derry

Not if the four compact and slide across to the threatened flank. Only better if 5 in midfield but we don't do that well. Usually too little too late from front men changing from attacking 433 to defending 451. We've conceded more than a few from dead balls.

Ain't that a fact How's the ticker now?

With the 442 we didn't tighten up the midfield. It's an old saying defend in to out, attack out to in, therefore the defensive 442 requires the wide midfielders to close up with the central midfielders the whole moving across to stifle the threatened flank. MU playing 442 is very compact defensively even one or sometimes both of the strikers tighten up into midfield. Our players are not disciplined enough and don't press hard enough from front to back often not bothering to pick up. A lot of the goals we have conceded may have been avoided with better defending/delaying/pressing from the moment possession is first lost.

Very true, but we have a major weakness with the existing set up. All we have really are Yoshida or Fonte but at the moment we have to get through to January and pick up points. The present way isn't working and the 433 ish isn't helping some of the players who don't get it. 442ish is more natural to them so we have to change something. I wouldn't advocate a front sweeper if we switched to 442ish. MU adopted a modified diamond last night and went two nil down then went back to two up front and wide players to win 3-2.

You assume too much I only said put in a front sweeper, the midfield balance would still need Schneiderlin and Davis and three attackers. Either way, we have to stop conceding three goals a game and Fox, Fonte etc aren't going to improve overnight and the midfield isn't defending well either so they have to change something. Sooner or later the penny will drop. If Adkins doesn't develop a bit of pragmatism, he will lose his job then somebody else will come in, ditch the free flowing possession and fight for points and be allowed to by a desperate chairman who won't want to be relegated.

I think the off the cuff style of play passing about in midfield is all very nice but there is a lack of discipline which is leading to our inability to defend. Our players aren't good enough to play off the cuff and will relegate us unless we become more disciplined. We have to tighten up front to back and work harder. Ball watching by Fox and Fonte especially is a major problem.

It was my intention that Davis and Schneiderlin would still play as a pair in front of the extra defender. I personally would advocate three strikers in front of them. Maybe with a front sweeper the circumstances that led to the goals wouldn't have occurred, as there wouldn't have been the gaps and the marking should be tighter. 21 goals conceded in 6 defeats means the defence needs to be tightened up, obviously nobody playing in midfield at the moment can do that. Hence my suggestion of a front sweeper.

What is obvious is your superficial knowledge of football tactics (Reading 'Inverting the Pyramid' by Jonathon Wilson might help but I doubt it). A sweeper is the free one of a man marking back four. A front sweeper is a defender that protects an orthodox back four. Schneiderlin plays deep but doesn't give the defensive cover across the field. A defender would do a better defensive job freeing up the two midfielders to join the front three. We have conceded 24 goals doing it the way we are, so that isn't working, putting in another defender could plug the holes. Fonte or Yoshida could do that job. It is a defender not a midfielder. It is only a small difference from five at the back, 3 CBs with wing backs.

No, his position not untenable.

There is a solution. Dispense with a holding midfielder and play a defender in front of the two centre backs to sweep across in front of the back four and cover the space being exposed by the wide player not tracking back. That would cover the unreliability of the forwards in being too slow to counter a threat. Something we don't do well is stay with the attacker. Fonte lost Nolan on Saturday after initially picking him up but reverted to ball watching and wandered off freeing Nolan to knock the cross in. Once a player tracks an attacker they have to stay with that attacker and tight mark until the danger is dealt with. Picking up initially then letting the attacker free is suicide in the Premier. One of the reasons Dickson doesn't get a look in, is that Lallana doesn't want to play in front of him.

If there is unrest at the club and HR is being sounded out, my question is who by. 75% of a poll on here and the Echo support keeping Adkins. The man deserves the season whatever the results to see if he can keep us up. He has given us two very successful seasons, we are where we want to be, in my opinion too early in the team's natural evolution. Two years from now we might have been considerably stronger. Redknapp isn't a genius, he has wasted enormous sums on bad players over his career. He has never gone anywhere and made the current team better without almost completely replacing the squad. Even then Spurs with enormous expense is the best he has been. At Portsmouth bankruptcy occurred as a result of massive waste. If we are going to change, it needs a manager similar to Di Matteo/Clark not Redknapp and his baggage.

