Is 4-3-3 still the way forward?

Thornliebank_Bear said:
Well thats obvious 4-4-2.

Get a pair of strikers in the middle and the game becomes a lot easier.

I am not making excuses for the players, but maybe its time to find a way to help them (they look sick of these tactics) instead of completely writing off the whole squad and asking them to do play in a way which most are finding almost impossible for a number of reasons.

There will be more speed, energy, etc in a team playing a more direct scottish/british style.
Click to expand...
How does it become easier?

We would have one less attacker for opposition CBs to worry about.

We would also lose a man in midfield. Given how poor we've been defensively this season, losing an extra man in midfield would be so stupid.
 
bar72bear said:
Absolutely hate it. Some easy to set up against domestically where teams basically play with a back 5.
Click to expand...
I’d agree if we actually played 4-3-3.
Which we do when out of possession
In possession, ours is more like
Two centre backs behind one DM with the “full backs” wide of two other midfielders who play behind three forwards who continually drop back and go wide.
 
I do like 4-3-3 (especially in European games and the tougher domestic games) but it requires the 2 wider forwards to chip in with a decent amount of goals or it puts too much of a burden on the central striker. Wide forwards need to both be getting into double figures. We've struggled to do that in recent years.

I also think we only need 1 holding midfielder for the majority of domestic games. The centre midfielder at the base needs to be either Davis, Lundstrum, Kamara or Jack. On either side of that holding player we should have Hagi, Bacuna, Arfield or Aribo who are more attacking.

I'd prefer us to play a 4-4-2 with a diamond in the midfield for the majority of domestic games. I understand coaches don't want to play a flat 4 in the midfield or their midfield 2 get crowded out by the oppositions 3. A 4-4-2 diamond would allow our full backs to continue to provide width, playing to their strengths. Our midfield would be a narrow diamond with either Kent or Hagi at the attacking point. The narrow diamond would provide support in the centre circle so we don't get overrun in the midfield and allow space in the wide areas for our full backs to run into.

Most importantly, we'd get 2 strikers on the field at the same time. I think there's a generation of centre half's who have come through not used to playing against 2 centre forwards and it scares them. Hibs have done it twice against us this season putting Nisbet and Boyle through the middle and we struggled with it.
 
Last edited:
Doesn't matter what formation is set out, if some players are not giving one hundred per cent. This is what Gio has to sort out before anything else.
 
I like it. We will see a different 4-3-3 under Gio than what we did from Gerrard. We will be playing this system with proper wingers as opposed to numbers 10s. There’s a few ways to play the formation.
 
Forth Bear said:
How does it become easier?

We would have one less attacker for opposition CBs to worry about.

We would also lose a man in midfield. Given how poor we've been defensively this season, losing an extra man in midfield would be so stupid.
Click to expand...
This is just nuts we only play with 1 striker, thats it 1 the Rangers play with 1 centre forward in the box completely isolated, having 2 playing together would make a huge difference.

Lets say we have 3 in midfield(not that theres much point in it as their job at the moment seems just to be short passes and keeping hold of it) 4 is more than 3.
 
ICA_86 said:
I couldn’t think of a worse formation than a 4-4-2 for this current side.

We don’t have two strikers who work together, and the thought of a conventional two in the middle giving very little cover to a horrendous central defence is nightmare material.
Click to expand...
How do you know we dont have 2 strikers that work together they seldom get the chance.
 
Thornliebank_Bear said:
This is just nuts we only play with 1 striker, thats it 1 the Rangers play with 1 centre forward in the box completely isolated, having 2 playing together would make a huge difference.

Lets say we have 3 in midfield(not that theres much point in it as their job at the moment seems just to be short passes and keeping hold of it) 4 is more than 3.
Click to expand...
If you're wanting to keep four in midfield, who is supplying these two strikers?

Numerous times we've played 4-3-1-2 under Gerrard with Roofe and Morelos playing together.

Playing 4-4-2 isn't going to magically turn things around.
 
bar72bear said:
Absolutely hate it. Some easy to set up against domestically where teams basically play with a back 5.
Click to expand...
4-3-3 can be very fluid it’s up to the players running off the ball running behind defenders at the right time. The system is irrelevant if the players don’t carry out instructions.
 
