How Do We Get Morelos and Defoe Starting Together?

tazzabear

Well-Known Member
#51
Our current formation is fine if we're playing against teams that come on to us, or if we score a couple of early goals.

The tarriers are the only team in Scotland who will open up and attack us, nobody else does.

So what's the options to enable us to play 2 strikers against deep lying defensive teams?

3-5-2 probably isn't the answer, as you have 3 central defenders playing against 1 striker, so in effect, you've got 1 less attacking player on the park than usual.
We tried it at Fir Park and it worked well 1st half, but Motherwell stuck another player in the midfield 2nd half and we barely got a kick.
We were probably fortunate to come away with a draw in the end.

Standard 4-4-2 with 2 wide men also seems unlikely, as Gerrard has been very critical of this formation previously.
With only 2 midfielders, you are always going to be outnumbered in midfield and can be easily exposed to a counter attack.

4-4-2 with 3 midielders and 1 wide player could possibly work.
2 central midfielders, with possibly Arfield playing as the 3rd on either side, but more narrow than a traditional wide player.
Kent would be the obvious choice for the other spot.

4-4-2 diamomd we already tried at Killie and we started well.
However, even forgetting the blunders from Worrall and McGregor, we never looked comfortable in the last hour and were constantly exposed down the flanks,as it can be a very narrow formation.

4-3-3 "Liverpool style" with Morelos, Defoe and Lafferty playing as an interchanging, goalscoring front 3.
We'd have 3 narrow hardworking midfielders, with the 2 full backs bombing forward providing width.


Personally I'm between the "Liverpool" formation, or the 4-4-2 with 3 midfielders and 1 natural wide player.

We certainly need to try something different.

What's your preference?
This is the one for me.
Reminds me of McLeish’s 2003 team.
I might have one better than this and that is 4-2-3-1
For me, this covers all bases and I think, with one massive exception, we have the players for it.
The exception is that, of our options for the “three” we don’t have the goals we need to support Morelos.
 

strider

Well-Known Member
#52
How do we get them playing together?

We don't. We shouldn't. Defoe doesn't improve us, he's not a starter any more.

A front 2 doesn't suit our squad in any system at present.
 

MearnsUnionist

Well-Known Member
#53
You are right. But wouldn’t you agree that the way we are set up to win the ball to regain possession quickly and (when it works), play wave after wave of ‘relentless’ football, is actually a very fluid system and really means 8 men in the opposition half with only Goldson and Worral staying put.

I wouldn’t play it away at the Piggery but it should work against most of the rest of them.

Don’t you think we have enough in the middle with Jack, Kamara and the two wide men to sacrifice Scott.

I like Arfield btw, it’s just I can’t see another way of accommodating Defoe.

I would be more inclined to sacrifice Candeias mate and go with Arfield as the 3rd midfielder, but wider than the 2 central mids.
I'd have Kent providing width on the left and Tav bombing up and down the right.

I think only playing 2 midfielders is a big risk tbh mate.
 
#58
I'd maybe like to see something like

McGregor

Tav
Katic
Worrall
Halliday

Jack
McCrorie
Kamara
Arfield

Morelos
Defoe

Or

Tav
Katic
Worrall
Barasic

Jack
McCrorie
Kamara
Arfield
Halliday

Morelos
 
#59
The quick answer is I just don’t see Morelos being able to play with a striking partner, just doesn’t seem to suit him however long term / with Morelos away in the summer it’s a formation change we do need to make at Ibrox (*games v Celtic we would Go with regular formation / Morelos up front and formation as is)

McGregor
goldson katic
Mccrorie
Tav kamara arfield Kent barisic
Defoe lafferty* (Lafferty gets run of games to end of season to see if he’s got future , if not we need to replace him & Morelos in summer
 
#61
Ive always liked 4-4-2 but id guess SG is going to stick with his fav system i dont know why we dont just stick 3 strikers on and see what happens. Spent enough money on getting Lafferty and Defoe in go with 3 and fire it up there get it in the mixer. That way we have plenty of players in the box that can take a chance, grafters in the middle of the park for the physical stuff from the opposition/ref cheating and both full backs getting forward.
 

RFC4ME

Well-Known Member
#62
Morelos off right in the 3 would work.

He is a really good runner coming inside a defender and full back, does loads of good work in wider channels, better than he does in the box I feel.