I was told today that he was light training but has suffered a relapse (swelling) so recovery put back. Presumably nobody knows anything as there is nothing on here?

Neither, Fonte was pushed before jumping. A blatant two handed push that should have been penalised by the referee/linesman.

Individual mistakes were the main problem. The first goal was down to the goalkeeper he had to track the ball. The second goal, Guly tried a fancy flick and gave the ball away then the real problem, Fonte marked Nolan tight on the back post but was ball watching, moved back across goal, lost Nolan who had acres of room to knock the ball in. The third goal was after a blatant shove that the linesman/referee missed, how much had that to do with Fonte's balance. The fourth goal was Yoshida being done but Fonte's positioning was hopelss and allowed the attacker on his inside. Fonte is a problem he loses concentration and his decision making is poor under pressure.

The Echo poll is the same 75/25.

I think Mcmenemy picking the injured Steve Williams had more to do with us losing that game.

Or changing the goalkeeper unnecessarily. A good approach to what we really need to do to stay up.

Gazzaniga letting in 6 in 3 average 2 and two of those were Hooiveld's deflections. Put him back in goal. The Sky commentators on Saturday (neutrals) said of Boruc, nervous, indecisive, will want to forget this display, a bad day at the office. Gazzaniga was doing well and had improved the defence, leaving him out especially when Boruc really wasn't that good v United U21s was unfair and contributed to our defeat.

433 is a great way to play but not with most of this squad. They are either not clever enough, not strong enough or quick enough or mobile enough in some cases a combination. That is why 442 ish is better for them as they are more comfortable, also it doesn't need much thought to play that way.

Having said that, if that is the case, Adkins should either walk or just go ahead and do it his way and confront the problem if there is one. Although I know why Pardew went suddenly and it wasn't this, there were the same stories going round then that Pardew was doing it his way in spite of others and there was confliction rumoured with the development side.

I just hope the tail isn't wagging the dog. Reed at League level has an abysmal and limited experience of management, it is inconceivable that his influence should trump Adkins. Adkins is the successful manager here and from the outside it looks like the predictable has happened somebody has been promoted way beyond their abilities. Youth development, yes, first team squad, no way.

Lambert needs support. 433/451 doesn't mean we can't play two strikers together, ideally play three, Lambert and Mayuka with Rodriguez.

I did say we have to vary our game. The best sides can keep the ball but also play balls through the channels at pace we don't. Chelsea's goals yesterday for example. There is no better example than MU breaking quickly from the back. Letting the opposition get goalside and then passing it sideways and backwards isn't the way to do it. Our league position equates to how good we are and that isn't very good.

The formation had nothing to do with two of the goals, 2 free kicks. The other two were giving the ball away and bad defending by Fonte and Yoshida on our left. The back four need to defend as a unit.

It's all very well playing God knows how many passes sideways and backwards while the opposition get ten men formed up in a defensive shield then try to pick them apart with more sideways and the odd short forward pass that is mostly followed by a backwards pass/es to start again as any attackers have nowhere to go except offside. We have possession but we aren't hurting the opposition. We have to vary our game, we have to have goalscoring runners plus Lambert at the front, they have to be released early from midfield/defence without taking the obligatory ten passes to allow the opposition to form up. We were undone by a lack of defensive organisation. When defending we are forever backing onto the goalkeeper. Yesterday we formed up all right but as soon as the WHU attackers went forward we dropped right on top of the keeper causing the chaos. We need to hold the line and force the attackers to hold or be offside. We don't have the discipline to do that, it then gives the keeper the room to sweep up if the ball is hit in. However if the defence holds it's line the ball has to be put in further out. We need a top class defensive coach to sort it out.