Team for Celtic

[Renegade]

An attacking 4-3-3 for me -

Esson

Meekings Tokely Hogg Gillet

Davis Tansey Foran

Tade A.Shinnie Hayes

Subs - Tuffey, Golobart, G.Shinnie, Chippendale, Piermayr, Cox, Sutherland

Hogg has to come straight back in IMO. Celtic have seem to a have very dodgy defence these days, so three strikers to press high up the pitch.

Edited November 5, 2011 by Renegade

[Tichy_Blacks_Back]

Aye that could do some damage - will be interesting to see if the same attacking formation will be deployed at Park Heard irrespective of the personnel involved because as you say Celtic at the back are a bit of a shambles at times. That is something though we have also been guilty of this season so far and on current form you cannot see Celtic not scoring against us so we will have to outscore them if we want all three points....

A tough decision to make - do you go for it or play a more conservative formation. If the players think they can take them then maybe it is worth the gamble....we shall see....

[lukemackay]

Hogg in for proctor

Piermayr for meekings

Piermayr has that little bit more experience to cope with forrest, commons or whoevers on celtics left wing

Other than that the same team

[marks]

Renegade has it bang on, old fashioned football formations FTW.

Too many people (real managers included) are coming out with fantastical formations which end up looking like nothing more than a series of random numbers on a page, I believe the old fashioned 4-4-2, 4-3-3, and 3-5-2 are the only way to go, maybe a 5-3-2 if against really tough opposition. over thinking problems does nothing more than create more problems to over think. Stick with the basics then react to how the match is being played out, be flexible and do not impress too much rigidity in roles upon players, play football the old fashioned way and aim to score more than the opposition without too much worry about letting them score.

I blame Champ/Football Manager for the way the game is going.

Excellent interview with TB here http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/15608595.stm

[starchief]

But then, England played a 4-4-2 in the World Cup and were slaughtered by a more intelligent German formation (can't quite remember it - was it 4-2-3-1?). Having said that, I'd go for a 4-3-3 (switching to 4-5-1 if under pressure). Stokes, Hooper and Forrest are too good for us to stop. Kayal, Wanyama etc are playing pretty average with Celtic's defence all over the place. Our only hope is to give them a doing. Piermayr in for Meekings, Hogg in for Proctor. No other changes. Just go for it. Our season won't hinge on our Old Firm results.

[marks]

I firmly believe all this 4-1-1-2-2. 4-1-2-2-1 etc etc is all just bullsht names made up by computer geeks to make programing "but I want my left sided central mid fielder to drop off towards the defence a little more with the CF to play slightly behind the two strikers" a heap of crap really. Set up traditional systems then as the match progresses direct the players to where they would be better utilised. This is a far more dynamic game than the American version of football where a "play" is a set of tactics played out over a very short space of time and there is no need to over think positioning, reaction is much more important in soccer than over ellaborate tactics which can be unfurled in one simple step over from a skillful winger.

PS England were mince and would have gotten humped anyway and was Germany's formation not just a 4-5-1 with two of the CM playing slightly behind the the rest of the midfield line?

Edited November 6, 2011 by marks

[madsooz]

Same formation as last week imo: 4-3-3..

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

Meekings - Tokely - Hogg - Gillet/Shinnie

Foran - Tansey - Davis

Hayes ----------- Shinnie

----------Tad? ----------

Subs: Tuffey (needs to get a chance soon or will want to leave), Proctor, Gillet/Shinnie, Cox (if fit, if not Morrison), Chippendale, Sutherland, McKay.

Also, is it maybe worth putting Shinnie in it LB because i always thought he seemed to perform very well against the OF?

Edited November 6, 2011 by madsooz

[AJS]

Esson

Piermayr, Tokely, Hogg, Gillet

Davis, Tansey

Hayes, A. Shinnie, Foran

Tade

Subs: Tuffey, Golobart, Meekings, G. Shinnie, Cox, McKay, Sutherland

[ICTPaisley]

But then, England played a 4-4-2 in the World Cup and were slaughtered by a more intelligent German formation (can't quite remember it - was it 4-2-3-1?). Having said that, I'd go for a 4-3-3 (switching to 4-5-1 if under pressure). Stokes, Hooper and Forrest are too good for us to stop. Kayal, Wanyama etc are playing pretty average with Celtic's defence all over the place. Our only hope is to give them a doing. Piermayr in for Meekings, Hogg in for Proctor. No other changes. Just go for it. Our season won't hinge on our Old Firm results.

We have used that same 4-2-3-1 formation and it won us the First division. It does work well against bigger teams where we can counter and move the two wide men of the attacking midfield upfront to make a kind of 4-2-1-3

[WYNESS101]

Esson

Meekings Tokely Hogg Gillet

Davis Tansay

Hayes A.Shinnine Foran

Tade

Same as ajsict92

[marks]

But then, England played a 4-4-2 in the World Cup and were slaughtered by a more intelligent German formation (can't quite remember it - was it 4-2-3-1?). Having said that, I'd go for a 4-3-3 (switching to 4-5-1 if under pressure). Stokes, Hooper and Forrest are too good for us to stop. Kayal, Wanyama etc are playing pretty average with Celtic's defence all over the place. Our only hope is to give them a doing. Piermayr in for Meekings, Hogg in for Proctor. No other changes. Just go for it. Our season won't hinge on our Old Firm results.

We have used that same 4-2-3-1 formation and it won us the First division. It does work well against bigger teams where we can counter and move the two wide men of the attacking midfield upfront to make a kind of 4-2-1-3

So it's a 4-5-1 with attacking (when the situation is right) wide midfielders?

Honestly guys there are 4 classes of player, Keepers (who are not named in formations) defenders, midfielders and attackers. It is only since the advent of tactical football management games that these stupid formation names have sprung up.

[marks]

Esson

Proctor Meekings Tokely Hogg Gillet

Hayes Shinnie Davies

Tade Foran

Tokely in a sweeper role, Proctor and Gillet given freedom to get forward down the wings, Hayes and Davies interchanging throughout the match, Foran sitting just behind Tade.

Now in the new way of writing this as a formation is it a 1-4-3-2 morphing to a 1-2-4-2 when going forward then a 1-2-4-4 when the wing backs get right up to the bye line for a cross? or is it just called a 5-3-2 sweeper?

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

An attacking 4-3-3 for me -

Esson

Meekings Tokely Hogg Gillet

Davis Tansey Foran

Tade A.Shinnie Hayes

Subs - Tuffey, Golobart, G.Shinnie, Chippendale, Piermayr, Cox, Sutherland

Hogg has to come straight back in IMO. Celtic have seem to a have very dodgy defence these days, so three strikers to press high up the pitch.

It must be fate that we are getting in tune with each other !!!!

I would still call it a 4-5-1 but Hey feckin Ho

[ICTRoughi]

Esson

Meekings Tokely Proctor Gillet

Davis Tansey

Hayes A.Shinnie Foran

Tade

[Yngwie]

PS England were mince and would have gotten humped anyway and was Germany's formation not just a 4-5-1

It was a 4-1

[lukemackay]

4-2-3-1 4-3-3 and 4-5-1 are the same formation

All then have 4 defenders 3 centre midfeilders usually 2 holding the other in the hole 2 wingers given freedom and 1 striker

At the end of the day if calling it a 4-3-3 gets us 6 goals every week that's what I'm calling it

[marks]

4-2-3-1 4-3-3 and 4-5-1 are the same formation

All then have 4 defenders 3 centre midfeilders usually 2 holding the other in the hole 2 wingers given freedom and 1 striker

At the end of the day if calling it a 4-3-3 gets us 6 goals every week that's what I'm calling it

I'd agree that 4-2-3-1 and 4-5-1 are the same formation, essentially a 4-5-1 but a preset formation on Football Manager of 4-2-3-1 saves you from having to drag player icons around the virtual pitch during set up. 4-3-3 however is a very different formation with 4 defenders, 3 midfield and 3 dedicated forwards, with dedicated meaning that their role is as a forward player and not a midfielder.

You see the confusion that football management games cause to armchair tacticians?

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

Could you all have a go at picking a team and leave the feckin tactics to me and Terry.

[Alex MacLeod]

Aye that could do some damage - will be interesting to see if the same attacking formation will be deployed at Park Heard irrespective of the personnel involved because as you say Celtic at the back are a bit of a shambles at times. That is something though we have also been guilty of this season so far and on current form you cannot see Celtic not scoring against us so we will have to outscore them if we want all three points....

A tough decision to make - do you go for it or play a more conservative formation. If the players think they can take them then maybe it is worth the gamble....we shall see....

I would have thought Terry and Mo will be more concerned about how we play against them at TCS before even considering a game as far away as Feb 11th.

[qwerty11]

Esson (who is now behind Craig Samson in the pecking order for Scotland)

Meekings Hogg Tokely Gillet

Davis Shinnie Tansey

Hayes Tade Foran

[Guest Mahonio]

Esson (who is now behind Craig Samson in the pecking order for Scotland)

Meekings Hogg Tokely Gillet

Davis Shinnie Tansey

Hayes Tade Foran

This with on the bench: Tuffey, Piermayr, G.Shinnie, Morrison, Chippendale, Sutherland, McKay.

[big man]

What we need is someone at the back who can talk and direct Ross just needs to be able get on with what he needs to do without having to worry about others in the back four, I think Hogg will just be the man

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

I am afraid that Hogg is actually the only real choice at the moment - Proctor and Golobart are always going to make a mistake - may be interseting to see what Meekins is like as a centre half but not worth the risk as yet.

[bigfan]

ESSON

MEEKINGS PROCTOR TOKLEY GILLET/SHINNIE

HAYES DAVIS COX/ROSS FORAN

A SHINNIE

TADE

[Renegade]

Why anyone would want to play Proctor over Hogg at centre-back of all places against Celtic is unfathomable! Hogg simply HAS to come back in - the defence is far far better with him in it. Proctor is not a centre-back and never has been. I also believe that any form of conservative play, damage limitation or "waiting for the break" is just footballing suicide. If that happens, it's over before it begins. ICT simply have to play positively and look to attack. The Celtic defence this season is very dodgy and playing attacking football is the way, not just to get a result, but win the game - something I believe is entirely possible a week on Saturday.

Edited November 8, 2011 by Renegade