Serie A: JUVENTUS 2-2 Atalanta [May 17th, 2009] 15:00 CET (13 Viewers)

Cuti

The Real MC
Jul 30, 2006
13,517
#65
Floccari is out of this game, so most probably Plasmati will play as striker, which re-enforces my theory that we should play a 4-3-3.

Also when will we know if this is behind closed doors?
 

pitbull

Senior Member
Jul 26, 2007
11,045
#66
let's play for the result and defend our pretty horrible defence, the 433 Ranieri has played this season has been pretty fucked up, i don't know what has changed from last season, when it worked well at times, but it doesn't work this year and the game is too important to make sure if we fail everytime when playing 433. if it's true that four out of five fullbacks are out, than it is going to be even more hard for Ranieri to do his choice's in defence. Nedved at LB anyone? It's never too late to try out something new :D
 

Gustav

Senior Member
Jul 20, 2008
927
#67
Also when will we know if this is behind closed doors?
The High Court will only give its verdict on May 14 and the likelihood of the ban being lifted is bleak.

This means that Juventus run the very real risk of being forced to play their final home game of the season behind closed doors instead.

It would be tricky for the club to close the doors to the match with Atalanta on May 17 because the verdict would be given so near to kick-off.

Therefore the most likely fixture to be affected by the suspension is the final home game of the season against Lazio.

It would be a disappointing way to end the campaign in total silence at Turin’s Stadio Olimpico, especially as that is Pavel Nedved’s final appearance in a Juventus jersey ahead of his retirement.
C4
 

Marc

Softcore Juventino
Jul 14, 2006
21,649
#72
Floccari is out of this game, so most probably Plasmati will play as striker, which re-enforces my theory that we should play a 4-3-3.
Plasmati already scored against us this season. But he did it for Catania. Also, we should not play the 4-3-3. No time for experiments. 4-4-2 worked well Vs Milan and I know Atalanta is not the same type of game but I have more faith in our standard formation.
 
OP
Alen

Alen

Ѕenior Аdmin
Apr 2, 2007
53,991
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #73
    4-3-3 with the players we have atm (just look at the defense) will end up very ugly for Buffon.
     

    Bjerknes

    "Top Economist"
    Mar 16, 2004
    116,132
    #74
    As long as we field two DM's I don't think so. If we're fielding Marchionni anyway it's like playing with one guy down defensively, so if the DM's and Camo/Nedved cover for each other, they should do fine.

    Camo getting red cards and Marchionni doing nothing is the norm on the flanks.
     
    OP
    Alen

    Alen

    Ѕenior Аdmin
    Apr 2, 2007
    53,991
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #75
    As long as we field two DM's I don't think so. If we're fielding Marchionni anyway it's like playing with one guy down defensively, so if the DM's and Camo/Nedved cover for each other, they should do fine.

    Camo getting red cards and Marchionni doing nothing is the norm on the flanks.
    But against Lecce we had 3 midfielders, all three of them capable to create (Nedved, Camo, Zanetti) and we were forced to play long balls from defense to attack because our midfielders were non-existent. Camo and Nedved were lost in the center.
    With 2 DMCs in the 4-3-3 our defense might be better protected, but the attack will suffer even more.

    4-3-3 does not suit this current set of players, we must face it. Unfortunatly, this team depends on width.
    4-3-1-2 with 2 DMCs will be much better though, imo, because the defense is better protected and we have a link between the midfield and attack. Giovinco can easily play it imo, but..... bah.
     

    Bjerknes

    "Top Economist"
    Mar 16, 2004
    116,132
    #76
    But against Lecce we had 3 midfielders, all three of them capable to create (Nedved, Camo, Zanetti) and we were forced to play long balls from defense to attack because our midfielders were non-existent. Camo and Nedved were lost in the center.
    With 2 DMCs in the 4-3-3 our defense might be better protected, but the attack will suffer even more.

    4-3-3 does not suit this current set of players, we must face it. Unfortunatly, this team depends on width.
    4-3-1-2 with 2 DMCs will be much better though, imo, because the defense is better protected and we have a link between the midfield and attack. Giovinco can easily play it imo, but..... bah.
    If we provide the width through the strikers it can succeed. Remember, we did well against Chelsea playing with the 4-3-3 at home even with Tiago and Marchisio.

    But honestly, it doesn't matter what formation we field, as long as we break away from using Marchionni and just field the players that should play. Although it might be too late for that as Giovinco probably isn't the most confident of players in the world.

    Next season we better start from scratch, screw the straight 4-4-2 with the hopeful signing of Diego, and provide the team a better system. I don't think the straight 4-4-2 suits us either as our wingers are not fast technical players who can own defense individually, so we need to break out of this funk with Diego.
     
    OP
    Alen

    Alen

    Ѕenior Аdmin
    Apr 2, 2007
    53,991
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #77
    Remember, we did well against Chelsea playing with the 4-3-3 at home
    Was it a 4-3-3 in practice? I might be wrong 'cause i don't remember it very well, but i think it was a 4-3-1-2 with Del Piero playing behind Trez and Iaquinta.

    The only way this team (this current set of players) to play without width imo is to have 1 man between the midfielders and the strikers.
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 13)