Team for Dunfermline

[Guest Mahonio]

I would go with 4-3-1-2 formation with this personnel:

Esson

Tokely, Munro, Bulvitis, Golabek (i may have got CBs the wrong way around)

Proctor, Cox, Hayes

Imrie

Foran and Sanchez.

Edited October 13, 2009 by Mahonio

[DornochCaley]

We could play Esson up front. Aslong as we win i dont care.

[ictchris]

Russell Duncan won't get dropped, he had a good game last night.

[Harry Chibber]

Esson

Tokely Bulvitis Munro Golly

Proctor Cox Duncan Hayes

Foran Imrie

[rovercaley]

I would go with 4 - 2 - 2 formation and an attacking side ( we need to win this)

Esson

Proctor Tokely Munro Golabex

Imrie Sanchez Duncan ( or Cox) Hayes

Foran Rooney

[rovercaley]

I would go with 4 - 2 - 2 formation and an attacking side ( we need to win this)

Esson

Proctor Tokely Munro Golabex

Imrie Sanchez Duncan ( or Cox) Hayes

Foran Rooney

Sorry above should be 4 - 4 - 2

[ICTFCkev]

Esson

Tokely Bulvitis Munro Golly

Proctor Cox Duncan Hayes

Foran Imrie

Once again, I'd go with HairyChopper's team. :)

With subs: Allison, Ross, Rooney, Barrowman, Sanchez.

[absent friend]

I accept that a starting formation is always present at kick-off but surely the formation should be altered to take cognisance of the oppositions strengths and weaknesses, on the day.

This alteration should be further amended to embrace the fatigue being shown within your own team or to take advantage of this in the opposition. Did Queens not take advantage of Rossco's fatigue in the second half last week?

I also see the subs as an integral part of the team, using a player as a battering ram initially and once the defence has been 'softened up' put on your correct man to take advantage of the new situation or indeed replace your own player that has become less effective. This latter point makes me again think of Rossco at the Queens game, maybe he should have been replaced in the second half as they had done the damage and he was by then, less agile.

This subbing could then alter the formation so I do not see a formation as being set but amended throughout a game.

ICT formation only plays one up at home? Yet we have a Queens fan stating that 'ICT seemed to have 9 men camped in our penalty box for most of the first half.'

[Harry Chibber]

I accept that a starting formation is always present at kick-off but surely the formation should be altered to take cognisance of the oppositions strengths and weaknesses, on the day.

Not when you're at home.... you should be dictating the style, tempo of play when you have the 'so called home advantage'.

[AJS]

Esson

Tokely, Bulvitis, Munro, Golabek

Imrie, Cox, Duncan, Hayes

Foran, Sanchez

subs: Allison, Proctor, Stratford, Rooney, Odhiambo

Edited October 14, 2009 by ajsict92

[absent friend]

Harry, I would suggest that that we have no style or home advantage.

We will have style if the squad stays together long enough and injuries are limited.

Home advantage was not here before Butcher and no doubt will not be here with his replacements in years to come as well.

The change of league has diluted the playing staff but expectations are still very high so ongoing criticism will be the order of the day in times to come.

We have not started the league well, 6 points short of my expectations (I said they were high) so whatever formation he uses on Saturday it better show results or the standites will be swearing at him again.

[CaleyD]

Line up 4-3-3 and just go at the opposition goal hell for leather. If we're going to lose, we may aswell do it in style and provide some entertainment.

[fraser]

Line up 4-3-3 and just go at the opposition goal hell for leather. If we're going to lose, we may aswell do it in style and provide some entertainment.

I agree. Line up will be.....

esson

tokely bulvitus munro golly

proctor duncan cox

hayes foran imrie

subs: allison stratford mcbain barrowman sanchez

[Renegade]

Attacking football at home for me -

-----------------------------------------Esson---------------------------------------------------

-----------Tokely-----------------------Munro-----------------------McBain-------------------

-------------------------------------------Cox----------------------------------------------------

---Hayes--------------------------------Imrie----------------------------------Djebi-Zadi-----

----------------Sanchez--------------Barrowman-------------Foran---------------------------

Subs - Allison, Proctor, Rooney, Ross, Golabek/Shinnie/Duncan

Edited October 14, 2009 by Renegade

[TheKnowledge]

Attacking football at home for me -

-----------------------------------------Esson---------------------------------------------------

-----------Tokely-----------------------Munro-----------------------McBain-------------------

-------------------------------------------Cox----------------------------------------------------

---Hayes--------------------------------Imrie----------------------------------Djebi-Zadi-----

----------------Sanchez--------------Barrowman-------------Foran---------------------------

Subs - Allison, Proctor, Rooney, Ross, Golabek/Shinnie/Duncan

I see you, pushing Zadi further and further up the field each week. I would go with a similar formation but I would put Dougie 'I am Jesus' Imrie on the left and have, Sanchez behind the fowards, and Rooney in the front three. That will never happen though.

[WYNESS101]

Esson

Tokely Bulvitis Munro Golly

Cox Duncan

Proctor Imrie Hayes

Foran

[Renegade]

Your last point is the most important. Butcher seems to think that only two formations exist in football, the 4-4-2 and the 4-5-1. In fact he even says in that interview from last night, that he essentially doesn't want to play attractive, attacking football, he just wants the win. Away from home, if it works that's fine, but at home, in front of your own supporters, I think we deserve to be entertained. This defensive style might work well away from home, but it doesn't work at home, where ICT's record has been rubbish for years now.

Butcher seems to go on about how there's been more season tickets sold this season than last, and there's also those (like myself and others) who go to the games regularly, but don't have a season ticket (no yet anyway). I for one believe we ought to see, no deserve to see an exciting game. For the first time in my ICT life, I've gone to games, and actually asked myself why I bother coming. It's just so boring these days and I've even thought about bringing a book on Saturday! Look at this final coming up. A few seasons ago, I'd have jumped at going down to Perth to see that. Even more so seeing the ticket prices, but I just can't be bothered.

ICT will get nowhere this seasons unless attacking football returns to Caley Stadium. Holding back a bit seems to work away, but playing 4-4-1-1/4-5-1 at home is ridiculous. It's ineffective, it's boring and it's a rip off to the fans. I personally, and I suspect I'm not the only one, do not ask to see ICT win the league, do not ask to even see ICT win, all I want see is a good game. Under Butcher and Malpas, we see the complete opposite.

[Renegade]

Esson

Tokely Bulvitis Munro Golly

Cox Duncan

Proctor Imrie Hayes

Foran

4-5-1, what evidence have to seen that says that style works at home?

[WYNESS101]

The way i see it is home games always go for the 3 points and the away games always trying for the 3 points but if not a point will always do

[WYNESS101]

Esson

Tokely Bulvitis Munro Golly

Cox Duncan

Proctor Imrie Hayes

Foran

4-5-1, what evidence have to seen that says that style works at home?

None. Just time to try something new out at home. Instead of sitting back and always doing long balls up the field

[Renegade]

Brew was very big on that formation, and look where it got him. You'd be better off playing a minimum of two strikers at home, if not three, and forgetting the long ball, and passing to the wings along the ground to attack and attack and attack. After all, it's what Caley Stadium was built for.

[Harry Chibber]

Esson

Tokely Bulvitis Munro Golly

Cox Duncan

Proctor Imrie Hayes

Foran

4-5-1, what evidence have to seen that says that style works at home?

Could ask you the same about you're 3-1-3-3?? Infact, can you name a team in the world that plays or has played that formation?

[Renegade]

Esson

Tokely Bulvitis Munro Golly

Cox Duncan

Proctor Imrie Hayes

Foran

4-5-1, what evidence have to seen that says that style works at home?

Could ask you the same about you're 3-1-3-3??

Defensive football doesn't work for ICT, especially at home. Never has. Attacking football has to return. 4-5-1 does not work, three strikers at home, that appeals to me. If you keep attacking the Pars on Saturday, that means that they'll have to hold more players back. Simple, and with Bayne probably going to run poor Bulvitis ragged, that's the best thing you can do and thus knock him out the game.

Infact, can you name a team in the world that plays or has played that formation?

Yes, Melbourne used it for for a good chunk of the season in the A League last year (was slightly different though, they went with the 3-4-3 with a diamond shaped midfield). They won the league, and were scoring for fun in some games. BTW - did consider bringing going with the world greatest ever formation, the 2-3-5, but with all the uproar there'd be from our boring football loving fans, I just couldn't be bothered arguing about it.

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

Esson

Tokely Bulvitis Munro Golly

Proctor Cox Duncan Hayes

Foran Imrie

Spot on Hairy - and I would have gone with the players and the system that Tel Boy played at Raith. If we stay fit I would stick to the 4-5-1 away but at home I would consider playing Imrie and Hayes wide, Obdhiambo up front with Cox and Duncan in the middle.

[CaleyD]

Esson

Tokely Bulvitis Munro Golly

Cox Duncan

Proctor Imrie Hayes

Foran

4-5-1, what evidence have to seen that says that style works at home?

No offence intended, but given some of the formations you come up with, you're in no position to be questioning what anyone else has to offer