You cant seriously be telling me folk would want Rangers to continue playing exactly the same way for the rest of the season, just hopefully find some form. Fingers crossed.

That is absolutely incredible i can only guess this stuff is coming straight from sky sports.
 
4-3-3 works if you have pacey wingers willing to beat a man and stretch teams...we don't have that

Our version of 4-3-3 involves 2 'wingers' coming inside and leaving space for attacking full backs...which again works well if you have people in the box to attack those crosses...which we generally don't...

Under Gio I think we'll see Kent/Aribo told to stay wide a lot more, until we can get some proper wingers in
 
Gio seemingly likes his full backs to defend and use wingers. Interesting to see how he fits Tav and Borna into that system. Interesting times ahead.
 
%^*& me, it's no table top football ffs, the system is fluid and changes depending on the passage of play. Folk talk about formations like the players line up beside each other and only move sidey ways and do backflips when kicking the ball.
 
Forth Bear said:
If you're wanting to keep four in midfield, who is supplying these two strikers?

Numerous times we've played 4-3-1-2 under Gerrard with Roofe and Morelos playing together.

Playing 4-4-2 isn't going to magically turn things around.
Click to expand...
1/ erm your midfielders Hagi could play on the left, or Kent, depends who the opposition are and ofcourse Tav should have been switched into midfield and Patterson in at rb. We need a midfield at the moment it feels like we play without one.

2/No thats true im sure we played 2 against st m and it changed the game but roofe for me wouldnt be playing, good player yes too many injuries sadly.

3/well we cant change all the players so only thing to do is sort out our tactics and a system with a partnership in attack would, imo anyway without watching skys excellent coverage from england, germany and so on, is that it would benefit every single player out there.
 
Thornliebank_Bear said:
You cant seriously be telling me folk would want Rangers to continue playing exactly the same way for the rest of the season, just hopefully find some form. Fingers crossed.

That is absolutely incredible i can only guess this stuff is coming straight from sky sports.
Click to expand...
It's not about playing exactly the same way though, is it? Same formation doesn't mean playing the exact same way
or even with the exact same personnel. Is your suggestion of 442 set in stone and only played in one way? Give it to CB's, hoof it 50 yards, big guy knocks it on and little guy races onto it, or are there variations? Oddly enough, 433 is the same. We destroyed O'Neil's 442 cloggers with a counter attacking 433 system remember.

Personally, I think he will go with Kent and Sakala or Wright wide with Aribo in-between them supporting most likely Morelos on Thursday with the wide players being asked to keep the width and Aribo asked to stay closer to the striker. All the reports say he likes pacey wingers and the ball moved quickly. It's not 100% about possession with him either. There's just a few instances of how his 433 may be entirely different to a Gerrard 433.
 
It will always be a variation of 4-3-3, most likely 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-1-2.

Going by what I've heard about Gio, I'm not sure we will see much of the 2 central no.10s playing behind Morelos. Not sure how I feel about that as it was a direct solution to teams parking the bus & flooding central areas.

Also not sure whether we will play 2 strikers in the front 3 but I think it's crucial in domestic games.

I've grown a bit tired of the flat 3 in midfield. It's function is to allow the full backs to roam forward but when their not both on their game, it leaves too large a gap middle to front.

I don't get the clamour for 3-5-2 as its a defensive formation rendered pointless when facing teams playing 1 lone striker. Also 4-4-2, I mean c'mon it's rare nowadays for a reason. The 2 central mids get swamped by teams flooding the middle so it usually requires one of the strikers to drop deep & you almost end up with a 4-5-1
 
Thornliebank_Bear said:
Yep no one plays 4-4-2 anymore.
Click to expand...

GvB plays a formation that can form into a number of shapes and formations through out a game.

In Holland his 4-3-3 / 4-2-3-1 allowed him to play with width. It allowed him to get bodies in the box and it also allowed the shape to fall back into a narrow 4 man midfield - 4-4-1-1.

The coming weeks / months are going to be interesting.
 
_DON_ said:
I would imagine it is not a baseline 3-4-3, with 3 CB's.

