Speminalium8
Well-Known Member
Come on Steven, you know you want to...
3-4-3
- Thread starter Speminalium8
- Start date
We need options and Dubai was perfect opportunity to mix the formations.
3-4-3, 4-4-1-1 or 3-5-2 to at least try something new. We are predictable as hell now.
3-4-3, 4-4-1-1 or 3-5-2 to at least try something new. We are predictable as hell now.
bjorklund-by-the-sea
Well-Known Member
It’s quite hard to just change system without working on it quite a bit in training and games - which I can’t see us having done.
I actually think 3-4-3 is a more defensive formation oddly especially with the personnel we have. I’m also not sure we’ve got the ball playing defenders to make 3 at the back work effectively.
I’d be more minded to a 4-2-3-1 if we were looking to change shape.
I actually think 3-4-3 is a more defensive formation oddly especially with the personnel we have. I’m also not sure we’ve got the ball playing defenders to make 3 at the back work effectively.
I’d be more minded to a 4-2-3-1 if we were looking to change shape.
tazzabear
Well-Known Member
For me, no other shape fits.
You’re correct re three at the back.
Necro
Well-Known Member
Goldson and Helander on either side of a back 3 would be more than adequate, I actually quite like the idea of having those two allowing Katic to run out and attack everything.
We definitely don't have the midfield options to go with that shape though
bjorklund-by-the-sea
Well-Known Member
I’m all for Katic leading the charge from the back!
tazzabear
Well-Known Member
What do you do with the full backs?
Necro
Well-Known Member
They'd play as wing backs.
Hypothetical lineup:
McGregor
Goldson
Katic
Helander
Tavernier
Jack
Arfield/Aribo
Barisic
Hagi
Morelos
Kent
You can either play a 532 or 541 out of possession
Necro
Well-Known Member
We don't have the personnel in midfield to go with that this season, only Jack would be capable to play in that system currently.
Kamara has the attributes but he's too error prone to be trusted in a midfield 2 imo
Arfield could slot in there he has plenty energy to get about in a midfield 2.
braeface13
Member
Said on the Barisic thread that this might be the time to try 3 - 4 - 3. Will still be surprised if it happens.
Necro
Well-Known Member
Doesn't have a good enough first touch imo.
Flaws become a lot more apparent in a midfield 2
RupertDeBoer
Well-Known Member
Considering since January we have been without 3 proper quality midfielders I don't hate the idea of a 3.
Would be prone to losing the midfield against a 5 though.
Would be prone to losing the midfield against a 5 though.
Here’s my formation with current form
———————Mcgregor———————
Tav———-Goldson———Katic——-Borna
———————-Jack—————————
———-Arfield————-Aribo—————-
——————-Hagi——————————
———-Morelos———Kamberi————-
Fullbacks to provide width and to be honest Aribo and Arfield can also provide that on both sides if needed
Hagi to be given a free role in the hole. I feel kamberi would be better suited up front rather than on the wing but again if needed can provide width.
Davis isn’t coming with 2 games a week so can’t rely on him every week and Kent needs a swift kick up the backside to rediscover his form.
———————Mcgregor———————
Tav———-Goldson———Katic——-Borna
———————-Jack—————————
———-Arfield————-Aribo—————-
——————-Hagi——————————
———-Morelos———Kamberi————-
Fullbacks to provide width and to be honest Aribo and Arfield can also provide that on both sides if needed
Hagi to be given a free role in the hole. I feel kamberi would be better suited up front rather than on the wing but again if needed can provide width.
Davis isn’t coming with 2 games a week so can’t rely on him every week and Kent needs a swift kick up the backside to rediscover his form.
We've been playing together long enough now (most of the team anyway) where we should be looking to add more formations. For me the two #10s is great when a team are going to compete in the midfield with us, as it gives us extra players to compete and more passing options inbetween the oppositions lines. When the opposition pack the defensive 3rd however the two #10s make an already busy area even more congested.
Against teams that pack the defense we'd be better, IMO, to have two orthodox wingers that will make the pitch as wide as possible to allow space for midfielders (one of which should be Hagi) to exploit the space created.
