With Wolves having virtually completed their summer business it is perhaps a good time to look at the likely options Mick McCarthy could go with for the 2010/11 season. There are decisions to be made in terms of personnel, but also in terms of formation…
Until December 2009 I would wager that McCarthy would have happily described himself as ”a 4-4-2 man”. Although he had operated with a variety of systems in the past, particularly during his spell as Republic of Ireland boss, we here at Wolves had been treated to 4-4-2 week-in week-out through his first three and a half years in charge. As Mick said recently however:
“I used to feel having one set way of playing in your mind showed a real strength in people because I used to think that’s how I did it. But I’ve come through that. You can’t keep playing the same way if you keep losing — you have to be big enough to change it.”
The signing of Steven Fletcher for around £7m was heralded by many as a clear signal that McCarthy intends to revert to 4-4-2 now that the pressure of a relegation battle is not upon his team – at least until September anyway! The theory will go that the players have had a taste of Premiership football and are ready to kick-on with a more attacking formation. I think it is more likely, however, that we will see a hybrid formation from Wolves this season, somewhere between 4-4-2 and 4-5-1. It is a belief based on a series of factors:
- McCarthy will be conscious of the increased impact Matt Jarvis had when allowed to play slightly higher up the field in the 4-5-1 (actually more of a slanted 4-4-2 as discussed previously). As can be seen by Mick’s regular touchline promptings he has often been wary of how vulnerable the team is down the left-flank in a traditional 4-4-2 when Jarvis is left stranded upfield after an attack.
- Wolves now have several players on the right hand side of midfield who are happy to tuck in to form a more solid midfield 3 when needed. Kevin Foley and David Edwards operated there with some success before Adlene Guedioura was given a chance in the role, scoring the winner against Sunderland on the final day.
- Steven Fletcher played much of the first part of the 2009/10 season on the right-wing for Burnley, part of a growing trend (Jarvis included) of ”inside-out wingers” – players operating on the opposite wing to their strongest foot. It was not a great personal success for the player with the Turf Moor faithful lamenting the fact that he was not given the opportunity to play through the middle. It did, however, coincide with some of Burnley’s better results and we know how fond McCarthy is of guys who put in a shift for the cause. Given that Mick has already spoken of Fletcher’s flexibility, I would suggest this is already in his thoughts.
With Stephen Hunt and Michael Kightly not expected to be fully-fit for the start of the season I would expect, assuming no other injuries, Wolves to line up something like this against Stoke on August 14th:
Steven Mouyokolo and Kevin Foley will be pushing hard for starts but, particularly against Stoke with their expected aerial bombardment, it would seem likely that Jody Craddock and Ronald Zubar will retain their places. Jelle Van Damme also happens to be remarkably strong in the air for a full-back and will surely come in at left-back. David Jones’ strong finish to the season puts him in the box seat ahead of Nenad Milijas in midfield, with the Serb offering an option from the bench alongside the likes of Sylvan Ebanks-Blake.
Whilst I would expect Michael Kightly to get his opportunities from the bench this coming season, the interesting shift in system may come when Stephen Hunt returns to full fitness around October time. Of course, as a left-footed winger, Hunt may be seen as a direct challenger to Jarvis. He is, however, also comfortable operating from the right-wing and it will be interesting to note whether he will be threatening Steven Fletcher’s place in the starting eleven or if he will be challenging for one of the midfield positions. If Wolves are playing away from home against a strong side, it would not be a shock to see Hunt and Jarvis playing wide in support of Doyle with a solid central midfield three. This is, after all, more of an attacking line-up than we saw for much of the second half of last season with Foley operating on the right-wing. Hunt’s return to fitness seems likely to coincide with a run of games from mid-October against Chelsea, Man City, Man Utd and Arsenal (the probable top four) so it would be understandable to see him come in for Fletcher at some point during this run of games.
The real intrigue of course, would be if McCarthy felt able to play Hunt and Jarvis in support of both Doyle and Fletcher in a clear 4-4-2. This is the sort of attacking line-up that many fans want to see. I suspect it would be something that could actually happen if and when Mick is feeling confident that his team is stronger than the opposition – at home to Bolton on November 13th or away to Blackpool on November 20th perhaps?
The 2010/11 season is a fascinating one for Wolves and it is difficult to overstate the importance to the club. Not only would relegation be a huge blow in itself and bring the usual problems of the team being broken up but it would also surely see the shelving of the club’s stadium expansion plans. As such there is more pressure than ever on Mick McCarthy to get his tactics spot on… expect the 4-4-2 / 4-5-1 debate to continue.
Adam Bate – Ghostgoal
a good line up not to sure on berra but the 2 forwards very good
Interesting reflections! I agree in your proposition, our “first team lineup” based on what players we now have on our disposal. But, depending on the results, it will certainly change throughout the season. We also know that MM likes to make adjustments according to who we play. Mancienne will probably replace Jones against the top six teams (if we buy him), and possibly in away games. Any way, I predict most changes in midfield. We have got a lot of cover/competition in that area, when injured players return, which should make us even harder to beat than in our next campaign.
Jarvis appeared stranded so many times last season coz he was always playing two positions, left wing and left back. This coming season, unless CL loses his marbles completely, we will have a capable full back on the left, leaving Jarvis to roam at will up the left flank, like Waggy used to do. This will have the added benefit of Jarvis not being knackered so much!
I also think Foley has had his day, and will struggle to get in the team at all this year, as will Berra.
Does anyone have a gold and black octopus?
FOWB
Jarvis always had an eye on helping provide cover to our weak left back (Ward or Big G – take your pick!).
I hope Jarvis turns out to be more honest than Waggy – sorry to destroy the memories Clive but I heard that he was given the push from ‘Waggys Bar’ for sticky fingers! Remember seeing him in there when I was studying at Wolverhampton University – he was a miserable bloke if ever I saw one!
Yeah, but that goal of the season against Arsenal in 71.
And giving John Kaye of the shit twisted blood two seasons in a row at the crem, brilliant.
What players do after they leave The Wolves is to me irrelevant, it’s the memories of their time in gold and black which sticks.
Dougan was a god, but his business acumen was virtually non existent, but did we care at the time he was playing? Of course not.
I take your point about Waggy, but we must remember that footballers are human, and just like in all walks of life, some go bad.
There must be hundreds of cases over the years of players and ex players falling foul of the law, and if they do, then they deserve whatever punishment they get.
On the other hand, there have been cases of players who did not perform for the lads, either after signing as the next great hope, or being sold, and then becoming a superstar for someone else.
Look at Peter Withe, left us and then won a European Cup winners medal.
Bastard!!
FOWB
I remember Waggy having an argument with my mate and refusing him entry to his bar for not taking his coat off!
It wasnt a coat, it was a padded lumberjack shirt (nice!) and underneath he was naked as the day he was born! You can guess the rest!
My concern at present is that it seems that Wolves are going to be light on strikers.
Last year we had, in effect, six strikers: Doyle, Ebanks-Blake, Keogh, Looms, Vokes and the Hoff.
I know that a lot of what you read is literally “paper talk”, but Doyle, Vokes and Ebanks-Blake will (almost certainly) stay and Fletcher has arrived – which makes four strikers.
Looms has already gone, and the way things look, Keogh is off to somewhere in Yorkshire, and the Hoff will sign for some ‘un-named club’.
I believe that four strikers is too light, particularly if we get injuries to a couple of them. Does this mean that Wolves have a promising, cheap youngster lined up to act as fifth striker?
I don’t know the answer – but I welcome comments.
Nice point Wirral.
However, I don’t think we’ll kick-off the season with four strikers. We’ll either keep one of Keogh or the Hoff or bring someone else in.
Dindane still hasn’t decided what he’s doing has he? Unless I’ve missed the story? I still think he could end up at Molineux.
We’ve got a few players who can play in an advanced role off a lone striker too. I’m thinking about the likes of Edwards and Milijas; forward thinking midfielders with little desire to defend anyway.
So maybe four strikers isn’t that short?
I agree with Wirral – one injury and we will be very light in attacking options from the bench.
In terms of strategy I guess the idea of Hof and BCO was to offer an outlet to play long ball and battle with the centre half (eg Stoke game at home). (neither made it in the Prem, but we dont seem to have this option any more).
Dindane would add an extra element of real pace – at the kind of money being suggetsed for him IMO I think he offers better value than £4million for Mancienne!
Loving that Adam. I wouldn’t be too unhappy with that starting XI. If Moyokolo is as good as I’ve heard, then I’d imagine he’ll be pushing as well, like you say.
Above all, what I love is the flexibility, and the fact we can all discuss different formations, when for so long there was no point as we only ever played 442. I remember the dodgy New Year in the Championship and teams had just sussed us. (didn’t help Mick playing Quashie mind) We got predictable.
There’s no reason why this team can’t play two different formations in one game, like some of the best teams.
If these lads can take instructions (which i believe they can unlike the national side) then they can adopt different styles as games progress.
It’s what the Argies and Germany seem to have subtely done throughout the WC.
That is the beauty of a signing like Fletcher. We get a bit of fluidity, a bit less predictabilty.
Clive spot on with Jarvo too. Van Damme surely won’t be reliant on Jarvis to cover his arse all the time, so we may well see a far greater threat from him fingers crossed.
Funny you should mention Argentina, Ben… they played without a right-winger vs Nigeria – Veron tucked in and Higuain/Tevez were asked to do shifts down right, covering the Nigerian left-back. Could see Doyle/Fletcher having to do something similar.
Great point about the fluidity issue re Fletcher. I partly wrote this as a response to some debate on here saying 4-5-1 would mean either/or with Doyle – in my opinion we would not have signed the guy unless MM saw how he could accommodate both players in a 4-4-2 AND a 4-5-1.
Hi Adam, I forget who it was who looked back at the last World Cup in Germany, and one of the signature games, when the Argies beat Mexico in extra time with an absolute snorting volley. (LAST16 2-1 I think)
Mexico, with a team of nobodies (bar Marques) played THREE different formations in 120 minutes. Despite them going out, they looked so comfortable, so adaptable, and so unlike England. Roll the clock forward and still nothing has changed with England’s 4-4-2.
I liked Harry Redknapp in SA talking about playing ‘behind lines’ and behind static, rigid formations. (like Ozil and Muller did so well)
I’m damn sure that with Fletcher, Jarvis, Guedioura in a team, we’d be seeing some more of this, if not the quality of Germany!
One thing’s for sure, we will have some players to put bums on the edge of seats, and not being so reliant on Doyle.
And Hunt & Kites waiting in the wings!!
yeah remember that with Mexico, they’re still the same – the way Marquez drops in / steps up gives them so much flexibility.
i think the recent comments from mick suggest he is learning to be flexible. i remember when we had guilherme finkler & denes rosa – now i’m not criticising our dear leader cos they’ve both done naff all since! – but his explanation for not playing them was pretty much that ”they play in that funny position between midfield and attack”. don’t want to open up the mark davies can of worms but it was same with him – couldn’t be accommodated in a midfield 2 so mick didnt really fancy him.
think he is more receptive to change now anyway so hopefully he’ll embrace options that fletcher & hunt give us.
Bang on there Adam. I was going on last season about switching to a more fluid 4-3-3. This keeps the midfield nice and tight and with the workrate and mobility of Doyle, Fletcher & Jarvo, we’ll be more than a match for many teams next season. The good thing about the 3 main wingers is that Jarvis, Kightly & Hunt are all mobile, all comfortable left or right, and above all else they work hard, so it don’t matter how or where we use ‘em.
Roll on August !
What nobody has mentioned is that all our midfielders love to go forward and shoot. We have attacking flair in abundance, coupled with some damn good tacklers and ball holders. This should take some pressure off the forwards, and hopefully free them up to score more.
All in all, a much improved squad, and with the England “players” in other teams who will undoubtedly get a load of stick, which will put them off their game, we should not be afraid of anyone next season.
Bring On The Shit!!!!!
FOWB
Brilliant post. I would love to see that line up for the first game. That would be very much a home team, full of attacking with Guedioura and Jones in the middle.
I remember Chelsea used to play a 443/451 at the same time with, say Joe Cole and Wright Phillips supprorting Drogba in attack, then tucking back in.
The system mentioned could definitely work, but so often we have been frustrated with strikers not up front. Keogh was used on the wing, Doyle spent a lot of time out of the box last season. Would our goals tally significantly increase with Fletcher wide?
That formation will lose us more points at home than you think.We still need to be mindful that survival is key, and a gung ho attitude at home could cost us dear. That formation would be better away from home, with hopefully Mancienne in front of the back 4
Too right! Signing three half decent players from relegated clubs isn’t going to turn us into a top half prem team.
4-5-1 away and at home against top 6 sides to bring stability. Like other posts have suggested football is a squad game now so Fletcher (or Doyle!) might not be involved in every game – squad rotation, how we have developed as a club!!!!
The realistic target for me is anything higher than 17th, and hopefully a few more goals/entertainment in home games.
Surely we have to attack teams at home this season, outside of the top 8 anyway. You can’t set up not to win for fear of losing. I reckon that team would be a match for the bottom half
I call it:
Home: 4-4-2 (traditional) mainly (i.e. revert to 4-5-1 against the top sides).
Away: 4-5-1 all games (pretty much as last season, Doyle on his tod up front, with Fletcher on the bench).
Dazza – completely agree.