Squad or system?

[Molineuxmessiah]

We need major reinforcements imo.

[Ashley]

the players we have are more suited to a different system so i went for option 2.

[wolfan]

I'd personally say somewhere between 2 and 3. Reinforcements are needed, but with them a change of system as well.

[IMAB]

we need to play what we have in the way they are comfortable/most effective, and see how we get on.


We have no choice til Christmas.

[Jack Bauer]

The formation isn't helping, whether the squad would be good enough in a different formation is open to debate, I think it would be though.

[whitemouse75]

option 2.

[28th March 1965]

Where's the sack Hoddle option....

[SFS II]

4-3-3 with Mark Kennedy as the one defensive midfielder and Kenny
Miller, Leon Clarke and Carl Cort taking turns out on the wing is
asking for trouble.



4-4-2 with a midfield diamond of Ince,McNamara or Davies at the bottom,
Kennedy on the left of midfield, Anderton or Ricketts on the right and
Seol or Cameron at the top would make the best use of resources
available.

[whitemouse75]

i reckon ince and davies together is going to be a tasty little combo later on.

[Essex Wolf]

Clearly the current system isn't working but I agree with MM that reinforcements are needed.

[Guests]

Where's the option to point out the real problem?


Hoddle has come in and done his stuff. True, he has been terrible in the transfer market, but the real problem is that things have settled down, and we are now seeing thefruits of Stuart Gray's labours.


Some posters seem to think that I am abit of whinger, but they couldn't be more wrong. Until that fateful day last Novemeber I had never moaned about the club once.


Then, moronic Jex Maxley said 'Hoddle was a good option for because he agreed to work with Stuart Gray'. That was the day my respect for the current board, and Pox-Me went out of the window.


Appointing a manager so you don't have to sack your coach is never a receipe for promotion. And when the coach is Stuart Gray it's a receipe for and endless supply of incompetant perfromances if the opposition doesn't roll over and die.


</>

[Essex Wolf]

Where's the option to point out the real problem?


Hoddle has come in and done his stuff. True, he has been terrible in the transfer market, but the real problem is that things have settled down, and we are now seeing thefruits of Stuart Gray's labours.


Some posters seem to think that I am abit of whinger, but they couldn't be more wrong. Until that fateful day last Novemeber I had never moaned about the club once.


Then, moronic Jex Maxley said 'Hoddle was a good option for because he agreed to work with Stuart Gray'. That was the day my respect for the current board, and Pox-Me went out of the window.


Appointing a manager so you don't have to sack your coach is never a receipe for promotion. And when the coach is Stuart Gray it's a receipe for and endless supply of incompetant perfromances if the opposition doesn't roll over and die.





</>


MrD, the pairing of GH and Gray was another perfect example of the club doing things on the cheap. Save money by not sacking Gray and not having to employ someone better.


Hitting of the nail firmly on the head could not have been done better.

[dazmanwolf]

We need to be moe flexible!


Millwall and Leicester have sussed us out now!


Option 2 for me!

[I.D.]

I think that our left and right backs are both suited to a 3-5-2 (or 3-4-1-2) system, the third centre back position would be the problem for me. Personally, I would want 3 Lescotts at the back.

[Bankswolf II]

We need to be moe flexible!


Millwall and Leicester have sussed us out now!


Option 2 for me!





You mean that Colin Lee actully used some amazing tactics to get that win on Tuesday and it wasnt some big fluke...

[G-Wulf]

Can't blame the system IMO. Hoddle is having tomake upthe "system" as he goes along in order to accommodate the fit pros he has left available to him. We need a stronger and deeper squad otherwise our team is going to permanently consist of out-of-position players and under-developed youngsters which is no good for either the club or the player.

[SFS II]

Can't blame the system IMO. Hoddle is having
tomake upthe "system" as he goes along in order to
accommodate the fit pros he has left available to him.





If this is true (which it blatantly isn't), why:


Is evey system Hoddle "makes up" identical to the last, involving playing
4-3-3 with out of position strikers as wingers while wingers play as
central midfielders?



And also, why did Hoddle enter the closed to transfer part of the
season desperately trying to sign another striker while we had
inadequate cover at left back and centre half and with the only options
in central midfield being a 16 year old, a 38 year old or the only
international defensive midfielder in the history of the world who has
never won a tackle?





Edited by: SFS II

[G-Wulf]

If this is true (which it blatantly isn't), why:

Is evey system Hoddle "makes up" identical to the last, involving playing 4-3-3 with out of position strikers as wingers while wingers play as central midfielders?

And also, why did Hoddle enter the closed to transfer part of the season desperately trying to sign another striker while we had inadequate cover at left back and centre half and with the only options in central midfield being a 16 year old, a 38 year old or the only international defensive midfielder in the history of the world who has never won a tackle?


You claim my statement isn't true then proceed to contradict yourself and back up what I say!???smileys/smiley5.gif


The fact is SFS if the players were available to Hoddle to play in their own naturalised positions, I doubt very much you'd be seeing the likes of Kennedy playing centre-mid and Clarkeout on the right. As it is he's having to rely on players playing out of position or youngsters who simply aren't ready for first team action.


It's clear you have the knives out for Hoddle BUT he can only play with the hand he's been dealt. If he were losing the plot with a full squad available I would be worried about him. As it is I'm more worried about what's going on above him and whytransfer targetswhich have CLEARLY been selected by him and (by sheer concidence) involve the exchange of money are consistently not making it pastthe negotiation table.

[SFS II]

Where's the contradiction? smileys/smiley5.gif



Hoddle made his bed when he made all those noises about only agreeing
to manage Wolves after receiving a catalogue of assurances from Moxey
about the direction of the club. Have you heard one word of complaint
from Hoddle that these assurances have not been met? Is Hoddle the kind
of person to keep his mouth shut when he can apportion blame elsewhere?



The simple fact of the situation is that adequate cover was not brought
in in good time. No left back, no defensive midfielder. You can't blame
Moxey for not identifying these glaring weaknesses. You can however
blame Hoddle for not having a plan B when players he wanted decided to
stay where they were - Idiakiez - or decided to move to the Premiership
- Rasiak.



There's no point making signings for signings sake. Only an idiot
thinks thats the way forward. But not having a plan B or C to fall back
on meaning that we do not have cover in key positions is not due to the
board. Its due to Hoddles assessment of what he needs and not being
realistic enough with his targets. The gamble is worth taking -
sometimes it comes off - well done on the signing of Celtic's captian
to all concerned. But you need a back up plan when the gamble doesn't
come off. And there clearly wasn't. What if Macnamara wasn't such a principled indvidual and had accepted
Celtics secondary offer like 95% of footballers would have had? Where would we have
been then?



I don't see Moxey telling Hoddle to play Clarke on the left wing when
Mark Kennedy is also on the pitch, either. Nor do I see him telling him
to religiously stick to a dysfunctional 4-3-3 when the personnel for 4-4-2 are
all freely available.










Edited by: SFS II