Who would go 4-4-2 instead of 4-3-3 / 4-5-1

I think we've looked pretty good so far with the 4-3-3 / 4-5-1, Croft has looked very good, Hucks when the ball has been played over the top and he's been able to run at the opposition. And we've looked very compact in the middle of the park. But I can't help but think we'll be more deadly if we had two up front. But if we did, we'd probably be weaker in the middle of the park - weak enough to be dominated in that area. Hence the $64,000 question (or has inflation made it the $64 million question?!) - do we stay as we are, or risk playing the 4-4-2?!

Posted By: Poirot, Aug 21, 22:53:18