Why do we refuse to change from 4-4-2?

Ledley played all of last season at left midfield. McCourt would shine in the hole behind the strikers where he is given a free role to roam.

 

switch them

 

Hmm.. Spose it would make us harder to break down with 5 in midfield, but once we get (Well hopefully get), a new centre half & left back, then we can stick to a back 4. No Scott Brown in the side? Who would you make captain?

 

The problem is, a 3-5-2 is almost useless against anything other than a two-striker formation (eg 4-4-2).

Against a 4-4-2, the 3-man defence would use two man-markers with a sweeper as a spare man. Zonally speaking, the three would shift across the pitch according to where the ball was, with two defenders in the area and one acting as a fullback. It was vulnerable to the switched ball, but generally could cope through wing-backs tracking back (which still left an extra midfielder for the counter).

Against a lone striker formation, the 3v1 situation is fine defensively but leaves an obvious shortfall elsewhere on the pitch. Against 3 attackers (most likely a 4-3-3 with one striker and two wingers) there is no natural way to mark players - if your 2 wingbacks pick up the opposing wingers, you're left pinned by being overmanned at the back. If your centre backs try to pick up the opposing wingers, they will either be dragged dangerously wide or leave the wingers with a lot of time on the ball.

Alex McLeish's Hun side ripped us apart at the back more than once by exploiting that, and they weren't close to being as good as us. That's why we changed to a 4-4-2 under Martin O'Neill.

Very, very few sides continue to use this formation - the notable exception at the moment would be Genoa, but they have the players to fluently change from a 3-4-1-2 to 4-3-1-2 when they need to. You can't really suggest we have that kind of quality anymore.


For me, with the present squad our best bet is to go:

Zaluska
Cha Rogne Hooiveld Mulgrew
Juarez Brown Ledley
Fortune Hooper Samaras​

If we need to be more direct in our approach, we can easily switch that to a 4-4-2.​

 

To be fair we have no real captains in the squad as a whole, including Scott Brown so we are at a disadvantage there. Probably Hooiveld i'd give it to.

 

would only swap rogne for loovens,an maybe kayal for brown cause i dislike brown an loovens and hopefully get a keeper in for saturday,if hoops iant making it swap him for paddy an push sammy or maf in the middle or maybe murphy

 

Captains should lead by example, do you really think that Hooiveld has the ability to do that? Im baffled if him talking a lot of * to the press has made you think that he has the ability to be Celtic captain. The best candidate we have is Hinkel but now that Cha Du-Ri is out first choice, the captaincy must stay with Brown. I do agree, however, that Brown is nowhere near the standard to be Celtic captain. When he speaks to the press he just isn't a good representative for our club.

 

If Lennon has to be brave to try this then what makes you think that this is suitable for us? Misun has never been tested properly in competitive games, you have never seen Kayal play in a Celtic shirt and McCourt has never been tested behind a front 2. The point is that the wide men in that formation are meant to act as wing-backs. Can Ledley really be used as a wing-back, considering he is a central midfielder come left sided, he is no winger.

 

I don't think anyone has the right to captain Celtic in our current squad. I would have said Hinkel but he is obviously surplus to requirements under Lennon. Brown isn't good enough to play in our first team never mind captain it. I picked Hooiveld purely because he seems one of the only vocal players and has shown a bit of passion.

In the future maybe Kayal or Juarez, lets see what they are made of.

 

You don't win things without making risks. This is a risk that could pay off massively. Obvcourse i'v not seen Misun play competively i'm simply putting down a rough team to fit into this formation. We have other players who can play there you know.

Again obviously i haven't seen Kayal play but considering we spent a fair bit of money on him i expect him to be a first team regular.

Alan Thompson played out wide left in a similar formation and he certainly wasn't a wing back. I'll say it again, Ledley is a central midfielder who is comfortable playing on the left hand side of midfield. Just because i'v placed him on the left hand side of midfield does not automatically make him a winger. Barry Robson played on the left/right flank and offered great balance to the team, he tackled, tracked back aswell as supporting attacks. I think Ledley can do the same.

By playing Cha wide right i think we can easily convert to a 4-3-1-2 / 4-4-2 when need do. He will slide into right back and Misun can move over to the left. This way we have a flexable team who can cause a number of problems to the opposition aswell as being able to stay solid at the back.

 

Im sorry but I just can't agree, with all our defensive problems, I can think of nothing worse that changing to 3 at the back.

 

Im pretty sure we will start with 4-4-2 on Saturday.

 

Fair enough we all have our own opinions. I just hope Lennon has something practical in mind.

 

If you have read my previous posts you will have seen that I don't think we should play with wingers at all. The main reason being that we don't have any wide players with a decent end product. This is why I think we should play Samaras and Fortune either side of Hooper up front. Like second half against Braga, we saw how effective they are in these positions.

 

Only if........

 

I think celtic should take a leaf out of the book of Italian's and play a 5-3-2 with wing backs, 3 CM's and 2 front men.Thoughts?

 

+1