is extremely suspect defensively. Decent wing back, though.
    Agree on Barnett, a worry in defensive situations but has enough energy and quality on the ball to be a decent LWB.

    A lot of it comes down to style of football than formations imo. If we move the ball through the thirds quickly, we looks such a better team

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    7,301
    Quote Originally Posted by Carlton_Pie View Post
    Agree on Barnett, a worry in defensive situations but has enough energy and quality on the ball to be a decent LWB.

    A lot of it comes down to style of football than formations imo. If we move the ball through the thirds quickly, we looks such a better team
    Knight is going to be really useful because he’s an option to stop teams getting so much joy out of pressing us. Woking today tried the pressing thing that keeps working for teams, and kind of did for them until we had a quick front two for the first time all season and could just keep going into the space they were leaving in behind.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •