Aw Formation

Aw Formation

thoughts?

442/4312.

Are you JAVIER in disguise?

It's not just a matter of formation, it's a matter of who is picked.

Therefore I am picking 'crap poll'

4-1-2-1-2

+1

Yep, we need to cover our butts for any counter attack whilst we seek to get a 3 goal lead - as quick as we can. Should the AW's be leading with 10 mins to go, there's gonna be a lot of people going out on the the concourse for a nervous smoke, if it is a close game.

please no Elliot.

he's only in the squad for what he has done in the past.

Mcglinchey is much more capable of attacking because that is what we need to do !!! attack and score goals !!

and quite frankly Elliot is not up to it.

are you serious?
ok nvm just read who it is
threat2009-11-09 19:44:16

4-4-2

BlattersBalls2009-11-09 20:06:14

its gotta be 4-4-2 and see how the game develops.There are going to be enough nerves out there in front of 35000 without going to fancy formations.  Dont choke....

Wrong website buddy. You'll find what you're looking for here- www.allblacks.com.

442 pasten scott nelson sigmund lochead bertos brown elliot mcglinchey killen smeltz

how players are allowed on the bench

Went with other, as a match as important as this calls for one formation only - the flying V. Arsenal2009-11-09 21:46:44

 

Wrong website buddy. You'll find what you're looking for here- www.allblacks.com.[/QUOTE]

i think a 442. Phoenix style seeing as the majority of our squad can easily play in it. McGlinchey adapting to a wider role on the right with bertos left imo. and Fallon to partner Smeltz

But then you have to drop one of our strikers Fallon, Smeltz or Killen who are some of our best players, and Wood gets sent further down the pecking order (remember how effective he was in leg 1?)

I think the beauty and possibily the reasoning of the 3-4-3 is our personal. Its either we play an extra on of those 3 star players, or you have a Mulligan or Christie or someone at fullback. It gets our best 11 players on the field (possibly Wood should be there but cant play 4 up front!), and is a dangerous and adaptable formation, where our wing backs bertos and lochie can either take it to them, or at worst get pinned back as full backs

Some variant of 4-4-2.

Bertos can not play the same position as last time. We need him in the other third of the field. In my opinion, I would drop Killen just so I can have McGlinchey and Bertos up the front creating space and sending in crosses which is exactly why we didnt score against Bahrain because our front 3 were all strikers and there were rarely any  positive balls put into the box from an attacking aspect. When Bertos got up (once or twice) then he did whip a ball in that could have done something. When McGlichey came on, he played centrally and pushed out right on occassion and was dangerous and Bahrain did not expect it.  442 for me and Wood off bench. Maybe Killen if we have to replace Smeltz or Fallon but 442 means we are the most balanced we can be. Just right back spot is a gamble

I pretty much agree with all of that - Leo has to play further up the field in his natural position, Killen's gotta go for McGlinchey to start, Smeltzy and Rory up front (for me, Rory and Killen are same type of players, but from what I've seen so far, Fallon > Killen), this leaves RB the biggest problem in the starting XI, but I'd go with Scott, and if thinks go south than we can try to reshuffle.

But I think this kind of set-up gets us the best balance and chance to win.el grapadura2009-11-10 18:20:41

yeah agree with that.
We need to get numbers forward while still having people to stop their break.

Possibly what El Grap said is the most likely. Where does that leave Wood, Killen and Vicelich? And what is the word on injuries?

Perhaps not that Fallon is greater than Killen, but is a better fit with Smeltz up front. Leaving Wood as the impact player.

But this means McGlinchley out wide as well, when he is at his best in the middle of the park, as he was at the end of the game.

Some questions there with that formation.

Vicelich and Siggy are both too slow for RB so one has to miss out.
We will have our full squad unless anything happens between saturday.

That's exactly what seems to have done for the game in Bahrain. He's thought to himself, 'Hmmmm, what are my best 11 players', come up with the 11, and then tried to make them fit. I think he needs to drop one of the 3 strikers and play a 4-4-2.

