Good questions from Tim, and some good responses from Derek too.
I'll be honest, they're generally pretty bang-on. Particularly over the last few months, we've generally been playing very offensive lineups.
jona77 wrote:Very attacking football?!! Certainly not on away games it’s been ultra defensive and you could argue playing one up front in home games has been ultra cautious! You would have thought with the run of 4 wins in not many more games playing 2 up front might have finally caused the penny to drop with Derek that was the way forward but no!!! I think we had a reasonable if not great squad that was restricted this year by a pretty negative thinking manager!
Two up top does not equal attacking football. It's an utter falsehood. Formations/how many centre forwards you play are not inherent to being attacking or defensive. Really basic example - Man City mostly play with one centre forward, are they defensive? Tim's actually correctly pointed out how attacking our lineup was against Charlton, and that only had one centre forward!
Away games - we've played Mayor at wing back against Ipswich, frequently had a midfield three of Shaw/Weir/Crowley (even against Derby). Don't people realise how attacking that midfield is? Especially when we're playing 4-3-3. Shaw isn't really a defensive midfielder. He's big and gets stuck in, but that's not really his proper role. It's either him or drafting in Gibson to play there. I'd say our performances in general, as well as our ability to attack, have been hampered all season by not having a proper defensive midfielder.
We've often had attacking lineups, in part because we lack any real defensive midfielders. Do people not realise how attacking Shaw/Weir/Crowley - Mayor/Stockton/Gnahoua (Derby away, for example) is? It's an issue of balance more than anything.
Keith wrote:Where can we find this? "Very attacking"? Really??? I know Berlin Wailer thinks zero shots on target is acceptable, even 'fun', but even he wouldn't describe that as "very attacking"!
Yes, we've struggled massively to create at times. But this isn't because there's been a lack of intent. That's another complete falsehood, and pretty blinkered thinking only looking at the outcome without trying to analyse it properly. Our lineups have often had plentiful amounts of attacking talent in them.
The issue has been similar all season - balance in the side. Some real talent, but not quite the right blend of defensive players to help maximise that. Plus injuries making things very tough in a small squad.
As I've said in another thread, I do think we maybe should have stuck with that back three more since January, but to say that we've lacked attacking intent given some of our lineups is ludicrous.