• 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.

* ORM *

Still Loves Emma Bunton. Roy McDonough is God!
Joined
Nov 7, 2003
Messages
19,236
Location
Flying the flag for SUFC in Sai Kung, Hong Kong
This is a toughie but does anyone know what our home results are using the 2 formations. I'm convinced we are better under 442 but can't prove it. Away is different and makes sense in my eyes to use either. Anyway our away results aren't in question.
 
This is a toughie but does anyone know what our home results are using the 2 formations. I'm convinced we are better under 442 but can't prove it. Away is different and makes sense in my eyes to use either. Anyway our away results aren't in question.

You are mrsblue and I claim etc...................
 
This is a toughie but does anyone know what our home results are using the 2 formations. I'm convinced we are better under 442 but can't prove it. Away is different and makes sense in my eyes to use either. Anyway our away results aren't in question.



Jam man will be along shortly explaining Phil has played 442 ages ago and he also played 433 yes three forwards!
 
Well obviously the 451 will be the worst system. Corr couldn't score under that system when he was the lone man up front. Now he is scoring at a brilliant rate and getting in the box a lot more and is getting chances every game.
 
Well obviously the 451 will be the worst system. Corr couldn't score under that system when he was the lone man up front. Now he is scoring at a brilliant rate and getting in the box a lot more and is getting chances every game.


Completely agree,

The 451 system is Imo so boring it should be banned forever!

Corr in his Echo interview even stated it was tough to play the lone forward role.
 
4-5-1
P 20 W 9 D 6 L 5 F 20 A 16 GD +2 Pts 33 Pts per game 1.65 Goals for per game 1 Goals against per game 0.85

4-4-2
P 20 W 10 D 6 L 4 F 28 A 19 GD +9 Pts 36 Pts per game 1.8 Goals for per game 1.4 Goals against per game 0.95

So if we'd stuck with 4-5-1 all season we'd be on 66 points, so still in 5th but 3 points worse off, and with a GD of +6
If we'd played 4-4-2 all season we'd be on 72 points, so above Bury in 4th but still 2 points behind Wycombe and on a goal difference of +18
In reality it's 5th with 69 points and +12

Obviously it's all theory and saying "we'd be 4th" doesn't consider who we'd take the extra points off etc, but seems a much smaller difference than I expected, the only major difference being how many we've scored

I'd forgotten that we played 4-4-2 at the start of the season as well for a couple of games which is something worth remembering

5 of our last 6 games earlier in the season in the reverse fixtures were 4-5-1 (with the exception of Bury which was 4-4-2 with Corr and Barnard up top), in those 5 we recorded W 1 D 1 L 3 (F 3 A 6) with 2 of the losses coming away from home. That would work out at an estimate of 5.8 points (let's say 6) from the last 6 games... :'(
 
4-5-1
P 20 W 9 D 6 L 5 F 20 A 16 GD +2 Pts 33 Pts per game 1.65 Goals for per game 1 Goals against per game 0.85

4-4-2
P 20 W 10 D 6 L 4 F 28 A 19 GD +9 Pts 36 Pts per game 1.8 Goals for per game 1.4 Goals against per game 0.95

So if we'd stuck with 4-5-1 all season we'd be on 66 points, so still in 5th but 3 points worse off, and with a GD of +6
If we'd played 4-4-2 all season we'd be on 72 points, so above Bury in 4th but still 2 points behind Wycombe and on a goal difference of +18
In reality it's 5th with 69 points and +12

Obviously it's all theory and saying "we'd be 4th" doesn't consider who we'd take the extra points off etc, but seems a much smaller difference than I expected, the only major difference being how many we've scored

I'd forgotten that we played 4-4-2 at the start of the season as well for a couple of games which is something worth remembering

5 of our last 6 games earlier in the season in the reverse fixtures were 4-5-1 (with the exception of Bury which was 4-4-2 with Corr and Barnard up top), in those 5 we recorded W 1 D 1 L 3 (F 3 A 6) with 2 of the losses coming away from home. That would work out at an estimate of 5.8 points (let's say 6) from the last 6 games... :'(


Have you included the games where we were playing 442 and either winning or drawing but then Phil in those same games switched to 451 and we ended up losing.
 
