PDA

View Full Version : 4 - 1 - 4 - 1 Happy with that?



Hibbyradge
11-11-2010, 06:19 PM
It's a system which gives the midfield much more responsibility offensively, but should help us at the back.

Since last season, it's been apparent that we needed more dig in the middle of the park, and with the inclusion of Nid in a holding role, we competed really well in that area last night.

Rangers have exploited that system pretty successfully under Walter Smith, but we don't have the pace of Miller up front and given our lack of strikers generally, I'm all for a bit of frugality in defence.

Making us hard to beat would be a great start.

BT58
11-11-2010, 06:47 PM
if this formation gets us results then great
i just wonder if CC will change the team for the well game
by all accounts yon trackays is finally finding his feet, ok he never scored
but maybe his hold up play is what we are wanting for this formation
does CC bring back deeks, or does he leave him on the bench

Brads Laing
11-11-2010, 07:26 PM
It's all about the result first and foremost, sure we all want to see free-flowing passing football but that will come, firstly we need to start winning

Prof. Shaggy
11-11-2010, 07:31 PM
Happy with a clean sheet, thank you very much.:wink:

Hainan Hibs
11-11-2010, 07:35 PM
With Murray in that position until Rocastle is signed, it allows Miller to go forward more, and hopefully we could see more of what we expected from him. It is a good formation as along as we get men forward on the wings along with Miller.

I was one who was taken in by the Calderwood hoofball reports but by seeing what happened against Rangers that is very wrong, and as shown it is entirely possible to play good football and get a result.

MyJo
11-11-2010, 09:00 PM
4-1-4-1 with a target man like Trakys up front is the best option for us IMO :agree:

Miller plays at his best when he is free to roam in the midfield and make himself available everywhere in the opposition half and that's what happened yesterday. Its no coincidence that our awful run of form and Millers poor performances came when we lost McBride anchoring the midfield and Miller has been forced into playing a stricter central midfield role which doesn't suit him.

Playing Riordan as a lone striker is never going to work either. Going forward we should use the 4-1-4-1 system with a target-man striker like Trakys upfront and Nid sitting in the holding midfield role. players like Riordan, Galbraith, Wotherspoon & Zemmama can play on the wings but with the fullbacks overlapping or the wingers cutting inside while the midfielders like Miller & Rankin support going forward or move out to cover the wings and provide options in attack without having to worry that we're being left short at the back.

4-1-4-1 can go to 5-4-1, 4-5-1, 4-3-3 or 3-4-3 very quickly and without the need for players to change their on-field positions other than to push forward more or sit back more depending on the situation and what is required.

WindyMiller
11-11-2010, 09:20 PM
4-1-4-1 with a target man like Trakys up front is the best option for us IMO :agree:

Miller plays at his best when he is free to roam in the midfield and make himself available everywhere in the opposition half and that's what happened yesterday. Its no coincidence that our awful run of form and Millers poor performances came when we lost McBride anchoring the midfield and Miller has been forced into playing a stricter central midfield role which doesn't suit him.

Playing Riordan as a lone striker is never going to work either. Going forward we should use the 4-1-4-1 system with a target-man striker like Trakys upfront and Nid sitting in the holding midfield role. players like Riordan, Galbraith, Wotherspoon & Zemmama can play on the wings but with the fullbacks overlapping or the wingers cutting inside while the midfielders like Miller & Rankin support going forward or move out to cover the wings and provide options in attack without having to worry that we're being left short at the back.

4-1-4-1 can go to 5-4-1, 4-5-1, 4-3-3 or 3-4-3 very quickly and without the need for players to change their on-field positions other than to push forward more or sit back more depending on the situation and what is required.

It obviously worked well last night and would be useful in most situations but I don't see Deeks fitting in to that system.

Bonnyrigg H.F.C
11-11-2010, 09:43 PM
With the right players it's a good system. Last night it was like we split in to two teams of five at times. The back 4 and Murray, the midfield 4 and Trakys. The back 4 pretty much stayed where they were with Murray covering wherever needed. The other 4 midfielders were all able to get up pretty much as the pleased, which they could do as we actually had someone who could keep the ball up at that end of the pitch in big Trakys. Most noticeable thing was that everyone was played in their proper position, makes some difference.

Springbank
11-11-2010, 10:43 PM
With Murray in that position until Rocastle is signed, it allows Miller to go forward more, and hopefully we could see more of what we expected from him. It is a good formation as along as we get men forward on the wings along with Miller.

I was one who was taken in by the Calderwood hoofball reports but by seeing what happened against Rangers that is very wrong, and as shown it is entirely possible to play good football and get a result.

I think you'll find this role is copyright, Herr M. Jack

basehibby
12-11-2010, 12:54 AM
if this formation gets us results then great
i just wonder if CC will change the team for the well game
by all accounts yon trackays is finally finding his feet, ok he never scored
but maybe his hold up play is what we are wanting for this formation
does CC bring back deeks, or does he leave him on the bench

The 4-1-4-1 obviously worked a treat last night vs the huns at ipox - but would it be the right one to go for home vs 'well? I'm not so sure.

I think a 4-4-2 with Riordan up front with Trakys would be best. I'd keep the back 4 the same along with Murray and Miller in the centre of midfield with Rankin earning his place with his great goalscoring performance vs the huns.

That would mean dropping one of Wotherspoon or De Graff to the bench - youthful zest vs experience and guile - difficult call.

poolman
12-11-2010, 01:29 AM
The system used last night looked really effective, especially in the first half, but I was only going on what I saw on Hibs TV

But it did look like the best Hibs have played this season

More of the same on Saturday :agree:

greenlex
12-11-2010, 02:16 AM
I think I will leave Satyurdays tactics to CC and DA.

Lucius Apuleius
12-11-2010, 05:15 AM
I know **** all about tactics and formations. I just want to see 11 players out there winning for our football team. Do not give a monkeys how they line up. :greengrin:

IWasThere2016
12-11-2010, 06:00 AM
As long as we've turned the corner I don't mind who plays where tbh.

Good football, clean sheets, points and non-havering/non-delusional post match interviews please :agree:

bighairyfaeleith
12-11-2010, 08:38 AM
I too am going to leave it up to CC & DA, then I'll criticise them to death when they get it wrong:greengrin

lucky
12-11-2010, 08:43 AM
4-1-4-1 away from home against the old firm is fine but teams that sit in as well could see us struggle to break them down.

Hibbyradge
12-11-2010, 09:09 AM
The 4-1-4-1 obviously worked a treat last night vs the huns at ipox - but would it be the right one to go for home vs 'well? I'm not so sure.

I think a 4-4-2 with Riordan up front with Trakys would be best. I'd keep the back 4 the same along with Murray and Miller in the centre of midfield with Rankin earning his place with his great goalscoring performance vs the huns.

That would mean dropping one of Wotherspoon or De Graff to the bench - youthful zest vs experience and guile - difficult call.

I might be splitting hairs here, but I don't think a strict 4-4-2 suits Deek either.

He's better playing off, or behind the front man, so I guess 4-4-1-1 would be better.

Andy74
12-11-2010, 09:15 AM
4-1-4-1 away from home against the old firm is fine but teams that sit in as well could see us struggle to break them down.

Why? You just have the wider 2 in midfeid as wingers or more forward type players such as Riordan, Wotherspoon or Galbraith and your two central players can be more attack minded such as Miller, de Graaf or Rankin with a sitting midfielder and the back four still in place behind them.

It's pretty flexible but makes the best use of the types of players we have.

borstalboy
12-11-2010, 09:16 AM
4-1-4-1 away from home against the old firm is fine but teams that sit in as well could see us struggle to break them down.

I can understand what you mean here....however, if that is the case and teams sit in, then you just play a bit further up the park. As someone mentioned previously, if teams are sitting in then it can easily become a 4-3-3 if required when attacking........Hopefully!

PISTOL1875
12-11-2010, 10:08 AM
4-1-4-1 is a good system to play but it all depends on the forward doing his job correctly.. Bit Trakys is playing up top now but if he can't hold the ball up then we nothing and the ball will come straight back..

I think if he can get him fit then he could play the role quite well..

Andy74
12-11-2010, 10:15 AM
It obviously worked well last night and would be useful in most situations but I don't see Deeks fitting in to that system.

Why not? He did okay wide in a 442 scoring 15 goals or so last year and with a full back behind him trying to get forward and no sitting midfilder.

In this set up particulalry at home he'd be more of a wide forward in a 433 just like when Mowbray was around. I think it would suit him a lot better than a central position and we'd also have a full back staying in position and cover from the sitting midfilder.

JimBHibees
12-11-2010, 10:19 AM
Why not? He did okay wide in a 442 scoring 15 goals or so last year and with a full back behind him trying to get forward and no sitting midfilder.

In this set up particulalry at home he'd be more of a wide forward in a 433 just like when Mowbray was around. I think it would suit him a lot better than a central position and we'd also have a full back staying in position and cover from the sitting midfilder.

