Eck2104
Well-Known Member
Exactly.
Pulls a CB out Of position.
If the players know how to play the formation then the CB thats closing down should be getting covered, either by a deep lying midfield or the opposite wing back coming in one.
Exactly.
Pulls a CB out Of position.
You'd prefer Barisic 1v1 in that situation than Worrall?
Smith, yes, in his first spell when he had Laudrup, Gascoigne, Hateley, Steven, McCoist, Durrant, Miko, Brown, etc.
A bit different.
Not during his second spell though.
Advocaat, I seem to recall being an avowed 4-4-2 man?
I don’t recall 3-5-2 at all under him.
And on the other side of the park,Tav never gave Sinclair a kick in the last game mate.
We'll definitely go with a back 4.
If the players know how to play the formation then the CB thats closing down should be getting covered, either by a deep lying midfield or the opposite wing back coming in one.
Doesn’t deserve to start every game. We should be flexible enough to play both formations.Completely takes Kent out of the starting line up
I agree we won't but it's not true to suggest a 3 man defence couldn't work. Celtic have done it to us on more than one occasion when we've played 4-3-3.
Rangers 7-1 Motherwell
Evidence the 4-3-3 can work
numerous shitty draws against dross in this league is evidence we need a second option/plan b.
Or, you could “mark the space” in the first place.If the players know how to play the formation then the CB thats closing down should be getting covered, either by a deep lying midfield or the opposite wing back coming in one.
I've never said we don't need a plan b, merely stating 4-3-3 can work.
But we did have a shitty draw with Motherwell when playing 3-5-2
No problem with a plan “B” but your plan “A” should always be the best option for your players and your game plan.numerous shitty draws against dross in this league is evidence we need a second option/plan b.
To be honest, the last third or so of Advocaat’s third season is quite a blur for me.Advocate dabbled with 3-5-2 a few times after Wibble continually got the better of him but it was so he could shoehorn Konterman into the team and compensate for Ricksen being a poor defender.
If they weren't Dutch, he wouldn't have bothered and it wasn't very successful or good to watch.
Maybe because they had Flanagan in there with them.
numerous shitty draws against dross in this league is evidence we need a second option/plan b.
Goldson slipped at the start and his confidence was shot after that.Flanagan was indeed in there but was in no way responsible for how uncomfortable Goldson looked, for example.
Smith, yes, in his first spell when he had Laudrup, Gascoigne, Hateley, Steven, McCoist, Durrant, Miko, Brown, etc.
A bit different.
Not during his second spell though.
Advocaat, I seem to recall being an avowed 4-4-2 man?
I don’t recall 3-5-2 at all under him.
Exactly as I recall it.In his successful seasons you are right advocaat preferred 442 with the midfield usually consisting 3 more central midfielders and one winger. Sometimes kanchelskos on the right with BF, GVB and Albertz as the 3, or McCann on the left with BF, GVB and Reyna
This is still my favourite formation in think in Scotland with 2 up you'd absolutely dominate teams
Correct, the only notable occasion I can recall was away versus Monaco when Tuguy operated as a sweeper. Advocaat's version of flexibility was how he deployed his four in midfield. Against tougher opposition he invariably plumped for Reyna, Ferguson, Gio VB, and Albertz. His other regular options were of course Kanchelskis and McCann, but rarely did he pick both in the same team as starters.Smith, yes, in his first spell when he had Laudrup, Gascoigne, Hateley, Steven, McCoist, Durrant, Miko, Brown, etc.
A bit different.
Not during his second spell though.
Advocaat, I seem to recall being an avowed 4-4-2 man?
I don’t recall 3-5-2 at all under him.
I didn’t say with the current squad.
However I’m up for the challenge
McGregor
Goldson Worral Katic
Tav Jack Arfield Kamara Barisic
Morelos Defoe
If you play a 3-5-2 against a team that play one striker and two wide men, like the mentally challengeds, you are in deep shite.
What do you do when the opposition play a ball down the touch line?
Yea because wolves have had a poor season against most of the premier league 433 teamsIf you play a 3-5-2 against a team that play one striker and two wide men, like the mentally challengeds, you are in deep shite.
Yea because wolves have had a poor season against most of the premier league 433 teams
I’d have thought it’s 3-5-2 when the opposition have the ball because, firstly, it’s not 3-5-2 you’re now playing, it’s 5-?-?.You should be in a flat 5 when the opposition has the ball, your 3 in the middle match up to theirs leaving you plenty of cover.
We weren’t able to execute the formation as the players got it wrong, doesn’t mean it’s the wrong shape going forward.