Tav is there to offer the width as is
 

cav

Well-Known Member
#66
We've been having this discussion since November now (even earlier probably).

https://www.followfollow.com/forum/...ked-us-out-how-do-we-approach-saturday.52970/

Our problems against teams who sit in have been obvious for months and months yet we continue to play with a 433 with only 1 goal threat.

We should be playing a 352 or 442 with one central midfielder playing wide against the majority of teams in this league.

Having Defoe sitting on the bench every week is a disgrace given the wedge he is on.
As an aside, I think the volume of intelligent replies and posts in that thread shows that many on FF have a very good understanding of the game and seen problems a long time ago that needed attention*


* clearly I didn’t post on that thread
 
#68
It does not matter what formations we play, against teams which sit with 9 players behind the ball,, the only way to beat this, is to play with fast flowing football with players who are confident
That would help but it isnt the only way to beat them. We really really really need to get a big lad in that will batter centre backs and enjoys the physical side of the scottish game.

oh and lets call out the refs cheating also thats possibly more of a problem than formations/tactics/poor buys.
 

andrewmont1

Well-Known Member
#69
Don't think our front three can replicate Liverpool's, not mobile. fast or good enough to do it, even up here, so that's out for me. I'd go 3-5-2 but the manager has to stop trusting these players, they can't be trusted to find a way as Klopp's men did last night. If the opposition have nullified what we're doing Gerrard has to make changes to our shape to counter. Something he needs to do more of anyway is subs.
I don't believe that Gerrard gets to play 3 forwards at all He has 1 centre forward and 2 wingers. He has no one nipping in at the back post to score. He has no interplay on the edge of the box between those 3. It's 2 wide men and Morelos up front. Now, Morelos plays best with his back to goal so it could be argued that it's pointless having 2 wingers firing balls into the middle when often there is no one poaching from 12 yards in. 4 3 3 is brilliant. When you have 3 proper forwards. Nobody makes it work with 2 wingers
 

cav

Well-Known Member
#70
Lot of good cases put for different formations,personally I suggested months ago that for some games we should revert to a ‘Wattie style’ 4-4-2 with one winger and a narrow midfielder the other side.
Arfield used to play as a narrow wide player for Burnley most of the time and would be tactically wise enough to do similar for us I reckon.Something like:
McGregor
Tav Goldson Katic Barasic
Arfield McCrorie Kamara Kent
Morelos Defoe
 
#71
We need to persist with the 3 up front, but drop the wingers. Both of them are ineffective.

Lafferty and Defoe up front (little and large) with Morelos as a false 9, linking attack with midfield - which he’s strong at. Almost like a 442 diamond, but more a 433. Jack DM. Kamara and Arfield box to box.

We need to be aggressive when playing at home in particular.
 
#72
3-5-2 /5-3-2 could work IMO with the right setup. Something like...



One of the 3 central defenders could play further forward when we have possession, effectively replacing what Jack does currently (dropping off, covering fullbacks) but dropping into a three when we are defending. That also adds weight to the midfield where you have three centrally that will have less defensive responsibilities. I think McCrorie would be a great fit for that, but I think Katic could play that role equally well.

Midfield (and wide players) could support the front two far more consistently and effectively.

Defoe and Morelos are the obvious choices for the two, but we could use Kent just off Morelos where circumstances needed that.

The downside for me is Kent is the one that drops out and on his game he is probably our most effective creative player. I just dont think it is consistently enough to persist with the current set up.

This could easily flip to a 3-4-3 ala Conte with two narrower 'inside forwards'.
 

cav

Well-Known Member
#74
I think from what I've seen on here what we all seem to be agreeing on,is that 4-3-3 with two wingers doesn't work.
Generally we're all behind the manager going forward,but he has to start learning from his mistakes or he'll be compared to Warburton from a tactical point of view which obviously,can never be a good thing.

Don't get me wrong,we've had the Europa group and a good win against the Paedos but since the turn of the year by and large- we've been pretty shite.
 

Crouchy

Well-Known Member
#75
As harsh as it may be, I think Defoe and Lafferty simply are not able to do the Liverpool thing.

They’re fairly limited in ability outside of central attackers.
 

Drumchapel-Bear

Well-Known Member
#76
How do we get them playing together?

We don't. We shouldn't. Defoe doesn't improve us, he's not a starter any more.

A front 2 doesn't suit our squad in any system at present.
I disagree with you on this but lets play devil's advocate and say you are right. What the f*ck are we doing paying a guy 50/60k a week to sit on the bench every week if we can't fit him into the team? It's a disgraceful waste of resources.
 
#77
I'd be delighted if Gerrard started experimenting with formations, we need to change the way we play.

