Reply To: Tamworth

[64]

Rene Artois wrote:

4-2-3-1

Is the formation they were usually playing last season.

2-3-2-3 anyone?

2 at the back to take care of their 1 up front
3 to match up their 3
2 to match up their 2
3 up top would give their 4 at the back something to think about and keep them occupied.

Too poetical a formation?; Worth considering?

Sounds like made up nonsense