Double signing

[londonblue]

He does a lot for charidy mate

You ain't seen nothin' yet.

 

[AndyT]

Looks like a team to keep Ben Clarkson busy.

Aren't they all! :winking:

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

Maybe a change in formation is on the cards should we also sign Kiernan.5-3-2, or even 3-5-2, just a thought:winking:

We don't have enough centre-halves to play a 3-5-2

Even if you have 3 on the books to play that for a whole season and think you're not gonna get injuries and suspensions is a disastrous idea

 

[Beefy]

Particularly if two of the centre-halves are Anton Ferdinand & Michael Turner.

 

[Barry.C]

My worry with a back 3 of Turner, Ferdinand and Coker would be a lack of pace . We would be very vulnerable to balls over the top or slid through, since as great as the two older boys are at anticipation , timing, positioning ,experience and tackling what they dont possess is turning pace. We were found out a few times in this regard last year. This is made all the worse with Demetriou, Wordsworth and Mc Laughlin whose instincts and play going forward are very good but defensively poor, although to be fair Mc Laughlin has come on in that respect to develop an all round better game. However these 3 would leave the back 3 even more exposed, especially if there was no Lenny ( and Atkinson ) belting around at pace sticking in last gasp saving tackles. As much as I would like to see us gain at least one more striker, I think the defence needs more cover and pace, naybe Hendrie if we get him can provide a bit of that?

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

Coker's pace is pretty good? Having said that I too am not keen on the 3-5-2 option really

 

[Beefy]

Coker isn't a centre-half. John White could be an option there though.

I'd prefer a young player with pace playing alongside those two. That said, it's 4-4-2 for me anyway.

 

[AndyT]

Agreed on 4-4-2. Always my formation of choice, but it was an option to release Hendrie and Demetriou as more of an attacking threat.

On the pace angle, it depends how far up the pitch you play your back line, but I'd envisage an Anton in a sweeper role, sitting reasonably deep anyway.

The ideal side would be, for me :-

Oxley
Demetriou Turner Ferdinand Hendrie
Wordsworth McLaughlin + 2 signings (or Timlin + 1)
Cox Ranger

 

[Clinton Baptiste]

Not sure why people are wanting to put square pegs in round holes? Coker is not a centre back, Hendrie is not a midfielder. Its about having competition for places. Brown will play 4-4-2, that's where the players feel most comfortable.

 

[Napster]

Not sure why people are wanting to put square pegs in round holes? Coker is not a centre back, Hendrie is not a midfielder. Its about having competition for places. Brown will play 4-4-2, that's where the players feel most comfortable.

Exactly. One more CB and we've got competition across the back.

 

[enfieldblue]

As he's a centre half, I'm trying to crowbar a Backman Turner ... line in.

Tougher than you think.

If you think he's good, YOU AIN'T SEEN NOTHING YET - :smile:

 

[Rattus Norvegicus]

Well, I've seen the 3-5-2 option work (or the 5-3-2 option when defending) for Southend at times and it does seem to bamboozle the opposition for a little while .......... but then teams (or the opposition manager does) work out what we are doing and seem to be able to nullify the attacking threat and at best we look like getting a draw.

Another point I would make is that we have in the past chopped and changed formation. If top class players struggle with changing formation then it's no different 2 leagues down.

 

[AndyT]

The problem with us playing 3 centre-halves in the past has been for negative reasons. To shore up a leaky defence. Rather than as an attacking option. Often we have set-up with one striker, as well.

For example, that turning point game at Rochdale, where we tried 3-5-2 (or more to the point 5-2-2-1), was a bit of a failure. Playing Mooney as your front man. The calls were to get Cox up there and play 4-4-2 and that worked a whole lot better.

4-4-2 is always my preferred choice, but a 3-5-2, with attack in mind, is also workable. However, you need wing-backs that can really bomb forward and even score goals, plus a very strong 3 in the middle of the park, that can put in the work-rate and create chances/openings.

4-4-2 give you more insurance in midfield, so will probably be the choice that PB will go with. It then makes it interesting how Coker, Hendrie and McLaughlin fit into that system.

Interesting times ahead.

 

[Rattus Norvegicus]

The problem with us playing 3 centre-halves in the past has been for negative reasons. To shore up a leaky defence. Rather than as an attacking option. Often we have set-up with one striker, as well.

For example, that turning point game at Rochdale, where we tried 3-5-2 (or more to the point 5-2-2-1), was a bit of a failure. Playing Mooney as your front man. The calls were to get Cox up there and play 4-4-2 and that worked a whole lot better.

4-4-2 is always my preferred choice, but a 3-5-2, with attack in mind, is also workable. However, you need wing-backs that can really bomb forward and even score goals, plus a very strong 3 in the middle of the park, that can put in the work-rate and create chances/openings.

4-4-2 give you more insurance in midfield, so will probably be the choice that PB will go with. It then makes it interesting how Coker, Hendrie and McLaughlin fit into that system.

Interesting times ahead.

What he said. Innit bruv.