The Liverpool style sounds the best on paper but we don't have the forwards to execute it.

Salah & Mane cut inside perfectly.. Defoe, Morelos, Lafferty aren't capable of that.

Id try 3-5-2/3-4-3 as I believe it would suit our players the best

_________________McGregor

_______Worrall____Goldson____Katic

Tav______McCrorie_____Arfield_____Halliday

___________________Kent

____________Morelos____Defoe

SImilar to the way Chelsea won the EPL under Conte.

Tav & Halliday given license to get forward, McCrorie in there to cover them, Arfield box to box, Kent can get on the ball with the wing backs overlapping.

That team wouldn't get bullied either & we'd defend and attack set pieces better.
I like this formation, and when we (hopefully) buy the right players in the summer it should work, I think we're looking at 3 additions to the team and we will or should be there.
 

a_weir

Well-Known Member
#78
For me the only way it works is

Shagger
Tav Goldson Worral Halliday
Kamara Jack Arfield
Kent
Defoe Morelos
But that feels like quite narrow play and I do think we’ll miss Tav and Candeias linking up.
 

TPB90

Well-Known Member
#79
Not sure why people keep mentioning Liverpool. None of the 3 they usually start with are a recognised centre forward whereas Morelos, Defoe and Lafferty are all centre forwards. No way could they play with the same fluidity that the Liverpool 3 do.
 

GimmeShelter

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
#80
I'd be delighted if Gerrard started experimenting with formations, we need to change the way we play.

The Liverpool style sounds the best on paper but we don't have the forwards to execute it.

Salah & Mane cut inside perfectly.. Defoe, Morelos, Lafferty aren't capable of that.

Id try 3-5-2/3-4-3 as I believe it would suit our players the best

_________________McGregor

_______Worrall____Goldson____Katic

Tav______McCrorie_____Arfield_____Halliday

___________________Kent

____________Morelos____Defoe

SImilar to the way Chelsea won the EPL under Conte.

Tav & Halliday given license to get forward, McCrorie in there to cover them, Arfield box to box, Kent can get on the ball with the wing backs overlapping.

That team wouldn't get bullied either & we'd defend and attack set pieces better.
This for me all day long
 

PMB1872

Well-Known Member
#82
Our current formation is fine if we're playing against teams that come on to us, or if we score a couple of early goals.

The tarriers are the only team in Scotland who will open up and attack us, nobody else does.

So what's the options to enable us to play 2 strikers against deep lying defensive teams?

3-5-2 probably isn't the answer, as you have 3 central defenders playing against 1 striker, so in effect, you've got 1 less attacking player on the park than usual.
We tried it at Fir Park and it worked well 1st half, but Motherwell stuck another player in the midfield 2nd half and we barely got a kick.
We were probably fortunate to come away with a draw in the end.

Standard 4-4-2 with 2 wide men also seems unlikely, as Gerrard has been very critical of this formation previously.
With only 2 midfielders, you are always going to be outnumbered in midfield and can be easily exposed to a counter attack.

4-4-2 with 3 midielders and 1 wide player could possibly work.
2 central midfielders, with possibly Arfield playing as the 3rd on either side, but more narrow than a traditional wide player.
Kent would be the obvious choice for the other spot.

4-4-2 diamomd we already tried at Killie and we started well.
However, even forgetting the blunders from Worrall and McGregor, we never looked comfortable in the last hour and were constantly exposed down the flanks,as it can be a very narrow formation.

4-3-3 "Liverpool style" with Morelos, Defoe and Lafferty playing as an interchanging, goalscoring front 3.
We'd have 3 narrow hardworking midfielders, with the 2 full backs bombing forward providing width.

Personally I'm between the "Liverpool" formation, or the 4-4-2 with 3 midfielders and 1 natural wide player.

We certainly need to try something different.

What's your preference?
4-4-2 with 3 mids and 1 wide. Only concern I have is the lack of quality delivery from the flanks.
 

PrivateAye72

Well-Known Member
#83
A big problem we have is not having a 'proper 10' or ACM who is creative and can drag a team forward. We also have alot of 'water carrier' midfielders such as McCrorie, Kamara and Jack. They are useful to have but in games when teams are sat in we can't use them properly. Arfield brings more and is a more traditional CM and his pressing (when the rest can be arsed) is vital to the way we play. Once we get a 10 we can look at having 1 CDM, 2 CM & 1 ACM.

