Ivan Toney | Page 3 | Vital Football

Ivan Toney

jeffs right said:
Oh well Swedish one if you're happy with the utter f'ing shite that we dish out that's up to you and you are welcome to your opinion but picking four wins out of our twelve in the last fifteen months FFS that's scraping the barrel. Twelve bloody wins in 55 matches playing your way certainly is working a treat for us. It's bloody boring as shite too. Just enjoy it if you like Swedish Latic. Plenty don't.
Click to expand...

When have i said that i am happy with the way we are playing?
You keep moaning about us playing 2 up front like its a magic trick that will get us flying up the league and excite the fans when there is no evidence that it does, i just pointed out the fact that we somehow beat teams playing your fantastic 4-4-2 thats all.
And Cooks hoofball is far far from the way i want us to play, Brentfords "tragic one up front crap" is the way i want us to play.

Edit: I meant the way Brentford play the game, ball on the floor and all that.
 
SwedishLatic said:
When have i said that i am happy with the way we are playing?
You keep moaning about us playing 2 up front like its a magic trick that will get us flying up the league and excite the fans when there is no evidence that it does, i just pointed out the fact that we somehow beat teams playing your fantastic 4-4-2 thats all.
And Cooks hoofball is far far from the way i want us to play, Brentfords "tragic one up front crap" is the way i want us to play.
Click to expand...

I think people don't believe we will move away from our hoof ball so they are saying go 2 up front and give ourselves a chance of it working better than it does with 1 up. As we are currently looking for flick ons and knock downs off Moore to no one. We play virtually an impossible style / tactic to score from.

Ideally we'd just try and play football rather than hoof and hope but that's very unlikely unless a change at the top happens so going 2 up top is the very obvious best option to try and salvage something from our current state. It's not a catch all but it's better than what we currently do.

If we are going to be force to play 90s style long ball then let's do it properly with a fast player feeding off a big man and 2 proper wingers rather than the incoherent approach we have now.
 
Stormin' Norman said:
I've asked once, what did you expect from him? What did Cook expect from him?
Did you expect Joffy to single handedly rip Brentford apart and score a hat trick?

What happened to Cook managing his game time so not to rush him, once again......What did Cook expect from the lad?
Click to expand...
First of all I don't know what Cook wanted from him, nor do you
I expected exactly what we got, a young lad not yet ready for the turmoil of first team football! He will be a star if looked after and The club are doing the right thing by holding him back
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
I think people don't believe we will move away from our hoof ball so they are saying go 2 up front and give ourselves a chance of it working better than it does with 1 up. As we are currently looking for flick ons and knock downs off Moore to no one. We play virtually an impossible style / tactic to score from.

Ideally we'd just try and play football rather than hoof and hope but that's very unlikely unless a change at the top happens so going 2 up top is the very obvious best option to try and salvage something from our current state. It's not a catch all but it's better than what we currently do.

If we are going to be force to play 90s style long ball then let's do it properly with a fast player feeding off a big man and 2 proper wingers rather than the incoherent approach we have now.
Click to expand...

Being a centre forward under the current style is a nightmare so giving Moore all the help he needs is a must but changing it to 4-4-2 with wide wingers is imo the wrong thing to look at and i think its an outdated way of playing the modern game, i would like to be proven wrong but i dont think it will happen.

This is a thread about Ivan Toney so i will try to keep on topic now.
 
SwedishLatic said:
Being a centre forward under the current style is a nightmare so giving Moore all the help he needs is a must but changing it to 4-4-2 with wide wingers is imo the wrong thing to look at and i think its an outdated way of playing the modern game, i would like to be proven wrong but i dont think it will happen.

