What's The Sudden Obsession With 3 At The Back On Here?

Hilly5411

Well-Known Member
....I'm guessing it's because of the tarrier's recent run of form?

Let's remember this was no tactical masterpiece from Lennon, it was forced upon him.

His 1st choice right back (El Ahmed) was injured and so was his 2nd choice (Frimpong).

He doesn't trust Bauer, so he decided to go with 3 central defenders and play Forrest at right wing back and Taylor (usually) at left wing back.

To be fair, he had the bottle to drop his attacking mid (Christie) and play 3 more central mids in Brown, McGregor and Ntcham.

He's also got 2 strikers who are more comfortable playing in a partnership, rather than on their own.

Gerrard has been without Tav since December and Jack since ht at Tynecastle.
He also lost Borna at Hamilton.

You can argue that Gerrard should've done what Lennon did and adjusted his formation to suit the players he had available.

However, if Borna is fit, for the 1st time this year he now has the personnel to play the same formation that was scoring for fun and winning consistently in Scotland and Europe.

Should we go with.....

McGregor
Tav Goldson Katic Barisic
Jack Davis Kamara
Hagi Kent
Morelos

It's maybe harsh on Arfield, Aribo and Stewart, but they're great options from the bench.

Remember, apart from Hagi, that's the players who destroyed Celtic at the piggery and won consistently in Scotland and Europe and were scoring for fun.

Should we not go back to it, now they are all available again?

If not, why not?
At home in almost every game, we should be dropping the flat 3 in centre and playing 2 there, and then play three attacking mids (Kent, Hagi, Stewart/Aribo) imo
 

MearnsUnionist

Well-Known Member
OP is a good poster but I would counter this question with:

'What's the obsession with continuing playing a formation that is seeing us fail to score many goals, losing some at the other end and seeing us drop points all over the shop?'

Aye, we were blowing teams away earlier in the season playing 4-3-2-1 when we had a full compliment of players but we now don't and haven't since the break, yet we haven't adapted to suit the personnel we have in reserve.

There is more than 1 way to skin a cat, especially in this league.

I'd like to see us play 2 up top and that would mean either playing 4-4-2, 3-5-2 or 5-3-2. The latter is out the equation as 5 defenders to mark a lone striker would be lunacy. That leaves the other 2 as possibilities...neither of which would I be against seeing.

In games that Walter knew we'd be in a battle to win, he'd regularly go a flat 4 midfield with 4 CMs eg. Davis, Mendes, Thomson, Adam in the 4-2 game at parkhead.

Refusing to adapt to different challenges and change formation is exactly what Warburton done and he got slaughtered for his 'Plan B is to do Plan A better philosophy'...that sort of stubbornness and inflexibility is why we're now as good as out of the title race.

You have to find a way to win when not at your best and sometimes that means compromising on your ideals and being pragmatic.

I agree 100% that if you don't have the right personnel available for a certain formation, then I'd prefer the formation changed to suit the players available, as opposed to trying to shoehorn them into a formation that doesn't suit.
 

GimmeShelter

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
I agree 100% that if you don't have the right personnel available for a certain formation, then I'd prefer the formation changed to suit the players available, as opposed to trying to shoehorn them into a formation that doesn't suit.
Time to change it then
 

DKS137

Member
It’s the work rate that’s the problem, a few times we pressured Kilmarnock into mistake in the first 45 min. We are not working as hard as we did before Christmas
 

GimmeShelter

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
Even though we finally have the players back who gave us so much success with it before Dubai mate?

We were cruising with it, pretty much every time Borna and Tav were available.

Domestically and in Europe.
Yes, teams have the 4-3-2-1 sussed out and we have no answer.

The front 3 isn’t working and we have had them back for a few weeks.

Kamara isn’t an attacking mid if you mean we will now have a midfield 3 of Jack, Davis and Kamara fully fit.

We are struggling to score goals and break teams down now.

This isnt Europe and it isn’t 6 weeks ago let alone 6 months ago.
 

GimmeShelter

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
I wouldn't argue for binning it, more like we need to complement it. We really should be capable of altering formations and offering different threats according to the game in front of us.
We don’t need to bin it, that formation will do us well in Europe and against the tarriers.

It’s just not working anymore on teams that play a low block against us.
 

SOB-WATP

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
I can't face watching the same 433 pish we've seen time and time again... it clearly isnt working right now and it's time to try something different.

I think kind of diamond 442 at Ibrox is our best bet.

When in possession it would look like this..

___________________McGregor

___________Goldson__________Katic

____________________Davis

Tav_________Jack__________Arfield________Barisic

____________________Hagi

____________Morelos_____Kamberi


I'm sick of us giving these diddy teams respect at Ibrox with a flat 3 of Davis Jack Kamara... it plays right into their hands.

Out of possession it looks like...

__________________McGregor

Tav________Goldson________Katic_________Barisic

___________________Davis
_____________Jack________Arfield

___________________Hagi

____________Morelos_____Kamberi


Tav and Barisic would be the key to this working.. it also means when Morelos runs the channels we'll still have bodies in the box which isnt happening just now.
 