Completely agree it should suit him better in giving him a bit licence to roam however with cover also.

blackpoolhibs
12-11-2010, 10:24 AM
Why not? He did okay wide in a 442 scoring 15 goals or so last year and with a full back behind him trying to get forward and no sitting midfilder.

In this set up particulalry at home he'd be more of a wide forward in a 433 just like when Mowbray was around. I think it would suit him a lot better than a central position and we'd also have a full back staying in position and cover from the sitting midfilder.

:agree: We get one good result and we want to drop our best goalscorer. He scored at parkhead too in case some folk have forgotten. I'd put money on him scoring regularly all season. I wouldnt put money on Wednesday's team doing the same. If we'd listened to everyone on here after Sundays defeat, Bamba Miller and Trakys would have been dumped in the north sea, along with Rankin Hanlon and Hart. Yet one game later we are building our team round most of these players. :confused:

cockneymike
12-11-2010, 10:26 AM
Completely agree it should suit him better in giving him a bit licence to roam however with cover also.

Also Murray knows Riordan's game well, so if he's the cover midfielder, he'll have a decent idea of what Riordan's movement is like and where and how to sit in.

cockneymike
12-11-2010, 10:30 AM
:agree: We get one good result and we want to drop our best goalscorer. He scored at parkhead too in case some folk have forgotten. I'd put money on him scoring regularly all season. I wouldnt put money on Wednesday's team doing the same. If we'd listened to everyone on here after Sundays defeat, Bamba Miller and Trakys would have been dumped in the north sea, along with Rankin Hanlon and Hart. Yet one game later we are building our team round most of these players. :confused:

To be fair, we were always going to be building a team around Bamba and Miller (this season at least), irrespective of people's opinions in the immediate aftermath of Sunday, don't you think?

blackpoolhibs
12-11-2010, 10:41 AM
To be fair, we were always going to be building a team around Bamba and Miller (this season at least), irrespective of people's opinions in the immediate aftermath of Sunday, don't you think?

They would both be along with Riordan the first 3 names i'd pick.

JimBHibees
12-11-2010, 11:01 AM
:agree: We get one good result and we want to drop our best goalscorer. He scored at parkhead too in case some folk have forgotten. I'd put money on him scoring regularly all season. I wouldnt put money on Wednesday's team doing the same. If we'd listened to everyone on here after Sundays defeat, Bamba Miller and Trakys would have been dumped in the north sea, along with Rankin Hanlon and Hart. Yet one game later we are building our team round most of these players. :confused:

It is surely about the team rather than individuals and after one excellent result and performance against the Scottish champions and league leaders after months of mediocrity does it make any sense to be changing anything. It might not work and Deek or whoever can come on if needed.

Arch Stanton
12-11-2010, 11:23 AM
It is surely about the team rather than individuals and after one excellent result and performance against the Scottish champions and league leaders after months of mediocrity does it make any sense to be changing anything. It might not work and Deek or whoever can come on if needed.

I'd agree with that - trying to give Riordan a game is going to give CC more problems than he needs right now - it is more important to get the balance of the team right. If Riordan plays then Miller will need to try and fill gaps rather than be given a free role - it changes things quite a lot in my view.

I don't actually think we will score fewer goals by not playing Riordan. I didn't notice a surge in our goals scored column when he joined us after all.

blackpoolhibs
12-11-2010, 11:27 AM
It is surely about the team rather than individuals and after one excellent result and performance against the Scottish champions and league leaders after months of mediocrity does it make any sense to be changing anything. It might not work and Deek or whoever can come on if needed.

Yes i agree it is all about the team, and if we won every game from now on in without Derek Riordan, nobody would be any happier than me. I just believe we should be playing Riordan. I will understand if he's not playing, but you can guess the title of the threads now should we lose on Saturday, without our most dangerous goalscorer in years.

I cant be bothered to look for the threads, but you will have seen them. Who would you keep out of that lot was the jist of them. Riordan was the only name on every one. And every list had 3 or 4 names at most.

blackpoolhibs
12-11-2010, 11:38 AM
Wanting Deek back in the side is just my opinion. If we had beaten the huns without Bamba and Miller, and they'd been replaced by Hogg and Stevenson. I'd be saying the same about them. I'd be wanting them straight back in next game.

--------
12-11-2010, 11:39 AM
:agree: We get one good result and we want to drop our best goalscorer. He scored at parkhead too in case some folk have forgotten. I'd put money on him scoring regularly all season. I wouldnt put money on Wednesday's team doing the same. If we'd listened to everyone on here after Sundays defeat, Bamba Miller and Trakys would have been dumped in the north sea, along with Rankin Hanlon and Hart. Yet one game later we are building our team round most of these players. :confused:


:agree:

Horses for courses, surely. And dropping our most gifted forward doesn't quite compute in my reckoning.