This is a thread about Ivan Toney so i will try to keep on topic now.
Click to expand...
Nail on head. The current style is a nightmare. Giving Moore support is essential. Thing is under this modern way of playing we are stale and boring. So without going 4-4-2 at least could we not have at least one real winger and one other attacking midfielder closer to the asset we have in Moore.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
I think people don't believe we will move away from our hoof ball so they are saying go 2 up front and give ourselves a chance of it working better than it does with 1 up. As we are currently looking for flick ons and knock downs off Moore to no one. We play virtually an impossible style / tactic to score from.

Ideally we'd just try and play football rather than hoof and hope but that's very unlikely unless a change at the top happens so going 2 up top is the very obvious best option to try and salvage something from our current state. It's not a catch all but it's better than what we currently do.

If we are going to be force to play 90s style long ball then let's do it properly with a fast player feeding off a big man and 2 proper wingers rather than the incoherent approach we have now.
Click to expand...
Playing with 2 strikers or 4-4-2 isn't 90s style long ball. A few played long ball ie Nob End at one stage but most clubs played a passing game. Playing with wingers is brilliant if not two then at least one. Remember how brilliant it was to see Wildshutt flying down the flank recently.
There must be a better way than what has become Cooks 4-3-2-1 or 4-5-1 negative bilge.
 
jeffs right said:
Playing with 2 strikers or 4-4-2 isn't 90s style long ball. A few played long ball ie Nob End at one stage but most clubs played a passing game. Playing with wingers is brilliant if not two then at least one. Remember how brilliant it was to see Wildshutt flying down the flank recently.
There must be a better way than what has become Cooks 4-3-2-1 or 4-5-1 negative bilge.
Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong I'm not saying 4-4-2 is out dated as Leicester won the league with it. I'm saying our style of long ball is 90s style long ball.
 
SwedishLatic said:
Being a centre forward under the current style is a nightmare so giving Moore all the help he needs is a must but changing it to 4-4-2 with wide wingers is imo the wrong thing to look at and i think its an outdated way of playing the modern game, i would like to be proven wrong but i dont think it will happen.

This is a thread about Ivan Toney so i will try to keep on topic now.
Click to expand...

I don't think 4-4-2 is out dated if you do it right. But I am not calling per say to switch to that formation for any other reason than we are playing throw back football so might as well go the whole hog and switch to the formation that goes with it.

In an ideal world we would have a more nuisances approach but our approach isn't so it's trying to at this point just make the mess less of a mess.

I'd prefer to do Sheff U style 3-3-2-2 overlapping centre backs or something more modern but we've got no chance. If we are playing cave man football it's just trying to do the things that is most likely to fit it at this point.
 
I was doing a bit of trawling on the web a while ago Jock cos my lad was talking about formations etc and I figured there were bound to be articles out there that could articulate the merits of various formations far better than I could.
I found both these articles interesting, but there are loads of others. One is from over a decade ago, one is quite recent.
I'm of the mind that most / any formation will work over an extended period of time at our level if you have the better calibre of player than most of the opposition. Unfortunately we don't./
The reason IMO Jewell's 4 4 2 was successful at the time was we had the best squad in the division playing it, not the formation itself.


https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2008/dec/18/4231-442-tactics-jonathan-wilson

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...ctics-201819-review-4-4-2-returns-power-full/
 
Arthur_Itis said:
I was doing a bit of trawling on the web a while ago Jock cos my lad was talking about formations etc and I figured there were bound to be articles out there that could articulate the merits of various formations far better than I could.
I found both these articles interesting, but there are loads of others. One is from over a decade ago, one is quite recent.
I'm of the mind that most / any formation will work over an extended period of time at our level if you have the better calibre of player than most of the opposition. Unfortunately we don't./
The reason IMO Jewell's 4 4 2 was successful at the time was we had the best squad in the division playing it, not the formation itself.


https://www.theguardian.com/football/blog/2008/dec/18/4231-442-tactics-jonathan-wilson

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/footbal...ctics-201819-review-4-4-2-returns-power-full/
Click to expand...
Not many sides pissed about with one striker then though and if Paul Cook had the choice of the best starting eleven in this division his current tactics would not bring success. It would still bore the pants off us too.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
I think people don't believe we will move away from our hoof ball so they are saying go 2 up front and give ourselves a chance of it working better than it does with 1 up. As we are currently looking for flick ons and knock downs off Moore to no one. We play virtually an impossible style / tactic to score from.
Click to expand...