But easier said than done, they all offer something different. Killen big and good at holding the ball up, Fallon big, strong in the air invaluable if we play wingers and cross the ball, and Smeltz has that crucial knack of scoring and can play slightly behind one of the other two.

If it was me - Killen, but it's a hard choice...

I see your point of view, but you're in danger there of sacrificing a balanced side for a team of individuals. It will be a team effort that beats Bahrain over 90 (or, god forbid, 120) minutes and I think that Ricki needs to sacrifice a 'star' or two for the sake of the overall balance of the side.

The first leg proved that Bertos is not able to play effectively as a wing back, he's not sound enough defensively (something Bahrain may hope to exploit if it happens again) and it stopped him from being a useful attacking threat. The real threat of our four strikers is that they are all imposing players who will be a handful for the Bahrain defence.

To play to our strengths is not necessarily a case of just throwing them all on there, because doing that - as we saw in the first leg - restricts the service. We need to play two up top (of which one MUST be Smeltz, because he can poach knockdowns as well as anyone) with good service from either wing. That means Bertos on one flank and McGlinchey on the other. It's not WeeMac's ideal position, but it is where he will be able to cause the most damage for us.

At right back, I'm not sure. I've not seen enough of Scott to comment but I would agree that neither Sigmund nor Vicelich have the pace to cope with the Bahrain wingers, that was their main threat in the first leg and I'd feel more comfortable with a natural full back there. That's a call Ricki has to make though, does Scott have enough football under his belt or would the more experienced but less suited Sigmund or Vicelich ultimately do a better job.

For me:
--------------Paston---------------
Scott-Nelson-Sigmund-Lochead
-----------Brown-Elliot------------
McGlinchey---------------- Bertos
-----------Smeltz-Fallon----------

Brown's form for the Phoenix is a massive plus, and if he and Elliot can replicate the Brown/Lia partnership it'll benefit us. Elliot's range of passing means he can sit deeper and contorl the play, while also breaking up opponents attacks. Brown has to absolutely run his socks off, getting forward with his quickly-becoming-trademark-late-runs but also putting in a massive defensive shift.

Fallon preferred to Killen for me, but that's a close call and either option will provide a good partner for Smeltz. Wood is an impact player at this level at present and could come on and terrorise tiring Bahrain defence late in the game. I think that Wood would be a far better sub to bring on than Killen (or Fallon) as he offers the youth and energy that will really tell in the late stages.

If only a certain Paul Everton Ifill was a Kiwi eh...
Still, I'm quitely confident for our chances. I think we can do it.
Going to be a massive night. Can't wait.
PS. Sorry for the excessive post - football fever is taking me over.

how good is ryan nelson at right full-back?

Probably pretty good, but he'd be wasted out there. He needs to be the commanding force at the heart of the team.

hopefully smeltzy doesn't play out wide again wala72009-11-11 20:50:50

Interesting comments from Fallons coach in the UK...said something like...."if you want a CF who can run angles/channels etc then he's not your man...but if you want someone lethal on the end of crosses then Fallons it"

So if Fallon plays you need Leo whipping in crosses and Smeltzy feeding on the scraps. Smeltz has to start so its really whether Rickie picks Fallon or Killeen to partner him.

Is Scott fast? I think that is one of the key requirements, and why chuckng someone like Sggy out there won't work (remember hm in Sydney not so long ago?)

And then, from the original 3 of NelsEn, Vicelich and Sigmund who do you drop to have 2 centrebacks? Ivan surely?

The obvious choice for left back is Lochie, McGlinchy in front of hime out wide on the left?
hellobeaver2009-11-10 23:59:11

McGlinchey centrally, feeding whichever two strikers start out of Smeltz, Fallon, Wood and Killen, then Bertos playing more of a free role, switching flanks.

3-4-3 is not really an option in this poll. . . .

Sounds like Ricki's decided on it if the Herald is to be believed...apparantly 3-4-3 was obvious after watching training today...

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=10608619

Unless, Ricki is going to pull a fast one

yep they lined up as 3-4-3 at training today