The change from 4-3-3 to 4-4-2 does not seem to have improved the way we are playing. If we truly are a counter-attacking team then why not use a recognised counter-attacking formation such as 4-2-3-1?

We could line up like this:

FB------CB------CB------FB
----McCarthy---McArthur---
Townsend----Eze------Zaha
---------Batshuayi-------

The 2 defensive midfielders form a solid defensive base with a central midfield playmaker in front of them who is flanked by 2 attacking midfielders. The formation is very flexible and allows for a quick transition into attack with the wide midfielders pushing forward or back to a defensive 4-5-1.

The central midfield playmaker is the key position but I think Eze is good enough to pull it off.

I think having the right formation is the point being made. Do we think Eze would have more impact in front of the 2 defensive midfielders or on the wing? I aggree that 4-2-3-1 would allow him to stay in the middle of the pitch. But there maybe technical reasons why Roy disagrees. I prefer Wilf on the wing - always have done. Lets see if Roy changes it.

I just cant see the point of having a no 9 in Ayew who spends so little time in the penalty area, let alone the box.
I would drop Ayew, play Bats as a traditional centre forward and tell him to get in the box and instruct Zaha / Eze / Townsend to get down the wings and get some balls in.
I know it might sound like a crazy idea, but it could result in a few chances and even a goal or 2.

Following Palace since 25 Feb 1978

I feel it depends on who they're passing the ball to and who is passing the ball to them as always far more important then worrying about where they actually play as both are that good.

It seems to have changed it pre season and the 3 league games before the Chelsea loss.