U21s: United vs. West Ham

backofthenet said:
My argument is that I don't see the need for two defensive minded midfielders. We had Ekangamene on the pitch last night to do the defensive work so why not put Cole in there to pull the strings a bit more? He's certainly got the talent.

We don't play with two defensive midfielders at any other level (that I'm aware of... you see the U16's etc so will have more of an idea than I do) so I would prefer that we didn't at this level as it is not ideal preparation.

That said, Joyce is obviously getting results, and there is something to be said for getting the lads used to winning at this level.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand you...who are the two defensive minded midfielders? Ekangamene was playing further forward last night not in a DM role...
 
But he is more naturally suited to the DM role in my opinion and there could have been a natural CM playing alongside him. Whether that was Cole, or perhaps Hendrie or even, if you wanted to go really gung-ho Januzaj they are more natural midfielders than playing a centre back there.

I would generally prefer to see two natural midfielders play in centre midfield. That, fundamentally, is my point.
 
Mujac, would you say we played a 442 yesterday? Or are you one of those who don't think it's useful to talk of formations?

SAF has said he doesn't use DMs, a few months before he said that Fletcher might have to play as a DM when he comes back due to a loss of endurance.

From my uneducated perspective it seems to me we play a 4231, but not if that row of 2 is supposed to be made up of two midfielders that don't venture forward. If that's the case then I'd say we play a 442.
 
But I'm saying there are no defensive midfielders in that formation, and thus neither Ekangamene nor Veseli played that role yesterday.

With DMs I'd think you'd have to call it a 4222 or a 424. But again I may be way off the mark with my cursory understanding of formations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.