• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Guess the team Phil Brown will pick v Plymouth.

Forums New posts

THE SEVENTIES NORTH BANK

Life President⭐⭐
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
14,908
Location
SHOEBURY
This is not who you would pick, for example I would drop one of the full backs that are O.K. going forward, but not good when being attacked. I would move John White to full back and bring in Kiernan as centre back. I would bring in Yearwood in place of Timlin, he can't do any worse.
But here is my Phil Brown team to start v Plymouth.

OXLEY.
DEMETRIOU WHITE FERDINAND HENDRIE
McGLASHAN LENNY TIMLIN KIGHTLY
COX FORTUNE​
 
Think I prefer that side, with 3-5-2

Not normally a fan of 3 centre-halves as invariably it means playing one upfront on their own, but if they stick to 2 up, this is a better system for Hendrie and Demetriou.

Also brings Kightly more central and in a more dangerous role.
 
AndyT said:
Think I prefer that side, with 3-5-2

Not normally a fan of 3 centre-halves as invariably it means playing one upfront on their own, but if they stick to 2 up, this is a better system for Hendrie and Demetriou.

Also brings Kightly more central and in a more dangerous role.
Click to expand...

Yes, but is it what PB will pick?
 
I actually think it is. Hence why I didn't add a different side of my own.

When we've had defensive issues before, he has generally gone to three centre-halves.

Add into the mix that Ferdy isn't 100% fit and both full-backs are getting exposed a bit and I think he'll see this as a safer option. He also dropped Kiernan into the mix early last week, maybe to see if it shored things up more.

It also frees up Kightly into a more attacking central role.
 
I think PB may go with the following:

Oxley

White Ferdinand Kiernan Hendrie

McGlashan Leonard Timlin Kightly

Cox MAF

Subs: Smith, Demetriou, Kyprianou, Yearwood, McLaughlin, Robinson, Ba​
 
If he were to go 3-5-2 ( which I don't think he will ) , I would move Lenny to right 'wing back' and put Yearwood.
I'm sorry , I've never been a fan of Demi.
Get's far too exposed and that is likely to be multiplied by 100 now Will has gone.

Oxley
white keirnan Ferdinand
leonard Yearwood timlin hendrie
kightly
cox fortune


subs : smith , kyprianou , demitriou , robinson , ba , mcglashan , mclaughlin
 
Oxley
White Kiernan Ferdinand Hendrie
McLaughlin Leonard Timlin Kightly
MAF Cox​

Subs: Smith, Demetriou, Kyprianou, Yearwood, McGlashan, Robinson, Ba
 
Oxley
Demetriou White Ferdinand Hendrie

McLaughlin Timlin Leonard Kightly

Cox MAF

subs. Yearwood, McGlashan, Kyprianou, Bridge, Ba, Smith, Robinson
 
Firestorm said:
Unchanged

Starting line up and Bench
Click to expand...

I believe there is one doubt due to injury. I won't say who as someone from the 'Green Army' (said in comedy Paul Whitehouse accent) is watching. :thumbsup:
 
Not sure why Deme should be dropped. Was more than ok v Blackburn, made some good passes that McG didn't read v Newport and was no worse than anyone else v Rotherham.
 
rigsby said:
Not sure why Deme should be dropped. Was more than ok v Blackburn, made some good passes that McG didn't read v Newport and was no worse than anyone else v Rotherham.
Click to expand...

I largely agree, but I see Brown both erring on the side of a more defensive player after Saturday and not wanting to drop John White. Per OP, it's what I suspect we'll see rather than what I'd necessarily do. If it's any reassurance, I'm highly unlikely to have nailed the selection.
 
This lot have to redeem themselves after last week....if everyone is fit I don't see any changes.
 
AndyT said:
Think I prefer that side, with 3-5-2

Not normally a fan of 3 centre-halves as invariably it means playing one upfront on their own, but if they stick to 2 up, this is a better system for Hendrie and Demetriou.

Also brings Kightly more central and in a more dangerous role.
Click to expand...

I get where you're coming from, but the problem we have with 3-5-2 is it ends up too defensive and we get overrun out wide, so I would stick with 4-4-2.

Other than a forced change Rigby is alluding to, I can see PB doing something stupid like dropping McGlash, moving Lenny out wide and bringing in Dru in the centre with Timlin as our one change!!!
 
Jay_SUFC said:
I get where you're coming from, but the problem we have with 3-5-2 is it ends up too defensive and we get overrun out wide, so I would stick with 4-4-2.

Other than a forced change Rigby is alluding to, I can see PB doing something stupid like dropping McGlash, moving Lenny out wide and bringing in Dru in the centre with Timlin as our one change!!!
Click to expand...

