Andy Cook

My worry is we or anyone else would get totally swamped in the middle of the park……with 442

I can’t think of one team in modernist football that plays the formation for that simple reason.

 

Doesnt happen if your second striker drops back when out of possession though. 442 is far too derided by "modernists" when in reality that type of football doesnt happen at L2 level. Force the game on the opposition and it's not a problem.

Still works for me at League Two, just look at the number of teams that go up with two strikers scoring 10 -15 goals each, which you rarely get with one up top.

 

Some will be playing 352 or 433. I don't see many opposition L2 teams, home or away, playing 442 these days, because they get swamped in central midfield.

 

Back to my point ..on your scenario the number ten drops back to help the two in the middle , that leaves you either two short or one short, against a 4231 or 352
To bolster that shortage the wingers have to come inside to help, thus leaving nobody out wide on either flank . The outlet ball then goes where?

That’s why nobody plays two out wide in a 442 anymore ..it leaves one exposed and outnumbered in the centre.

 

Of course it doesn't. If the 10 drops back you get a 451. too many assume that in a 442 the wingers just sit on the wing and have a fag. It worked perfectly well with McMahon on the right and Reid on the left because both did their share to help the middle.

442 works perfectly well, and no-one gets "swamped" if the rest of the team have the positional sense to help out.

You are more in danger of getting swamped with 433 and 4231 is too defensive. Its all about the rest of the team being in the right position to help when required and still leaving one up front for the break, with others ready to support.

At the end of the day, each team has 11 players and theres no need to be swamped however you use them. 442 is the most attacking, but doesnt have to be the dinosaur formation many see it as.

 

Devils advocate….Which teams play 442 in say the Prem? I suggest the Prem because we all watch their games or highlights every week through the season. ( Well I do)

 

Never watch ANY PL football (I have absolutely zero interest in it) so I wouldn't know, but (devils advocate as well) isn't that like comparing Bradford City with Steeton United in the NWC league ?

No-one will ever agree on tactics, and that's the beauty of these debates, but for me there is still a place for 442 in this khazi league, where most players are only one bad season away from being at Guiseley, even if it's not every match and for all the match.

Mix & match I say.

 

The top teams in the Prem play 4-3-3 and the ones who struggle play 4-2-3-1 which is very defensive

 

Not wrong but like Liverpool last night, it’s too easy to get caught on the break playing 433 if the full backs are so far forward. They were almost suicidal at times. It looks good goin* forward , no question, but it’s damn risky! So it proved.

 

The stats don't lie. He may be ungainly, pigeon-toed and sometimes bloody clumsy. but this guy scores goals. He's on fire at the moment and that's the way he rides. Gets a few goals in a row - and then continues to get bloody more. I love Cookie - he is the epitome of the finest of lower league strikers. Little finesse, never a thing of beauty, but a big, bad, bruising regular scorer of goals when he's got his confidence head on.

 

I wonder if we might have to fend off some last minute bids for Andy Cook from any league one team looking for a striker before the deadline?

 

Personally can’t see it , but never say never, unless Derek Adams is around?

 

Isn’t that due to having players of a higher technical ability though. Man City even play a false nine and at times have played Grealish, Foden and KdB through the middle, but they can because they have great movement around them and Cancelo plays effectively as a winger he’s always that far forward.

We don’t have players of that ability at this level.

We have a physical forward in Oliver. We’ve signed him for three years. That suggests we are planning on him sticking around. Yet in a 4-2-3-1 he has been starved of service and given nothing. No wonder he looks so miserable.
Cook has been in great form and taken chances clinically but he cannot convert those chances so clinically long term. Our xG hasnt been good at all and the system doesn’t work with one upfront. We need to be whipping balls in and utilising the strength of Cook and Oliver.

 

Don’t disagree but those crosses can only emanate from full backs or those playing either side of the “three”

 

I don't mind tactical debates by any stretch, but they are somewhat pointless.

Imagine telling Parky to play 4231 instead of 442 or the diamond. He'd never do it on the regular. He wouldn't have the centre back taking goal kicks only to pass it to the keeper. Neither would Adams.

And by the same token, Hughes isn't ever going to play 442 on the regular anymore. He's signed a whole squad geared to playing anti 442 football.

Regardless of which is better, managers do what they believe in, and if they get chance (which Hughes has) they'll sign players accordingly.

At that point, genuine discussions about Hughes playing 442 or long/direct balls and byline crosses into a target man really are redundant.

By all means, theoretical discussions are great; but just so long as we all see it's not going to happen any time soon?

 

Nail and head.

Stick yer "presence" where the sun don't shine.

 

26 goals in 65 games for us (and not all of those are starts). The man is a machine.

 

Some one called him a poor mans Deano and I didn’t see it until recently, he’s playing with a new lease of life and it’s showing.

 

He's got Deano's good looks

 

No chance. He does score goals but his overall play is shite.