I suspect he was thinking that we start as a 4-3-3, then Jack drops back to let the fullbacks bomb on, thus creating a 3-4-3? But maybe not. :p
Click to expand...
Yeah true tbf
 
Bowery Boy said:
Nobody moaned about the formation last season. The players are woefully out of form. Simple as.
Click to expand...

Alongwith player form, the problem was that by Dundee Utd away last season in December we were worked out. Prior to that tav was scoring or assisting every week and we looked a threat in every game. If you look at nearly all the games between then and the rest of the season it was largely a struggle. Offcourse we won the vast majority of games but a lot of the games were turgid affairs where we relied on a really good goal to sneak a game.

That has continued this season where we have been sussed out by teams. Opposition fullbacks are pushed up and we end up narrow and ineffective.
 
4-3-3 is just a standard starting formation. Can do plenty with it during the course of a game.

For example, if we play a 4-3-3 with a midfield 3 of Jack, Davis and Kamara it's a totally different style of play from a midfield 3 of Aribo, Bacuna and Hagi

People get far to hung up on formation. It's all down to the individuals selected and the instructions they are given, not where they stand when kick off is taken.
 
Huncholini said:
Personally think our 4-3-3 formation is far to predictable at times, although its been mentioned GVB likes this formation, would you be happy seeing this change and if so what to?
Click to expand...
I know I will get pelters for this but when I saw we were lining up 4-3-3 and Hibs were 4-4-2 I feared the worse.
We are so predictable now. Ball out wide to Tav or Barisic then a hit or miss cross into the box. If it gets past the first defender.

They came at us through the middle and over ran us in midfield and forward areas

Will we learn?
It seemed to be back to the Warburton era. Plan B is to do Plan A better.
 
_DON_ said:
I would imagine it is not a baseline 3-4-3, with 3 CB's.

I suspect he was thinking that we start as a 4-3-3, then Jack drops back to let the fullbacks bomb on, thus creating a 3-4-3? But maybe not. :p
Click to expand...

haha - so it's a 4-3-3?!

We need to play 4 at the back, unfortunately we don't even have 2 centre halves worthy of a game right now.
 
Formations are fluid, personally I think fans pay too much attention to them. Under Gerrard we would go from 4-3-3, to 4-2-3-1, to 4-3-1-2.

You can adapt, or change in a game.

Particularly when we are attacking, then changing to a defensive shape or whatever.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think Gio will change too much in terms of tactics or formation.
 
RfcWATP said:
Who’s our 3rd CB? Simpson ?
Click to expand...
Or Bassey

Balogun on the right, Goldson central and Bassey on the left. Tav/Patterson and Barasic/Bassey as wing backs. Patterson I think could also play at right side of a back three

Scotland team been utilising it well but I can't see it being the preferred option for us though.
 
GF7 said:
Or Bassey

Balogun on the right, Goldson central and Bassey on the left. Tav/Patterson and Barasic/Bassey as wing backs. Patterson I think could also play at right side of a back three

Scotland team been utilising it well but I can't see it being the preferred option for us though.
Click to expand...
Think Tav would be better as the RCB in that system, Kyle Walker esque.
 
Its the players that become predictable rather than the formation. A midfield 3 of Kamara, Davis and Jack will play completely different to a midfield 3 of Bacuna, Jack and Arfield. Same goes for the front 3. Kent and Wright playing wide of Sakala brings a different dynamic to Aribo and Hagi playing either side of Morelos.
 
Thornliebank_Bear said:
These threads always go full pep, it makes no difference how popular the system is in England, Germany or anywhere else its destroying this team and the confidence of every single player. We need to get rid of it before its too late.
Click to expand...
I agree.

Let’s start with a flat back 10 and take it from there
 
I actually don't think the 4-3-3 base system works when we cha get out of it as the personal are picked on the basis or 4-3-3.

When we go forward and we hear this all the time it changes to 3 at the back and a more attacking formation, however the personal moving into the different set up is the wrong type of player for these formations. I get where Thornliebank Bear is coming from. When we play 4-3-3 it's not a 3 upfront it's basically 4-5-1 with 2 wingers either pressing to the corners themselves or covering Tav or Bassey. We aren't actually playing with 2 goal scoring forwards. Why not these days.