I think a big problem we had is the fact SG took time to be a pundit at the WC (contractual obligation) and was probably planning on having some time with the players to implement an alternative system in a second preseason once EL was over. In the 2 weeks in Spain we worked the majority of the time on 1 system for the EL and early games then bring in more when we had time to work on them. That didn't happen. Thursday/ Sunday from July - December will have played a large part in how one dimensional we are.

3 at the back with wing-backs is an interesting idea however we'd need to recruit a few more CBs. If the WBs are up the pitch you need quick, versatile and mobile CBs. And we'd need 4/5 of them. If we were to work and implement that system and one was to get injured or suspended it wouldn't work with GMc stepping in.

I think next season we'll see a few different systems used but they need worked on and we need to recruit for them.
 

PMB1872

Well-Known Member
#84
We've been having this discussion since November now (even earlier probably).

https://www.followfollow.com/forum/...ked-us-out-how-do-we-approach-saturday.52970/

Our problems against teams who sit in have been obvious for months and months yet we continue to play with a 433 with only 1 goal threat.

We should be playing a 352 or 442 with one central midfielder playing wide against the majority of teams in this league.

Having Defoe sitting on the bench every week is a disgrace given the wedge he is on.
Given he is so different from Morelos, what was the thinking otherwise?
 
#85
4-3-1-2

Shagger

Tav (providing width in attack)
Goldson
Worral/katic
Barisic (providing width in attack)

Jack (DM, linking with Arfield and covering full backs)
Kamara (DM, linking with Arfield and covering full backs)
Arfield/davis (linking with Kent and forwards)
Kent (top of diamond)

Morelos
Defoe/lafferty

Seems narrow but with two attacking full backs should give you width and more bodies in box to attack.

At the moment we have 1 (Morelos) attacking crosses maybe 2 if Arfield makes run.

The set up above could have 4 playing directly through the middle of stuffy defences with tav and barisic providing or even creating chances playing straight through the middle.
 
Last edited:

strider

Well-Known Member
#90
I disagree with you on this but lets play devil's advocate and say you are right. What the f*ck are we doing paying a guy 50/60k a week to sit on the bench every week if we can't fit him into the team? It's a disgraceful waste of resources.
We're not paying 50 or 60k for him, as far as I understand. Don't believe it's even close.

If we are, it's a hugely disappointing decision.
 

JamesyMRR

Active Member
Official Ticketer
#92
I don't think it's a question of formations. Its quality. Kent, Arfield and Candeias are our main attacking players outside Morelos. They dont score or create enough goals.
 

WATP_74

Well-Known Member
#93
I’m wondering if this Aberdeen defeat is a watershed moment for Stevie G as a manager.
In the past he’s bristled when his formations and tactics have been questioned after a bad defeat.
Usually his response is it wouldn’t have mattered what system we went with as the players didn’t turn up.
I wonder if he still believes that.
 

Growler

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
#96
3-5-2 but with McCrorie as one of the 3 allowing him to basically step up into midfield when we are playing a defensive side which are parking the bus.

It’s worth a shot at this point, Defoe sitting on the bench and getting 15 minutes when we are chasing a game is a waste of his and our time.
I was thinking this too, but realised it’s essentilly 442 diamond with attacking full backs. Worth a go, but the brief diamond stint looked pretty poor.
 
#98
4231, with Morelos anywhere across the 3.

All formations, with Morelos and Defo starting, will have its problems - hence the thread.

But that's as good as your getting.

Morelos works harder than most. He'd be fine on either side. Shooting across the keeper is his favourite finish.

But I'd play Alfredo up top on his own, v the taigs.
 

Drumchapel-Bear

Well-Known Member
#99
This ''3 at the back means we have one less attacking player with 3 v 1 striker as well'' is a nonsense. The left/right centre halves can step out and even get forward and attack if the spaces are there.

Sheff Utd are brilliant at it.
 

Steve Snedden

Well-Known Member
I would be more inclined to sacrifice Candeias mate and go with Arfield as the 3rd midfielder, but wider than the 2 central mids.
I'd have Kent providing width on the left and Tav bombing up and down the right.

I think only playing 2 midfielders is a big risk tbh mate.
I’d be Ok with that, it does offer us more security. I’m happy with one winger, similar to Walter’s idea’s.

However, as exciting as Kent is, and as frustrating as Daniell is, are their stats much different?

To the naked eye, Kent is a better player, but i’m curious about the tangible, measurable, contribution.

I remember berating Daniel, only to be shocked by his assists / goal scoring oppportunity stats.
 
Top