Starting 11 -first round- new season

Cacace would surely take uo one of the MC roles in a defensive capacity?

I just love how we are arguing over our starting XI when we still have more signings coming in, including probably 1 or 2 more foreign ones.

Nice post DJ, yes 4-2-3-1 looks better, and supposedly is a formation Rudan likes, with the 'wingers' asked to move infield and link with the 10 and striker, making space for the wing-backs to overlap.

First job though is to get the best players on the pitch, within reason - make the formation fit the players, not the other way round. So IMO Cacace must start, and Durante too, on end-of-season form, ahead of Gulley (unproven) and Burns (well below his best). With three centrebacks, the wingbacks should have more freedom to get forward, and the extra centreback can help the holding midfielder.

Too soon at 17 to pigeonhole Cacace; so far he looks better on attack than defence. Strong skilful player, with a hint of a mean streak. Will be interesting to see where he settles (if he can hold down a starting place) - LB, CDM, L wing? He showed more penetration on attack than Burns last year.

Singh - agree he shouldn't be asked to do too much 'dirty work'.

I'm counting Krishna still as a visa until it is 100% confirmed that he isn't anymore. Plus Rudan has been quoted in the paper about maybe not using all the visa spots up before the season kicks off.

Can't pick players on 5 month old form under a different coach.

Our best XI will be decided by Rudan in preseason, and we can't know if we're getting the best players on the pitch til we know our squad makeup. If Cacace is starting come the beginning of the season then we haven't made the signings required to survive in the A-League. He's a squad player and a great prospect at 17 but if he's the best player we have in any of those roles we aren't going to have a good season.

Will be interesting to see how Burns does under a competent coach - was good for us under Merrick but I agree he was disappointing last year.

Plenty of teams don't use all their imports, good to be flexible come January

I think he will use four of them, the idea is that he will only use an import spot if they can do a better job than a Kiwi or Australian player can, plus as above gives up room in the January window as well to sign someone.

If I was to go with a back 3 I would go for something more like this:

back three with wing backs is just too defensive for mine, well get swamped with an overloaded midfield be well dominated by most teams. if we were any better at controlling possession then maybe. I'd prefer the suggested 4-2-3-1 or even a 4-1-3-2 type thing. We definitely need a defensive minded midfielder which I think Libby can easily do. Whether he patrols alone or as part of a midfield 2 is the question.

agreed but I worry about doyle and whoever is on the right being able to do both a strong job on attack and defence. Especially if Durante is one of the man men in the CB spot as his lack of pace caused severe issues last season.

Tratt at the back if the rumour turns out to be true.

Ohhhhh boy I've just seen the goal.com article, hell farken yeah

Covert Agent saying signed.

Sauce reliability sub 50% but you would hope he has the decency not to fudge with someone who has clearly had health issues..

Remember that that's the guy who was reporting as fact that Rob Morrison had basically sold us to South West Sydney

The back 4 will be a mix of that and then throw in Tratt, Durante, Cacace in some form (and Lowry)

If the rumoured Tratt signing is true, makes it tougher for Gulley to get a deal which is harsh on him. One would suspect that would be all the defensive signings we would make with 7/8 players in that mix.

The only question is it an upgrade on last year? 

Mullen, Rossi Galloway replaced by Taylor, Gulley, Tratt. 

One would say yes but the only massive difference would be Taylor over Rossi who did not play. Mullen for Tratt is much the same and Gulley for Galloway, you can argue here nor there without really seeing Gulley at that level.

I think it's the striker and strength of the pair of new midfield signings that will or won't make a difference over last year.  Plus how good the cover is for key players like Singh, Burns/Krishna and what impact we have on the bench.  The back four and the cover there looks OK already.  But further forward there's still a lot we don't know.

It really depends on the imports. We won't be able to tell until we get them in, and even then they're always complete unknowns. (though with Taylor we kind of know what to expect - full blooded, the odd error, slow, but tenacious etc.)

The formation against Miramar was like a 4-2-1-3 thing where they played with two number 10s, with one operating as a false nine. Imagine it will be Singh + import, with Burns and Krishna the two wide forwards.

But thats the point I am making.

El Grapadura makes a point that we have expected better defensive showing each year but largely with the same cast. There is no denying that we have been defensively poor the last 2 years conceding a lot of goals but we have largely the same cast again, with an expectation of better results?

Its not the strikers that concede goals. Granted a better midfield will help but if we have the same defensive players plus Taylor for Rossi (which is really the only main difference), is that much of an upgrade?

A big issue with the defense in the last couple of seasons was not just the personnel, but being able to field a settled back-line. The same back four started in what, a max of two games in a row last season? 

And when Rossi did play mostly he might as well not have bothered.  Well, mostly he didn't bother.

Taylor and Fox versus last years Dura (slowing but still decent enough to be back-up) and a disinterested Rossi;

or some patched together combo of Doyle and/or Mullen with one of Dura or Rossi, and a third or fourth choice FB, if we were lucky. 

It's no contest for me.  Unless we get a bad run of injuries we will be much better than last year accross the back.  

And add that Rudan is wanting a better screen than Paracki.

If Taylor turns out to be too slow then we've got a different story.  But hopefully Rudan did his due diligence on that.  

Fox was pretty good when fit.  And you would think will improve again, especially alongside a more consistent guiding partner and especially if that's Taylor, with Dura barking at the back of them both.

I was just posing the question.

I guess the thing for me is that it all hinges on Taylor because he is the only *real* difference. If he gets crocked early on, its going to be another season of same personnel as seasons gone and we know how that has gone. Thats a rather large weak link in the system to rely on one player

Disclaimer: I know we are getting a new keeper and midfield but we did have Moss, Riera and Paracki as well.

If rumours are true...

Our midfield trio could be:
       
                  Singh

Polish Guy          Mitch Nichols

Although I don't particularly think Nichols is a box to box type.

we like Rudan more?

They like Rudan more ?

The defence will be standing around as the front third dominates the possession and score line?

Starting to take shape.

Assuming all speculation is true, and with best (imho) players starting:             

                         Tbc

               Dura. Taylor Fox

Tratt                                           Doyle

                   Kopczyński (?)

              Nichols  Singh  Cacace

                       Krishna                  

Durante looks good playing out of defence - passing and dribbling, and sometimes dribbles further forward than anyone expects. Maybe he could sit in front of Fox and Taylor, and help the CDM out.

Not sure how Kopczyński will go.

Singh and Nichols give a left and right footed combination, both skilful and with good long shots. So many goals are unplanned - deflections, errors etc - so Nichols and Singh taking long shots from left and right is pretty appealing. Krishna can shoot too.

Nichols also seems to have the striker's knack of getting into goal scoring positions. The front four could be fairly fluid.

Squad size update (speculative):

Ten players named above

Other contracted players: Lowry, Fenton, Parkhouse, two keepers, Burns

Squad size (speculative): 16 (15 without Smith)

Two imports used.

Would leave 7 to choose - four or fewer imports / three or more Australasians. To include a GK and another CDM.

Looks promising.

needs more goal scorers

Surely at least Burns instead of Cacace

Also seems fairly clear Tratts not joining us. A YF founder said

4-3-(narrow)2-1 last week which is consistent with how he once described a preference to play with wide players playing advanced and narrow with full backs over lapping

Based on that, for me

?? - ??, Fox, Taylor, Doyle - ??, ??, ?? - Burns, Krishna, ??

#workinprogress #barebones

Thought Hudson-Wihongi was a DM? 

Yeah you're right, in that lineup if he were to come on for Nichols I suppose the formation would shift to a more defensive 4-2-3-1/4-2-1-2-1