Fans want a quick fix. We tend to clutch at whatever straw floats by. The manager and coaches see the players at training, know the state of their fitness and motivation, and plan accordingly. And the players (if they're big grown-up boys) will appreciate that the team for an away game at Ibrox isn't necessarily the team to face Motherwell at ER.

If Trakys is approaching match fitness, and we can get Duffy, Zouma and Welsh back fit, and bring back McCann, Booth, Byrne, and maybe one or two of the other loan deals, we may yet see a glimmer of daylight in the New Year.

IMO Hughes left us stuck up Ordure Estuary with neither outboard, oars, or paddle, in a rapidly sinking ship. It will take time for CC to get us out of it, and we need to have patience.

Tomorrow's a huge game for us, and, I expect, a formidably difficult one. I'm making no predictions, and harbouring no huge expectations. One game at time, guys, one game at a time.

GreenPJ
12-11-2010, 11:47 AM
Whatever the formation and whoever plays we are going to have to be as good as we were first half against Motherwell. I rate the Motherwell attack highly, they are fast and mobile.

Just hope whatever passion and confidence CC instilled on them on Tue is still growing.

Arch Stanton
12-11-2010, 12:24 PM
Wanting Deek back in the side is just my opinion. If we had beaten the huns without Bamba and Miller, and they'd been replaced by Hogg and Stevenson. I'd be saying the same about them. I'd be wanting them straight back in next game.

These switches would strengthen the team without changing the system, could the same about Riordan? Even amongst his advocates there is no consensus about what exactly is his best position. Fair enough if CC can work that out and slot him but I would not want to go back to having Riordan grabbing goals against the run of play - I'm really fed up with that.

Keith_M
12-11-2010, 12:33 PM
One of Hibs problems has been that they've been far too predictable. If the cure for that is varying the formation, then I'm all for it.

As said already, 4-1-4-1 worked on Wednesday but it's not going to work every game.



Oh, and time for my wee gloat. I've been saying for ages that the manager should at least try out Murray in front of the back four but was told by lots of posters that he'd lost it, was now too slow, or whatever. You know who you all are :greengrin

Andy74
12-11-2010, 12:35 PM
These switches would strengthen the team without changing the system, could the same about Riordan? Even amongst his advocates there is no consensus about what exactly is his best position. Fair enough if CC can work that out and slot him but I would not want to go back to having Riordan grabbing goals against the run of play - I'm really fed up with that.

Yes, whoever played widest left of the 5 in midfield could be swapped with Riordan.

Rankin or Riordan over a season?

blackpoolhibs
12-11-2010, 12:36 PM
These switches would strengthen the team without changing the system, could the same about Riordan? Even amongst his advocates there is no consensus about what exactly is his best position. Fair enough if CC can work that out and slot him but I would not want to go back to having Riordan grabbing goals against the run of play - I'm really fed up with that.

I'm fed up with Riordan digging us out the sheite too, its about time the rest chipped in with some decent performances, and helped out a bit as well.

Stevie Reid
12-11-2010, 12:59 PM
These switches would strengthen the team without changing the system, could the same about Riordan? Even amongst his advocates there is no consensus about what exactly is his best position. Fair enough if CC can work that out and slot him but I would not want to go back to having Riordan grabbing goals against the run of play - I'm really fed up with that.

I think over the years Deek has looked more dangerous outside the box than in - his penalty failures and successes in one on one situations, seem to back this up also.

Coming inside from the left or playing in the hole is great for him, as he can shape to shoot with both feet or find a pass from those areas - such as Motherwell on the opening day of the season, 2 assists from wide positions and a great pass to Miller after defenders had been drawn to him in the hole.

borstalboy
12-11-2010, 01:06 PM
Wanting Deek back in the side is just my opinion. If we had beaten the huns without Bamba and Miller, and they'd been replaced by Hogg and Stevenson. I'd be saying the same about them. I'd be wanting them straight back in next game.

Do you think he'll maybe try and set an example......Deek didn't perform too well on Sunday (neither did the rest of the team to be fair) and then got himself stupidly sent off. Maybe a lesson to be learned if he doesn't start??...

JimBHibees
12-11-2010, 01:08 PM
Yes i agree it is all about the team, and if we won every game from now on in without Derek Riordan, nobody would be any happier than me. I just believe we should be playing Riordan. I will understand if he's not playing, but you can guess the title of the threads now should we lose on Saturday, without our most dangerous goalscorer in years.

