A lot of debate between Wolves fans has been about what formation Wolves will start with against Stoke. Many point out that it's 4-5-1 that kept us up, taking a more solid look. If we were to use that formation we would probably have a three man forward line of Fletcher, Doyle and Jarvis which does seem very tasty as they would be given licence to attack and with three centre midfielders behind them not have to worry too much about the defensive side of their games.
However, a 4-4-2 would mean Doyle and Fletcher up front together. We have seen glimpses of a partnership and with these two playing with each other we might see quite a few goals. Would that mean restricting Jarvis though? It would mean he would have to track back more than we might want him to. But, 4-4-2 is what got us to the promised land in the first place and we scored so many goals that year.
I have a feeling he will go with 4-4-2, to start with. After his comments about Foley playing midfield I think he will start right midfield. He would be a more defensive option and would mean that most of our attacks would be based around the left hand side until Kightly is fit as he's not likely to run at his marker. When Kightly is fit that 4-4-2 is very exciting, with two proper wingers I don't think many defences will be able to cope with them.
If you think about it, a 4-4-2 with Foley is a bit like a 4-3-3. Foley will tuck in more and Jarvis will be further forward almost making him a third forward along side Fletcher and Doyle. Jones likes to play slightly left anyway.
On paper, I think we will start with something like this:
 |
| Jarvis - Will be key again this year |
Zubar
Craddock
Berra
Van Damme
Foley
Henry
Jones
Jarvis
Doyle
Fletcher
Who knows though, I could be very wrong. What team do you think we will go with, comment!
Mick will go with a 4-5-1, but like you said with Foley as a centre mid and Fletcher a right midfielder.
ReplyDeleteLet's all hope that Van Damme just had a bad day at the office because if he plays like that again he won't play many more games for us.
i do like the idea of playing 442 with two attacking wingers (two from jarvis, kights and hunt as it stands.) However i still have some doubts about whether a central midfield of henry and jones wouldn't get overrun, even against some of the lesser prem teams. When we played 442 at the beginning of last season Mick preferred to use foley on the right as he saw him as a more defensive option and meant that he could tuck in and provide more numbers in the middle of the park. I realise that kights injury meant he wasn't available but even so i still think that mick would have only used one attacking winger at a time.
ReplyDeleteI really like the idea of sticking with 451, but this season developing it into a more attacking formation for us. The players should be more comfortable now they're more used to it, plus summer addtions such as hunt and fletcher give us more options attacking-wise. Both doyle and fletcher appear comfortable playing in wide positions as part of a 433, while SEB seems to have come back determined to prove that he can be equally versatile and 'put a shift' when required. This then means that we can play two solid central midfielders (henry and another) plus either jones or milijas to provide some creativity.
We could play 4-3-3 but that could mean leaving it two players like Hunt and Kightly (if we play one of the strikers wide). I would play 4-4-2, with Henry and possibly someone good on the ball like Mancienne who could defend.
ReplyDeletebig mick must be strong with the supporters and tell them,at the moment we still dont have the right players to be able to play 4-4-2 in the premier league. The central midfield two of d.jones and k.henry just aint got the legs,as a pair to do that job, not saying they not good enough cause in there respective positions they are(henry just sitting protecting, and jones linking play up between midfield and attack), but playing 4-5-1 gives the back four a lot more protection. if we play 4-4-2 as a prefered formation during the season, i believe for one, that we will really struggle, due to teams opening us up for fun!!!! hope im wrong, but honestly believe mick needs to stick to 4-5-1 to start with and try and get us off to a solid start to the season. really reaaly unsure bout the new left back after seeing him a couple of pre-season games. in my opinion,looks really comfortable on the ball, but as a defender his job is to defend,which i for one havnt seen him do properly yet!! if he plays like he did sat,in the premier league, he will be sat in the stands suspended, more times than out on the pitch wearing the old gold and black shirt!!! roll on sat 14th :-)
ReplyDeleteI'm with anonymous on this one. 4-5-1/4-3-3 is the only way forward because, as he says, Jones and Henry will get over run in a 4-4-2 formation. But it just has to be a more attacking version of 4-5-1 and for me the perfect wide players for that system are Kightly and Jarvis. Both are hard working and disciplined defensively as well as quick, direct and attack minded, when fit and at their best. I understand this means that one of Doyle or Fletcher is left out but I also think that the lone striker's role these days is an extremely tiring one and their ability to play wide if needed means they can be useful there too. Anyway, once Mick gives in to the inevitable and settles on 4-5-1 I think the real debate is the midfield three. Henry obviously and Jones certainly earnt his place there last season but surely Milijas deserves a run of games sometime. I'm not sure Edwards is really up to it. Is this where we still need to strengthen? I went to the Bilbao game today and was mostly concerned about Van Damme's dreadful defensive performance in the first half. He just kept allowing the winger to cross it as if once he had (whatever the consequence)his job was done. On one such occasion this led to the equaliser. Strangely, in the second half one of the highlights was Van Damme's attacking performance winning absolutely everything in air and actually looking quite useful with the ball at times.
ReplyDelete