3-5-2 can be a very fluid formation. it can be virtually anything you want and cover for almost any gaps. the ball comes down the oppo left, the wing back engages the full back while the right centre back covers the winger while still leaving 2 centre backs covering the middle and if needed a defensive central midfielder covering runs from deep.

when attacking, it gives many options too, especially if its kightly playing behind the front 2. he could have a free role effectively, searching out weaknesses, providing width if needed at times or playing as the playmaker.

the most important thing it does in my opinion is allow the back 3 to attack the ball without being shorthanded. with a back 4 all it takes is a centre back coming out to win the ball, not managing it and the opposition turning and running in behind the lone centre back.

it really is an adaptable formation that can be made to fit what you want it to be. another example is that you could put kightly in the demitriou wing back role once wordsworth is fit if you have white as the right sided centre back.

4-4-2 is such a rigid formation and i think it shows quite often these days. especially at home, opposition teams so often pack the midfield, and if you can dominate that area, you can often stop teams playing.
 
I'd love to see a 3-5-2 kind of formation today. I can't honestly see many changes, Brown will have told them that they need to redeem themselves, so a possible formation change rather than personnel? Though, with that, I wonder whether Tims might be used to cover the LB position where Hendrie has been rather exposed?

Oxley
White, Kiernan, Ferdinand
Demetriou, Leonard, Kightly, Timlin, McLaughlin
Fortune, Cox
 
Eddy Melito said:
3-5-2 can be a very fluid formation. it can be virtually anything you want and cover for almost any gaps. the ball comes down the oppo left, the wing back engages the full back while the right centre back covers the winger while still leaving 2 centre backs covering the middle and if needed a defensive central midfielder covering runs from deep.

when attacking, it gives many options too, especially if its kightly playing behind the front 2. he could have a free role effectively, searching out weaknesses, providing width if needed at times or playing as the playmaker.

the most important thing it does in my opinion is allow the back 3 to attack the ball without being shorthanded. with a back 4 all it takes is a centre back coming out to win the ball, not managing it and the opposition turning and running in behind the lone centre back.

it really is an adaptable formation that can be made to fit what you want it to be. another example is that you could put kightly in the demitriou wing back role once wordsworth is fit if you have white as the right sided centre back.

4-4-2 is such a rigid formation and i think it shows quite often these days. especially at home, opposition teams so often pack the midfield, and if you can dominate that area, you can often stop teams playing.
Click to expand...

Spot on 'Eddy' and as I see it, as well.

I like 4-4-2 and do actually prefer it, but mainly because it allows 2 upfront and a touch more width in midfield, but with our personnel, particularly Demi and Hendrie being so good going forward, I think 3-5-2 is much better suited, as Lenny and Tims fit nicely into a 3 man midfield with Kightly.

The key, as you say, is it means your centre-halves can be more adaptable, including bringing the ball out of defence a little more.

I'd definitely see it as an attacking formation and it also allows Ferdy to play as effectively a sweeper, which he'll just be ideal for.

Also think Cox works so much better with a link man in midfield he can work with. He has the nous and touches needed around the box. Hence I can see him working better with Kightly behind him, than having McGlashan and Kightly out wide. Thinking back to last season, he generally played better when Wordy was in the side in that link role.
 
Last edited:
Barring any injuries I think he's likely to keep it the same. He's suggested in the past that he's made mistakes by panicking/over-reacting to a bad performance with changes to the system. The Rotherham game was awful but it IS just one game and I don't want to see him start panicking and chopping/changing personnel and system like he kept doing at the start of last season. Keep things as they are to start with, give them the chance to prove that it was a fluke and an off-day and that they ARE capable of consistently performing the standard that they achieved against Blackburn. We have good players but this is still L1 football. No need to over-complicate things. Everyone harping on about 3-5-2 this and 3-5-2 that. At the moment, no. If we go on a poor run and prove that starting 11, system and performance against Blackburn were flukes then fair enough, try something different. But not after one loss. There's a lot to be said for consistency, trust and morale when it comes to chopping/changing things through panic. It's what he kept doing at the start of last season and the players constantly looked unsettled and like they didn't know what they were supposed to be doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

.



Club News
Fixtures and Results
League Table
SUFC Ticket Stats
Shrimpers Trust
SoccerBase
SUEPA (Ex Players)
Shrimperzone on Facebook
Shrimperzone on Twitter
Shrimperzone on Instagram
SUFC Exiles


ShrimperZone Sponsors

FFM MSPFX Foreign Exchange Services

Zone Advertisers MFF2

Zone Advertisers Zone Advertisers

ShrimperZone - Player Sponsorship


Southend United Away Travel


All At Sea Fanzine


Back
Top