I cant be bothered to look for the threads, but you will have seen them. Who would you keep out of that lot was the jist of them. Riordan was the only name on every one. And every list had 3 or 4 names at most.

See where you are coming from and it is only my opinion that we have been so bad yet seemed to put up a committed and excellent performance for the first time in months and we should be careful about changing that. Deek would no doubt come on if he is on the bench. To be fair I am sure CC will consider this and make the right call.

blackpoolhibs
12-11-2010, 01:17 PM
Do you think he'll maybe try and set an example......Deek didn't perform too well on Sunday (neither did the rest of the team to be fair) and then got himself stupidly sent off. Maybe a lesson to be learned if he doesn't start??...

I dont know what CC will do?


See where you are coming from and it is only my opinion that we have been so bad yet seemed to put up a committed and excellent performance for the first time in months and we should be careful about changing that. Deek would no doubt come on if he is on the bench. To be fair I am sure CC will consider this and make the right call.

In my opinion its about time the team put in a performance, with or without Derek. The midfield imho have been the most under performing part of the team all season. Not pitching in with some goals, hardly helping the defence out too, again imho.

I dont rate Nish either, and to be fair to him he's worked his socks off when picked, but had little service from the midfield. Wednesday was great, if CC picks the same side hopefully it pays off again. I have my doubts those players can give us consistent performances and results, but still hope they do.

WindyMiller
12-11-2010, 01:34 PM
Why not? He did okay wide in a 442 scoring 15 goals or so last year and with a full back behind him trying to get forward and no sitting midfilder.

In this set up particulalry at home he'd be more of a wide forward in a 433 just like when Mowbray was around. I think it would suit him a lot better than a central position and we'd also have a full back staying in position and cover from the sitting midfilder.


You've just changed the formation from the 4-1-4-1 metioned in the OP!

Andy74
12-11-2010, 03:51 PM
You've just changed the formation from the 4-1-4-1 metioned in the OP!

I've not.

That's the beauty of it, the two wide midfield players can play further forward when we have the ball.

We played the same way at Tannadice, Stevenson and Galbraith were basically playing as a 3 up front when attacking.

Riordan could play there fine as we have two central midfield players inside, a further sitting midfielder and the back 4 all still in position.

Ed De Gramo
12-11-2010, 03:56 PM
The 4-1-4-1 obviously worked a treat last night vs the huns at ipox - but would it be the right one to go for home vs 'well? I'm not so sure.

I think a 4-4-2 with Riordan up front with Trakys would be best. I'd keep the back 4 the same along with Murray and Miller in the centre of midfield with Rankin earning his place with his great goalscoring performance vs the huns.

That would mean dropping one of Wotherspoon or De Graff to the bench - youthful zest vs experience and guile - difficult call.

Or we could stick with the same 11 that destroyed Rangers and leave Deek on the bench till such time as CC wants to bring him on :thumbsup::thumbsup:

McKenzie
12-11-2010, 10:40 PM
Or we could stick with the same 11 that destroyed Rangers and leave Deek on the bench till such time as CC wants to bring him on http://www.hibs.net/images/smilies/thumbs%20up.gifhttp://www.hibs.net/images/smilies/thumbs%20up.gif
completely agree, why try and fix something that isnt broken, we beat a team who were unbeaten in the league so why do we not keep the same team, system :confused:

essexhibee
12-11-2010, 11:41 PM
I've got to be honest I was one of the murray bashers (strike me down). Thought he had lost it.
Looks like I was wrong and fingers crossed it continues sunday.

silverhibee
13-11-2010, 12:23 AM
I've got to be honest I was one of the murray bashers (strike me down). Thought he had lost it.
Looks like I was wrong and fingers crossed it continues sunday.

Hibs play tomorrow. :wink:

monktonharp
13-11-2010, 12:45 AM
Hibs play tomorrow. :wink:actually............they play today:wink:

Sunny1875
13-11-2010, 03:00 PM
Against NIL for THREE

playing the Scottish champions in thier own cave

of course were not happy with the formation

2-3-5 would have been a better formation with the players at our disposal

any one else agree CC got it wrong :greengrin

blackpoolhibs
13-11-2010, 10:39 PM
Or we could stick with the same 11 that destroyed Rangers and leave Deek on the bench till such time as CC wants to bring him on :thumbsup::thumbsup:


completely agree, why try and fix something that isnt broken, we beat a team who were unbeaten in the league so why do we not keep the same team, system :confused:

:tee hee: