Same team as at Stamford Bridge or revert to the 4-4-2 that worked so well at home last year?

What would you do?

same team. They earned the right to go again.

Same team, same formation.

Exactly the same for me, didn't struggle to create chances with only one up front last week and Hendrick can get up to support Vokesy.

It's easier to create chances with 5 in the middle as our two forwards very rarely set each other up for goals last season.

Plus we have proper footballers in there now.

Same team, same formation with Mr Defour pulling the strings.

Hoping for more of the same tomorrow. No reason why our midfielders can't make up the numbers up top when we're at home.

Given
Dawson Ranocchia Shawcross Robertson
Andone McArthur Whelan Clucas
De Preville Wood

Same team as Chelsea, with the possible exception of Walters playing from the right in place of Gudundsson, who wasn't particularly effective against Chelsea.

This will be an interesting test, however. The night that 4-5-1 was ditched last season was when we went to WBA, played 4-5-1, saw lots of the ball and proved completely incapable of breaking down a well-drilled, compact defence, partly because for all the probing of Defour, Hendrick and Gudmundsson, we lacked the movement, pace and subtlety to get down the sides of their defenders. There's lots of chat about us being more able to play probing football this season and we'll get a good sense of that tomorrow.

What Walters might give us is someone capable of breaking beyond Vokes with a bit of cunning. Gudmundsson has lots of qualities, particularly his inswinging delivery (wasted aganst West Brom) but I've not really seen any great intelligence of movement in his game yet.

Are we sure Vokes has done enough to earn his place?

Clarets unchanged for tomorrow. UTC

AndrewJB wrote:Are we sure Vokes has done enough to earn his place?

Just - hat trick next time for me

I think West Brom, by ceding position to us and hitting us on the break were the ones that made our 442 look clumsy and then hit the gaps we left, so hopefully the 451 means we use possession better and still have cover.
So yes same again me too.
UTC

longsidelewis wrote:Clarets unchanged for tomorrow. UTC

It'll be a strange one. Pulis openly admitted last week he prefers to play on the break and have less possession. As do we, well we did. I'm interested how THE BOSS will line up. Unchanged or switch to 4-4-2.

ExistentialWanderer wrote:It'll be a strange one. Pulis openly admitted last week he prefers to play on the break and have less possession. As do we, well we did. I'm interested how THE BOSS will line up. Unchanged or switch to 4-4-2.

451

jedi_master wrote:Given
Dawson Ranocchia Shawcross Robertson
Andone McArthur Whelan Clucas
De Preville Wood

As if you have left out Shane long. Bloody clueless you!

Same answer as on the "tomorrow's XI" thread. Merge coming up.

We played 451 with Vokes up front away last season and got battered 4-0. I can see Dyche dropping Defour and going 442 with Vokes and Walters up front.

northernpowerhouse wrote:We played 451 with Vokes up front away last season and got battered 4-0. I can see Dyche dropping Defour and going 442 with Vokes and Walters up front.

Defour will be starting and Walters on the bench again.

northernpowerhouse wrote:We played 451 with Vokes up front away last season and got battered 4-0. I can see Dyche dropping Defour and going 442 with Vokes and Walters up front.

Wasn't that the only game last season where we had the majority of possession?

We attacked and they picked us off with their favoured counter attack

claretspice wrote:Same team as Chelsea, with the possible exception of Walters playing from the right in place of Gudundsson, who wasn't particularly effective against Chelsea.

This will be an interesting test, however. The night that 4-5-1 was ditched last season was when we went to WBA, played 4-5-1, saw lots of the ball and proved completely incapable of breaking down a well-drilled, compact defence, partly because for all the probing of Defour, Hendrick and Gudmundsson, we lacked the movement, pace and subtlety to get down the sides of their defenders. There's lots of chat about us being more able to play probing football this season and we'll get a good sense of that tomorrow.

What Walters might give us is someone capable of breaking beyond Vokes with a bit of cunning. Gudmundsson has lots of qualities, particularly his inswinging delivery (wasted aganst West Brom) but I've not really seen any great intelligence of movement in his game yet.

Fair point but it's about the quality of the 5've imo we have better ball users now

claretspice wrote:Same team as Chelsea, with the possible exception of Walters playing from the right in place of Gudundsson, who wasn't particularly effective against Chelsea.

This will be an interesting test, however. The night that 4-5-1 was ditched last season was when we went to WBA, played 4-5-1, saw lots of the ball and proved completely incapable of breaking down a well-drilled, compact defence, partly because for all the probing of Defour, Hendrick and Gudmundsson, we lacked the movement, pace and subtlety to get down the sides of their defenders. There's lots of chat about us being more able to play probing football this season and we'll get a good sense of that tomorrow.

What Walters might give us is someone capable of breaking beyond Vokes with a bit of cunning. Gudmundsson has lots of qualities, particularly his inswinging delivery (wasted aganst West Brom) but I've not really seen any great intelligence of movement in his game yet.

Walters will be used as an impact sub tomorrow

claretspice wrote:Same team as Chelsea, with the possible exception of Walters playing from the right in place of Gudundsson, who wasn't particularly effective against Chelsea.

This will be an interesting test, however. The night that 4-5-1 was ditched last season was when we went to WBA, played 4-5-1, saw lots of the ball and proved completely incapable of breaking down a well-drilled, compact defence, partly because for all the probing of Defour, Hendrick and Gudmundsson, we lacked the movement, pace and subtlety to get down the sides of their defenders. There's lots of chat about us being more able to play probing football this season and we'll get a good sense of that tomorrow.

What Walters might give us is someone capable of breaking beyond Vokes with a bit of cunning. Gudmundsson has lots of qualities, particularly his inswinging delivery (wasted aganst West Brom) but I've not really seen any great intelligence of movement in his game yet.

After Saturdays performance it's not Walters cunning that Pullis needs to worry about, it's Ward. Who'd have thought that?

No Ney Never wrote:After Saturdays performance it's not Walters cunning that Pullis needs to worry about, it's Ward. Who'd have thought that?

Got to admit. It was a belting shot for a left-back.

What formation did we play in the 2-2 draw at then end of last season?

Admitted if we were playing away 4-5-1 might result in another Hawthorns drubbing - but at home might work out well. Cork could be the difference.

ExistentialWanderer wrote:Got to admit. It was a belting shot for a left-back.

Ward and Kights met my lad at V fest late Saturday night last year. Day we beat Liverpool at home from memory? They were talking after the Preston friendly and he said he'd be going again so hope it''s a good omen.

BleedingClaret wrote:Fair point but it's about the quality of the 5've imo we have better ball users now

3 of the 5 who played across midfield at Chelsea last week also played at WBA last season - Hendrick, Defour andd JBG.

The other two who played last year were, I think, Boyd (I'd accept Brady is an upgrade) and Marney (we can debate whether, at least in terms of penetrating a defence, Cork is an upgrade). The problem we had a year ago wasn't so much the technical ability of our midfield 3, but the movement and ability to commit defenders amongst the 2 wide players and centre forward.

claretspice wrote:3 of the 5 who played across midfield at Chelsea last week also played at WBA last season - Hendrick, Defour andd JBG.

The other two who played last year were, I think, Boyd (I'd accept Brady is an upgrade) and Marney (we can debate whether, at least in terms of penetrating a defence, Cork is an upgrade). The problem we had a year ago wasn't so much the technical ability of our midfield 3, but the movement and ability to commit defenders amongst the 2 wide players and centre forward.

To be fair Hendrick missed a great chance to make it 1-1 which could have changed the outcome.

claretspice wrote:3 of the 5 who played across midfield at Chelsea last week also played at WBA last season - Hendrick, Defour andd JBG.

The other two who played last year were, I think, Boyd (I'd accept Brady is an upgrade) and Marney (we can debate whether, at least in terms of penetrating a defence, Cork is an upgrade). The problem we had a year ago wasn't so much the technical ability of our midfield 3, but the movement and ability to commit defenders amongst the 2 wide players and centre forward.

Spice, i think the problem was that we really didn't know how to use our extra possession, i get the impression that we will be better with the ball this season.
Having said that WBA are a tricky opponent for us.

claretspice wrote:The night that 4-5-1 was ditched last season was when we went to WBA.

Not quite. I think it made sure Dyche would never try it again away from home again but we successfully reverted back to it some weeks later at home to Bournemouth.

If we are gonna switch to 4-4-2 this season it is much more likely to be for an away game as the way Dyche plays the two formations the 4-5-1 is definitely the more adventurous and attacking set up with 4-4-2 being a much more rigid solid defensive set up

boatshed bill wrote:Spice, i think the problem was that we really didn't know how to use our extra possession, i get the impression that we will be better with the ball this season.
Having said that WBA are a tricky opponent for us.

You might be right. I suppose my point is that tomorrow will be a good test of whether we're going to be better with the ball or not, and whether we can break teams down playing 4-5-1. The personnel has been tweaked rather than overhauled, and the weaknesses of the team that went to WBA last year haven't necessarily been addressed, so it will be a good test of how far the players have come.

claretspice wrote:Same team as Chelsea, with the possible exception of Walters playing from the right in place of Gudundsson, who wasn't particularly effective against Chelsea.

This will be an interesting test, however. The night that 4-5-1 was ditched last season was when we went to WBA, played 4-5-1, saw lots of the ball and proved completely incapable of breaking down a well-drilled, compact defence, partly because for all the probing of Defour, Hendrick and Gudmundsson, we lacked the movement, pace and subtlety to get down the sides of their defenders. There's lots of chat about us being more able to play probing football this season and we'll get a good sense of that tomorrow.

What Walters might give us is someone capable of breaking beyond Vokes with a bit of cunning. Gudmundsson has lots of qualities, particularly his inswinging delivery (wasted aganst West Brom) but I've not really seen any great intelligence of movement in his game yet.

It's taken me the best part of a year to get over that west Brom performance. Thanks for reminding me....

claretspice wrote:You might be right. I suppose my point is that tomorrow will be a good test of whether we're going to be better with the ball or not, and whether we can break teams down playing 4-5-1. The personnel has been tweaked rather than overhauled, and the weaknesses of the team that went to WBA last year haven't necessarily been addressed, so it will be a good test of how far the players have come.

It has been addressed IMO, Cork is naturally comfortable at playing in front of the two centre halves. But I actually think we play more 4-4-1-1 than 4-5-1 anyway.

RocketLawnChair wrote:It has been addressed IMO, Cork is naturally comfortable at playing in front of the two centre halves. But I actually think we play more 4-4-1-1 than 4-5-1 anyway.

Yep.
looking at Hendrick's role in the first half against Chelsea I agree with you.
Don't think it worked out quite so well in the second half when we lost control of the game.

I would say it is more of a 4-2-3-1

Heard that starting XI for the clarets is unchanged from a reliable source

What I would expect

claretspice wrote:3 of the 5 who played across midfield at Chelsea last week also played at WBA last season - Hendrick, Defour andd JBG.

The other two who played last year were, I think, Boyd (I'd accept Brady is an upgrade) and Marney (we can debate whether, at least in terms of penetrating a defence, Cork is an upgrade). The problem we had a year ago wasn't so much the technical ability of our midfield 3, but the movement and ability to commit defenders amongst the 2 wide players and centre forward.

Exactly how it played out again.
Although we still had 5 free headers
20 shooting opportunities in total
10 scuffed, under hit over hit crossing opportunities and the free kick too
Although it was totally evident that our 5 man midfield, except when we went behind, were unwilling or unable to effectively cut through or get behind West Brom
When the goal gave us urgency we couldn't cross for Toffee
We should have had 4 and they shouldn't have scored but they did and we didn't.
If we were going to pass around and then pass to Tarks to lump it we should have been 442 or 433
To me the system can work in time and we should still have been discussing a victory yesterday .
Going forward I'd rather be a fan of Burnley FC than West Brom, we are trying to play at least.