Tav/Patterson - alternative formation?

Gascoigne8

Well-Known Member
The 4-1-4-1 we tried and abandoned after less than 10 minutes on Sunday was brutal

it left the striker, itten at the time so isolated

we moved back to our normal formation with Tav higher up but that didn’t last long til he was subbed

I don’t see us starting both any time soon
 

Bangersbc

Well-Known Member
I agree, and that’s why I said it’d depend on the amount of control we have but it shows that a back 3 isn’t always more defensive formation.

I mean. We could sacrifice the goalkeeper too if attacking threat is all we are interested in.

I now see how a back 3 isn't always more defensive. What I fail to see is it not being a suicidal tactic when it comes to defending crosses into the box (one of the most likely ways we have been likely to conced in recent years - Lord knows opposition teams rarely cut us open, it's set-pieces and headers which tend to be how we concede).

Not only that, but by losing a centreback we make ourselves easier to defend against at our own set-pieces by omitting one of our 2 main aerial threats.
 

AriseSirWalter

Well-Known Member
I mean. We could sacrifice the goalkeeper too if attacking threat is all we are interested in.

I now see how a back 3 isn't always more defensive. What I fail to see is it not being a suicidal tactic when it comes to defending crosses into the box (one of the most likely ways we have been likely to conced in recent years - Lord knows opposition teams rarely cut us open, it's set-pieces and headers which tend to be how we concede).

Not only that, but by losing a centreback we make ourselves easier to defend against at our own set-pieces by omitting one of our 2 main aerial threats.

Define 'sacrifice the goalkeeper'? There's an argument that could be made that although McGregor is the better keeper that McLaughlin builds the play better. No system is perfect all have their flaws/weaknesses/areas that can be exploited.

I'm not suggesting we abandon 433/4321 as it worked out not too bad for us last season, I'm saying we're now at a point in Gerrard's reign that we have a settled squad and system we should look to add a different string to our bow, for when we're struggling to break teams down, something that would allow us to have two forwards on in the box without sacrificing dominance in the middle of the park.

When we're in those situations, late in the game looking for a goal it is rare that the opposition gets effective breakaways, it's normally a sole forward chasing a hopeless clearance.
 

Drumchapel-Bear

Well-Known Member
343 is the only way I can see us fitting them both in. It's a bit of a defensive formation but if we were to qualify for the CL, it's definitely a formation that we should look at play imo.
 

ROOFE25

Well-Known Member
Both don't fit in the same team and I wouldn't change formation. Competition for places is healthy and over the season both will get enough games. Tav has the first choice jersey, it's up to Patterson to win that.
 

RenfrewBear72

Well-Known Member
I tried to put a 5-3-2 together with Tav playing the Kyle Walker role but it means dropping the likes of Kent / Wright / Alfie / Fashion / Roofe / Aribo...

F*ck me we are in a good place right now B-D
 

Thornliebank_Bear

Well-Known Member
They linked up really well when we did try it the speed they broke with was fantastic.

Having said that i dont think it will be used again simply because theres so many other options in forward positions the whole team played really well the desire and team spirit is superb.

It did happen though we did try it.

It was maybe more about making it clear to Patterson hes a huge player for next season.

Its a nice position to be in i still dont see how Patterson spends most of the season on the bench, not while we play in this league, but i guess if theres one manager that can find the solution and keep them both happy where they are then its ours. Its really important we dont lose Patterson as hes going to be worth crazy amounts of cash in the near future.
 

GreigC1911

Well-Known Member
I don't see who we drop from further forwards to effectively shoehorn both into the team

Patterson will get game time through the season, but I don't think it'll be anywhere near as much as we expect
 

Ibrox IX

Active Member
I love Patterson, very much.
But Tavernier is first choice not doubt, kid will get minutes under his belt and will grow, he'll be right around the corner when Tavernier will decline or leave Rangers.

Win/Win situation for me, Patterson learns from Tavernier and Tavernier has the kid pushing for the RB spot.
 
Top