Absolutely nailed it.

We're playing a formation made for a quick passing team. Short passes to move the entire midfield up the pitch so when the lone striker gets possession the midfielders and at least one of the wide men will be there to support him.

We're playing a style that means that formation is entirely ineffective. Hoofing long balls to a big man with no support isn't ever going to work. It hasn't for 50 plus games, why would it suddenly start now?

Cooko the Clown is going to have to make a decision: stick with the formation and change the style to a pass and move style that'll mean less separation between Moore and the midfield, or change the formation to one where Moore has support and someone to pick up his layoffs.

We all know Cook won't change it, though, and we'll keep losing until they finally bin him off, by which time it could be too late, the way things are going.

Ivan Toney has gone on leaps and bounds since leaving, and a lot of credit needs to go to the coaching staff at Peterborough. It's academic though. He's not at Latics any more and I don't think he'd have come good if he'd stayed. Whatever the price tag, he couldn't do anything for us. I don't think any player could shine in the (I use the term loosely) system we're playing at the moment.
 
king_dezeeuw06 said:
Toney showed a couple of glimpses of a good player for us, but nowhere near enough to make you think he would evolve into the player he has since become. I was a big fan from what i saw when we signed and thought he would be a great addition for us but by the time he was recalled in January his performances had made me completely change my opinion on him and was glad to see him move out.

I'm not sure if the majority of the credit for the improvement should go to the lad himself for upping his game or his coaches for taking him up a number of levels but he's undoubtedly improved massively and found consistency that he never showed for us.

Sometimes you look at a player do well after leaving and you think we screwed up royally but i don't think we did with Toney - if he stayed i don't think he would've become what he is now - whatever the situation was here it wasn't working for either party and i don't think it ever would have gotten any better - it was a bad fit and / or bad timing.
Click to expand...

Let's be honest, has Cook ever made an attacking player look good? Is it any surprise attacking players who leave Wigan tend to do well? The only example of the opposite is Grigg which had the complete opposite effect.
 
Soccerates said:
People will say we need two up top from now until kingdom come, irrespective of whether it could work or if it couldn't.
Click to expand...

With our current long ball though it probably would help significantly having Windass up front in a partnership trying to feed off Moore's headers.
 
We play the same style of clubs like Millwall. Difference is they are far better at it. Why? Because they cross the ball, play two up front and give their big man some support from a partner. It’s not rocket science, Burnley have spent years comfortable in the Premier League playing that way.
 
Hampton said:
Let's be honest which players has Cook improved at all ?
Click to expand...
None. He has got rid of the best. Burn, Powell and Grigg plus he as only signed one decent player in James and possibly Williams and two others the Jury's out on untill he plays them right Moore and Lowe. In reply to your post though none have improved whatsoever.
 
jeffs right said:
None. He has got rid of the best. Burn, Powell and Grigg plus he as only signed one decent player in James and possibly Williams and two others the Jury's out on untill he plays them right Moore and Lowe. In reply to your post though none have improved whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I think the jury is out on all the players Cook's brought in. And question marks remain on some of those we had already.

But that's absolutely no criticism of any of the players. I don't see how any player could thrive in our current system / style. I reckon Cook could do a good job of making Messi or Ronaldo look crap tbh.

I won't judge any single player (except maybe Jacobs, who's clearly got far far worse and was only ever 'kind of ok' at best) until we have a competent manager who can employ a style of football that has a chance of working. Then we'll see who is up to this level and who isn't. Right now, no-one, including the manager, really has any clue what our players are capable of when properly managed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.