I'd like to see us be able to play 3 at the back as it gives us more options but it's more difficult to implement than say changing from 433 to 4231. Goldson and Helander look comfortable enough on the ball but it would take big Katic out his comfort zone.
If we got comfortable with 3 at the back it'd allow us to go an attacking 3124 or a defensive 3421. 433 has served us well and there's no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water just because we're going through a period of bad form but being able to change formation during games would make us much more difficult to defend against.
Against teams that pack the defense we'd be better, IMO, to have two orthodox wingers that will make the pitch as wide as possible to allow space for midfielders (one of which should be Hagi) to exploit the space created.
I'd like to see us be able to play 3 at the back as it gives us more options but it's more difficult to implement than say changing from 433 to 4231. Goldson and Helander look comfortable enough on the ball but it would take big Katic out his comfort zone.
If we got comfortable with 3 at the back it'd allow us to go an attacking 3124 or a defensive 3421. 433 has served us well and there's no reason to throw the baby out with the bath water just because we're going through a period of bad form but being able to change formation during games would make us much more difficult to defend against.
tazzabear
Well-Known Member
If I were playing or coaching against a 3-5-2 or any three at the back, I’d be getting the ball played behind the wing backs.
This will either put the wing backs on their heels or pull a centre back out of position.
Gives the opposition the opportunity to fill the gaps.
Thisneithe
Necro
Well-Known Member
The thing is, our fullbacks are already being played as wing backs in a back 4 so this problem already exists.
A back 3 would make us more sturdy, not less.
GingerRanger
Well-Known Member
I think a 4-3-1-2 would work for us.
Hagi needs to be playing centrally and I think two up top will help take a bit of focus off Alfie. It’s easy for defenders to just focus on him (as much as he batters them himself and generally does well) and I think he gets isolated at times.
Hagi needs to be playing centrally and I think two up top will help take a bit of focus off Alfie. It’s easy for defenders to just focus on him (as much as he batters them himself and generally does well) and I think he gets isolated at times.
RupertDeBoer
Well-Known Member
Aye but you’ve currently got 3 midfielders who can cover for the attacking fullback on whichever side needs it so we’re still really a 4
Speminalium8
Well-Known Member
After yesterday, formation/ personnel change has come into sharp focus. If you don’t change we’ll keep getting the same results. I’m sick of being funnelled out wide for hit and hopes into a box where we’re outnumbered 5 to 2 . I’m sick of deep midfielders standing alongside our centre backs and I’m sick of our prolonged game of passie in our own half while the opposition have time to close all space down where it matters. I’m sick of an all too often isolated single striker.After yesterday I’m also sick of the Goldson Katic form and look forward to Helander and Edmundson coming back. And I’m sick of the manager not starting the next game with the changes which were necessary, and worked, in the previous game.All told, I’m pretty, pretty sick.
I'd like to see a 4-4-2 with a diamond in the midfield. You would have Morelos up front with one of Kamberi/Defoe/Kent/Stewart with Hagi at the attacking point of the diamond, and Davis at the base. Jack and Aribo complete the midfield. Kamara competing with Davis and Kent competing with Hagi.
4-3-3 is good for games where the opposition are going to come out and have a go but most games we play aren't like that. We need 2 up front, and Hagi in the middle. The fullbacks provide the width, as they do just now.
I think changing to a back 3 is something that takes a fair bit of work on the training ground and has to be drilled into the players and we don't have time for that just now with 2 games per week. We should work on it next pre season to have in our locker for certain games next season.
4-3-3 is good for games where the opposition are going to come out and have a go but most games we play aren't like that. We need 2 up front, and Hagi in the middle. The fullbacks provide the width, as they do just now.
I think changing to a back 3 is something that takes a fair bit of work on the training ground and has to be drilled into the players and we don't have time for that just now with 2 games per week. We should work on it next pre season to have in our locker for certain games next season.
Coplandbear
Well-Known Member
Korova Milk Bar
Well-Known Member
We shouldn't revert to a back three, the problem lies with poor defence mistakes. Helander and a new centre back needs to be our pairing going forward.
Moreloslaces
Well-Known Member
Who are we kidding. He'll stick with his beloved 433 he's unable to change.
