it is clearly working for us at the moment, however it is becoming a little predictable when we switch things over to a 4-5-1. when we do, we seem to lack any real goal threat. However I guess thats the point and we are trying to shut up shop rather than look for a second.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
442
- Thread starter Brighton TID
- Start date
it is clearly working for us at the moment, however it is becoming a little predictable when we switch things over to a 4-5-1. when we do, we seem to lack any real goal threat. However I guess thats the point and we are trying to shut up shop rather than look for a second.
Mackenzie
Old Brightonian
I guess Hughton is happy to use the "dinosaur" tactics to get us the lead, then revert to the modern 4-5-1 midfield spectacular to see it out.
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Good bounce. I've been against it for a long time, but have entirely re-evaluated that view on what we've seen so far. A few comments:
-- I see it as a formation to get us into the PL. I'm not so sure we'll use it if we get there. Still few teams persist with it, and those that do tend to get relegated.
-- in every game this season, we've finished playing 4-1-4-1, with Ince as a holding midfielder to hold on to a lead (or, vs Hud, a draw)
-- I wonder what formation CH will use when we're chasing a game (and hope that I continue wondering this for a long time)
-- the success of 4-4-2 this year has been due to good partnerships. The most obvious is Stephens-Kayal, but I'd like to make a special mention for Baldock and Hemed, who are developing an understanding, but also rotate positionally, making life very difficult for their defence.
Birdie Boy
Well-known member
- Jun 17, 2011
- 4,387
This was the case until Bobby came on, then we got forward again. Shame he didn't come on a little earlier. Not that it matters now as we got the win.
Marshy
Well-known member
I have to say I was incredibly sceptical that we had the players to play 4-4-2.
I am delighted to say thus far i have been proved wrong, I still see us playing 4-5-1 away from home at times but credit where it is due, it has made all the difference.
I am delighted to say thus far i have been proved wrong, I still see us playing 4-5-1 away from home at times but credit where it is due, it has made all the difference.
brightn'ove
cringe
What's incredible is that we have cover for almost every position in the 4-4-2, moreso when crofts is back and harper & hambo break into the 1st team. I'm unsure about ince playing in a 4-4-2 though, although he is very useful when trying to hold on to a lead, reverting to 4-5-1.
Hughton really has built a side to play his way and it's certainly showing.
Stumpy Tim
Well-known member
Can't argue with the results, and I never felt we were in danger on Saturday. I don't think it'll work if we were to go up, but that's a long way off. Enjoy the ride with 4-4-2 while we can
pishhead
Well-known member
I'd be interested what our attacking changes were to be, thankfully thus far we haven't had to see them!
4-3-3 is the only system for the home games. If Albion want to bore the opposition to death north of Watford, to pinch some points, that's OK, as is bringing on a defensive midfielder and playing possession football to protect a 1-0 lead with 30 minutes to go.
4-4-2 often tends up as no wingers. 4-2-4 is two wingers and punt and rush (too much of that already).
As it is only practical to play on one wing at a time, 4-3-3 looks a really good bet to get the balance between attacking and defence and possession just right.
Our team suits a variant of 4-4-2 two with two midfielders of different styles and roughly the same ability in Kayal and Stephens. I would still like a winger who can cross hugging the touchline to stretch the opposing defence on one side, overlapping full back on the other side.
4-4-2 often tends up as no wingers. 4-2-4 is two wingers and punt and rush (too much of that already).
As it is only practical to play on one wing at a time, 4-3-3 looks a really good bet to get the balance between attacking and defence and possession just right.
Our team suits a variant of 4-4-2 two with two midfielders of different styles and roughly the same ability in Kayal and Stephens. I would still like a winger who can cross hugging the touchline to stretch the opposing defence on one side, overlapping full back on the other side.
Last edited:
Bwian
Kiss my (_!_)
- Jul 14, 2003
- 15,898
Sorry to be joining this thread somewhat later than others.
So, you don't like our style of play at the moment? I confess to being unhappy when it became obvious that this season would see BHAFC playing 4-4-2 as its main formation but it appears to be working at the moment. In games where Hughton changed tactics from 4-4-2 we have looked far less confident after the change. On Saturday against Hull we were well on top playing 4-4-2, then the change came and Hull could have had a point had their strikers known what a striker should be doing inside the 18 yard box.
As for your wanting more of a possession game, what exactly do you mean by that? We lose possession mainly from Stockdale's clearances ( something I wish he didn't do but he is obviously following instructions). Other than that we haven't become hoofers. I think our game has become much more positive compared to tippy tappy football. Yes, we held on to the ball a little more but frigging hell, it was boring as hell a lot of the time. Now, we retain possession and actually look to go forward these days.
Before the season started I wasn't looking forward to Hughton being in charge for 46 games based on what we witnessed last season with him in charge. Last year's dead wood has been jettisoned along with some alleged bad influences in the dressing room and the club is looking much better for it.
Do what I'm doing-enjoy our start to the campaign no matter how it has been achieved. I would much rather see wins using 4-4-2 rather than 'pretty' football with fewer points on the board. Hell, we still have Elvis to enter the building (and others), what's not to like?
I agree with you.
Negatives: Rigid play, percentage football. Giving away the ball too easily. Too much hoof. Very narrow (not expansive).
Positives: less long shots, more guile and more balls into the penalty box.
One of a percentage game that says that most goals (less the higher up the league) come as a result of mistakes and getting in more attacks and balls in can result in % mistakes by the opposition, especially of the ball is moved forward quickly. It is getting the balance right according to the standard we play at. Even in the % game, possession football plays its part but is seen as a purely defensive tactic.
It is not as though we are getting more shots per games. The small increase can be out down entirely to Lualua for some part fashioning and finishing chances entirely on his own.
Remember the start of last season. Characterised by mistakes by our defence. This seems to have been rectfied. This may have been trying to play the ball out of defence? It is getting the balance right. I still think we should retain our possession play a bit more. If we have the ball they are less likely to score. I think we should have one wide player.
Passing and possession has gone down a bit, but that sometimes comes from trying out a more direct approach. http://www.whoscored.com/Regions/25...TeamStatistics/England-Championship-2015-2016
Not forgetting, the opposition may try and stop up us playing the passing game. They are meant to chase shadows and get tired out.
http://www.fourfourtwo.com/performance/tactics/how-make-opposition-play-long-ball-game
Last edited:
Mackenzie
Old Brightonian
This thread is brilliant.
One hot tub one ambition
Active member
This thread is brilliant.
We're unbeaten...but there must be some reason why we're not top...wait, why we, um... oh, haven't won all our games, or scored 100 goals yet... it must be our formation! Barber out
darkwolf666
Well-known member
Guess that will be 3-4-3 - attacking enough for everyone? (Ok, it was Nathan Jones' idea, but he is paid to have ideas too)
TSB
Captain Hindsight
[MENTION=409]Herr Tubthumper[/MENTION] hasn't revisited this thread then, I see.
McTavish
Well-known member
- Nov 5, 2014
- 1,587
Looked more like 1-2-7 to me...
sir albion
New member
Yep I was spot on and most were not on here