Have you included the games where we were playing 442 and either winning or drawing but then Phil in those same games switched to 451 and we ended up losing.
No, dread to think how long that would take as you'd have to look at every sub, the times of the subs etc, and even then it's hard to tell without having made a note at the time (e.g. Did Shaq/Weston go on up front or on the wing?), unfortunately I don't have time for that right now so that's based entirely on the formation that we started the match with.
 
4-5-1
P 20 W 9 D 7 L 4 F 20 A 16 GD +4 Pts 33 Pts per game 1.65 Goals for per game 1 Goals against per game 0.8

4-4-2
P 20 W 10 D 6 L 4 F 28 A 19 GD +9 Pts 35 Pts per game 1.75 Goals for per game 1.4 Goals against per game 0.95

So if we'd stuck with 4-5-1 all season we'd be on 66 points, so still in 5th but 3 points worse off, and with a GD of +8
If we'd played 4-4-2 all season we'd be on 70 points, so above Bury in 4th on goal difference of +18

Obviously it's all theory and saying "we'd be 4th" doesn't consider who we'd take the extra points off etc, but seems a much smaller difference than I expected, the only major difference being how many we've scored

I'd forgotten that we played 4-4-2 at the start of the season as well for a couple of games which is something worth remembering

First of all are these stats correct ...we played 4-4-2 away at Luton for example.

When lee barnard missed from 6yds v Exeter was that because 4-5-1 or Weston missed his penalty at 0-0 at Newport.

No one can prove that a result would have been different if we had played a different formation or certain subs switched.
Good example is Mondays game. Some people are convinced that we would have strolled through the last ten without Hartlepool mustering a shot had we stayed with 4-4-2.
 
The stats/predictions do not include when Phil messed up by reverting to 451 when we were either winning/drawing using 442.



442
We would finish on 83 points scoring 65 goals

451
we would finish on 76 points scoring 46 goals


Based on Manor's stats over the entire season .
 
First of all are these stats correct ...we played 4-4-2 away at Luton for example.

When lee barnard missed from 6yds v Exeter was that because 4-5-1 or Weston missed his penalty at 0-0 at Newport.

No one can prove that a result would have been different if we had played a different formation or certain subs switched.
Good example is Mondays game. Some people are convinced that we would have strolled through the last ten without Hartlepool mustering a shot had we stayed with 4-4-2.


The Luton game we had Shaq and Weston(were they both playing down the middle?)Shaq then got the hook on 45 replaced by Corr..Did Corr and Weston both play down the middle?
 
The Luton game we had Shaq and Weston(were they both playing down the middle?)Shaq then got the hook on 45 replaced by Corr..Did Corr and Weston both play down the middle?

YES and with Hurst pushing hi up the pitch.
 
YES and with Hurst pushing hi up the pitch.


Ok ok so we played 442 with Shaq preferring to play wide and Weston who is a wideman but is not too sure.

Does it count as playing an orthodox 442 with genuine forwards?
 
If you don't get service to the strikers or let players attack in numbers then it doesn't matter if you play 4-4-2 or 4-5-1.
 
There are far too many variables in football, the basic starting formation can not be the sole justification for a win / loss it just doesn't work that way. Why are people always looking into the past for an angle, just enjoy each game and the fact that we are in a position where no matter what happens between now and the end of the season we are guaranteed some sort of drama and excitement.
 
Ok ok so we played 442 with Shaq preferring to play wide and Weston who is a wideman but is not too sure.

Does it count as playing an orthodox 442 with genuine forwards?

let me get this one straight.... 442 Does not be count as 442 unless its an orthodox 442 and to be an orthodox442 you have to play 2 genuine forwards in a 442.

Don't tell me... the only 2 forwards that would truly count in your 442 is Jason Williams and his twin brother.
 
let me get this one straight.... 442 Does not be count as 442 unless its an orthodox 442 and to be an orthodox442 you have to play 2 genuine forwards in a 442.

Don't tell me... the only 2 forwards that would truly count in your 442 is Jason Williams and his twin brother.


So if Phil played Timlin and White up top in 442 you would be happy with that ?
 
Back
Top