The Front Three

[a-k]

It's not a one size fit all approach. In games where we are likely to be pinned back (e.g., vs City, L'pool, etc.), go with Watkins up front as the outlet. In games where we are expected to dominate possession, go with Ings through the middle for his clever movement.

[OLDVILLAIN]

Can we get our money  back from bailey, ings and buendia please

[Marka Ragnos]

Not sure what the right questions are here, but Watkins and Ings feel like the wrong answers. 

[nepal_villan]

In Watkins, Ings, Buendia, Bailey, Traore, Carney, JPB and even JJ and McGinn -   feel we have the frontline pieces we need, it's just arranging them in the right way. If we can sort this out, we go from midtable side to one that will be challenging for a European spot.

[M_Afro]

As many have already said it has to be either Ollie or Ings. For me that would always be Ollie because he suits our system way better than Ings. 

You then have to play Buendia. He is the best player we have at linking the play. He also has a few more gears to go yet (hopefully) but I’m sure he is suffering from trying to adapt to new surroundings and also not being part of a settled unit. 

The final position is still up for grabs. Nobody has really put their hand up. It’s all a bit unbalanced too as we seem to love signing right sided players over left sided ones. Hopefully, in time, Carney will make the position his but for now I would play Bailey or Traore.

[Hank Scorpio]

We replaced Grealish with some players. I don't really see what the tactical plan was. Ings and Watkins do not work together. One of them always ends up out of their best position and so plays terribly.

Buendia has been disappointing.

Bailey has muscles made of cheese strings. So all in all very frustrating. 

 

 

[villalad21]

Benching Ings feels like such a no brainer.

He is not the focal point with pace and energy, and with the ability to hold the ball up which we need.

[nick76]

7 hours ago, Marka Ragnos said:

Not sure what the right questions are here, but Watkins and Ings feel like the wrong answers. 

Name one of the Avengers?

 

[nick76]

10 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

Benching Ings feels like such a no brainer.

He is not the focal point with pace and energy, and with the ability to hold the ball up which we need.

Same with Ollie though, he looks off the pace, stroppy and making really poor decisions.  Even when Ollie is on his own this season he’s been poor.  So we need to choose Ollie or Ings based on the game and tactics so both will get chances.

[MentalM]

Yesterday we played with Watkins Ings and Buendia. 

Watkins and Ings both wants to move into the same room, both refusing to pass to anyone in a better position. 

I could count at least 3 times yesterday, if those two had opened their eyes and rolled it to Buendia coming with huge space on the opposite side we would have had a huge chance. So frustrating to see strikers being that ego, I feel we are playing Buendia worse. He is making great movement and creates space for himself, but our team refuses to pass to him (Cash done it many times this season as well). 

I dont know if Watkins and Ings will work out, but right now it doesnt. Perhaps some times in the training field will help, right now. There is no cohesion in the movement up front.

[El Zen]

Watkins down the middle and Emi2 inside right (Bertie may well get the nod when back to full fitness.) 

Inside left is the big question. Probably Chuk or JJ (if not in midfield.) 

McGinn - Dougie - Sanson

—Buendia————JJ———

—————- Ollie —————-

[Laughable Chimp]

I'd play

                 Luiz

Sanson  Ramsey  Mcginn

Traore                     El Ghazi

               Watkins

Next game.

I don't think its working with Buendia or Ings and they should be limited to appearances off the bench for now. They're definitely not starting at the expense of Traore and Watkins.

 

Edited December 27, 2021 by Laughable Chimp

[sne]

2 minutes ago, Laughable Chimp said:

I'd play

                 Luiz

Sanson  Ramsey  Mcginn

Traore                     El Ghazi

               Watkins

Next game.

I don't think its working with Buendia or Ings and they should be limited to appearances off the bench for now. They're definitely not starting at the expense of Traore and Watkins.

 

With a back 3 or do we go without a GK?

[ferguson1]

16 minutes ago, El Zen said:

Watkins down the middle and Emi2 inside right (Bertie may well get the nod when back to full fitness.) 

Inside left is the big question. Probably Chuk or JJ (if not in midfield.) 

McGinn - Dougie - Sanson

—Buendia————JJ———

—————- Ollie —————-

I’d be happy with that. As you say, Bert to challenge Buendia from now. Chuk, Trez and El Ghazi to challenge for the other spot. 