Having a 4-4-2 doesn't take anything away from the setup it adds to it. 2 players up top who just want to score goals. An extra man in midfield ti counter the midfield 5 that most teams play Aginst us and it still allows Tav and Bassey / Barasic to still get forward. There jobs wouldn't change. I feel the current base 4-3-3 is actually boring as hell.

I couldn't give a monkeys if we have the most possession whilst playing triangles between the defence and midfield. When Morelos is up top himself he looks uninterested snd has to come deep cause he is bored himself.

I'd like to see the team build by having 2 strikers from the off. Whether it's a 4-4-2 or a 3-5-2 doesn't matter but fill the 2 top spots with guys who want to be in the box to score not wingers who due to their own style always go wide leaving 1 strikers isolated.

Just my opinion cause something isn't working. I think the defence switches off due to them not having to defend a lot in a game. They are involved as they are expected to start our attacks by the getting the ball short from the GK. Maybe theh wpuld switch on more if we tried to get more balls into the box or had more shots. If that gives up some possession then so be it.

It's boring and turgid. Complete change is needed.
 
Huncholini said:
Personally think our 4-3-3 formation is far to predictable at times, although its been mentioned GVB likes this formation, would you be happy seeing this change and if so what to?
Click to expand...
What matters is how we press, how we transition and the different roles Gio asks each position to play.

You can have a Gerrard 433 with a flat midfield three who stay behind the ball, two tens and high full backs.

Or, you can have a flat back four, two wingers, number 9 and a more traditional midfield three with a 6, 8 and a 10.

Two wildly different set ups but both 433.
 
Huncholini said:
Personally think our 4-3-3 formation is far to predictable at times, although its been mentioned GVB likes this formation, would you be happy seeing this change and if so what to?
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure our inside number 10’s will become out and out wingers free to change sides. A winger who can roast a full back and get to the byline is what we have been missing. Deep crossing and recycling the ball forever is our major problem. Some old school attacking of defenders and shooting on sight will show immediate results.
 
4-3-3 is the most adaptable formation you can use with or without the ball. Gio did say in his first press conference that there are systems within systems, within a game. His preferred formation will be 4-3-3 but that doesn't mean it will always look like a 4-3-3.
 
Thornliebank_Bear said:
Well thats obvious 4-4-2.

Get a pair of strikers in the middle and the game becomes a lot easier.

I am not making excuses for the players, but maybe its time to find a way to help them (they look sick of these tactics) instead of completely writing off the whole squad and asking them to do play in a way which most are finding almost impossible for a number of reasons.

There will be more speed, energy, etc in a team playing a more direct scottish/british style.
Click to expand...

Hear hear!!!
 
erskine bear said:
Formations are fluid, personally I think fans pay too much attention to them. Under Gerrard we would go from 4-3-3, to 4-2-3-1, to 4-3-1-2.

You can adapt, or change in a game.

Particularly when we are attacking, then changing to a defensive shape or whatever.

For what it’s worth, I don’t think Gio will change too much in terms of tactics or formation.
Click to expand...
A very understated fact about the game. Never in a game does a formation stay the same throughout it.
 
Gio mentioned in his presser that he likes 4-3-3 but can also see 4 or 5 different systems operating in the course of a game. Nice to know he's got that flexibility in mind as I'm not sure Steven Gerrard always had more than one system in mind (or at least it didn't show often enough!)
 
erskine bear said:
Think Tav would be better as the RCB in that system, Kyle Walker esque.
Click to expand...
Tav in a back three would put a fair few people on this forum in the hospital. Can see the veins popping now

To be fair it works very well with Scotland with Tierney and Robertson and they both get forward with midfielders tucking in.

Jack/Kamara/Davis defensive midfielders and then Arfield/Bacuna/Aribo doing what John McGinn does. Aribo/Hagi/Kent off of Roofe or Morelos.

Can't see it though. Think Gio more likely to remind the likes of Kent & Wright that it's OK for a winger to actually go for the byline now and again.
 
The most obvious change in Van Bronckhorst's 433 will be the main striker, and two forwards alongside him. We will most likely be more direct in possession.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top