[VillanousOne]

On the most basic level, most of our attacking success over the last few seasons was based on pace and width.

At the moment I don't get the feeling Ollie or Buendia are proper wide players who offer us the width we had before. We need Ollie to be on the end of crosses not putting them in.

I would honestly stick Bidace or Anwar on the left and now we have Traore back start him on the right, Ollie on his own up front. If we need more attacking impetus bring on Buendia or Ings.



 

[villaslash]

18 minutes ago, VillanousOne said:

On the most basic level, most of our attacking success over the last few seasons was based on pace and width.

At the moment I don't get the feeling Ollie or Buendia are proper wide players who offer us the width we had before. We need Ollie to be on the end of crosses not putting them in.

I would honestly stick Bidace or Anwar on the left and now we have Traore back start him on the right, Ollie on his own up front. If we need more attacking impetus bring on Buendia or Ings.



 

I’d also like to see the left and right attacking players move farther to the outside sometimes and cut in. This was one of the strengths of Traore. I think he is a player who has the trickery to play narrow but the pace to really rip down the wing.

[OutByEaster?]

Width in Gerrard's system comes from Targett and Cash - we don't play with wingers and I can't see him suddenly changing that.

Smith played:

--------------------XXXXX--------------------

XXXX-----XXXXX-----XXXX---XXXX

-------------------XXXXX---------------------

-------------XXXXX---XXXXXX----------

XXXXX----------------------------XXXXX

--------------------XXXXX--------------------

Gerrard plays:

--------------------XXXXX--------------------

XXXX-----XXXXX-----XXXX---XXXX

------XXXXX---XXXXX----XXXXX-----

--------------XXXX------XXXXX------------

--------------------XXXXX---------------------

With full backs bombing on.

I think we'll sell two or three of Bailey, Traore, Philgene-Bidace, Trezeguet and El Ghazi in the summer.

 

[VillanousOne]

8 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Width in Gerrard's system comes from Targett and Cash - we don't play with wingers and I can't see him suddenly changing that.

Smith played:

--------------------XXXXX--------------------

XXXX-----XXXXX-----XXXX---XXXX

-------------------XXXXX---------------------

-------------XXXXX---XXXXXX----------

XXXXX----------------------------XXXXX

--------------------XXXXX--------------------

Gerrard plays:

--------------------XXXXX--------------------

XXXX-----XXXXX-----XXXX---XXXX

------XXXXX---XXXXX----XXXXX-----

--------------XXXX------XXXXX------------

--------------------XXXXX---------------------

With full backs bombing on.

I think we'll sell two or three of Bailey, Traore, Philgene-Bidace, Trezeguet and El Ghazi in the summer.

 

I don't think we've played a proper 433 with width more than twice this season even under Smith.

If Gerrard prefers centre backs that bomb on, who is meant to be on the end of these crosses? Ollie or Ings? Also Cash seems suited to bombing on, Targett doesn't seem to have as much overlapping threat without Gresford.

However we are supposed to be set up, it's not working.

Gerrard has the midfield and defence better organised, just the attack needs work but it was always going to take time.

 

[OutByEaster?]

36 minutes ago, VillanousOne said:

However we are supposed to be set up, it's not working.

Seems to be going alright to me. I thought against Norwich we looked as dangerous as we've looked in a long time and we've troubled every team we've played against since Gerrard arrived. I like this system, I think we look very promising.

 

[VillanousOne]

57 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

Seems to be going alright to me. I thought against Norwich we looked as dangerous as we've looked in a long time and we've troubled every team we've played against since Gerrard arrived. I like this system, I think we look very promising.

 

The same Norwich that just got destroyed by Arsenal?

I am not being critical of Gerrard who has done wonders in such a short time, but the card he has been dealt hasn't been great in terms of attack. Even if his system is the right one, he hasn't found the players to play it yet and our shots on goal stats per game remain low. Bringing Ings back didn't make it better.

But we also looked sublime vs Chelsea in the first half, our midfield has looked better than it has in god knows how long, then we stopped pressing and gave them too much space in the second half, it genuinely looked like we didn't have the legs to play 90 mins. Maybe if we had, some of the half chances and through balls might have finally paid off.
 

Edited December 27, 2021 by VillanousOne