Renfrew@UKGB&NI

Well-Known Member
....I'm guessing it's because of the tarrier's recent run of form?

Let's remember this was no tactical masterpiece from Lennon, it was forced upon him.

His 1st choice right back (El Ahmed) was injured and so was his 2nd choice (Frimpong).

He doesn't trust Bauer, so he decided to go with 3 central defenders and play Forrest at right wing back and Taylor (usually) at left wing back.

To be fair, he had the bottle to drop his attacking mid (Christie) and play 3 more central mids in Brown, McGregor and Ntcham.

He's also got 2 strikers who are more comfortable playing in a partnership, rather than on their own.

Gerrard has been without Tav since December and Jack since ht at Tynecastle.
He also lost Borna at Hamilton.

You can argue that Gerrard should've done what Lennon did and adjusted his formation to suit the players he had available.

However, if Borna is fit, for the 1st time this year he now has the personnel to play the same formation that was scoring for fun and winning consistently in Scotland and Europe.

Should we go with.....

McGregor
Tav Goldson Katic Barisic
Jack Davis Kamara
Hagi Kent
Morelos

It's maybe harsh on Arfield, Aribo and Stewart, but they're great options from the bench.

Remember, apart from Hagi, that's the players who destroyed Celtic at the piggery and won consistently in Scotland and Europe and were scoring for fun.

Should we not go back to it, now they are all available again?

If not, why not?
Thank God for you mearns. Your posts help with the insanity that happens on here and actually gives us a proper football debate.
 

Dotty_84

Well-Known Member
Nor do I, I actually think our Formation is bang on, for me it's how we utilise it. 3 of our 4 Hamilton goals came from the wide left.

Last year Candeias and Tav were a good partnership. Why aren't we using the width our advantage?

Borna and Kent should be hugging that touchline and overlaps should be made. It should be mirrored on the right too but since Candeias has gone and no successor to his role mixed management wanting Kent and RW tucked in.

We as a threat has regressed. If a team sit back with a bank of 4 and 5 then logic screams you need to open up space to create chances. Nope not us, we went narrow and I see the reason, right? Attacking threats are nearer to the goal.

But there's a glaring error with this, we're asking but one question to the Opposition.. Can you keep compact and not let us break you down?

We need to ask more, what we need is players wide running at the Full backs and their Team mate seeing this trouble and pulling out of position whilst Arfield and Aribo push into this vacated space. Now we're asking more questions.

Playing narrow allows Opposition Fullbacks to tuck in narrower it also negates that other player to pull from position or far less a distance from his natural defensive position, so we're not asking questions.

And teams no matter how bad, if you are giving them one task of being compact and defend then it's manageable, give them a task where they have to be tactically astute on the wing but if that fails they have be ready when it comes in centre or suddenly switched left to right and with our midfield runners. Can they handle that? I don't think so.
 

SOB-WATP

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
Are we really worried about "our midfield being over ran" at home by the majority of dross in this league?
It's a ridiculous argument to make for not dropping the 3 in the middle.

The majority of teams that come to Ibrox skip the midfield with balls up to the striker or into the channels.
 

Renfrew@UKGB&NI

Well-Known Member
I think we're a good team, a very good team, but the ferguson article hits it bang on for me.

As much as I dislike scott brown, he doesn't allow the players in the team to get their heads down. I noticed it in the game at parkhead. He might not have had a great game but he pushes them on when he gets the ball. I still say, if he wasnt playing that day we'd have had a comfortable 2 or 3 goal margin victory.
 

TheBlueBlazerV3

Well-Known Member
We could really do with two strikers up front.

The two number 10’s playing behind Alfie isnt working at the moment, they simply don’t contribute enough.

And as we are finding out, when Alfie isnt on top of his game we really struggle.
Completely agree with the 2 up, Kamberi and Morelos with Hagi off of them would do I think
 

Blue and True.

Active Member
Formations in a football match are fluid I guarantee if we went 3 at the back they would go 3 up top..They been forced into their change by us.
 

barrheadbear

Well-Known Member
Something needs to change starting tomorrow, the fans have lost belief in the side and worryingly, the comments and demeanour of SG hint that he might feel the same way.

We are far too passive, in fact the lack of pace and aggression is of great concern. No one seems to want to grab the game by the scruff of the neck, it is play safe, play the side pass. Only confidence from a winning run will bring that back into our play.

Whether by accident or design Celtic have found a new formation playing 3 at the back and a two pronged strike partnership which is reaping rewards with convincing wins week in week out. Should we try it?

Highly unlikely as SG is firmly wedded to 4-3-3 system. He tried 3 at back in only our 2nd away league game at Fir Park and it hasn't reared its head since.

My gripe is far to often we guilty of leaving Alfie completely isolated. Alfie as our lone striker works fine when he is on song but when not we really are impotent in attack. It is oft repeated that Alfie cannot play with a partner but IMHO we should be moving one of our no. 10s a good deal closer to him so that he is not hunting alone. Personally I drop Kent and give that role to the criminally underused Greg Stewart, who continually shows he has an eye for goal.

Don't think we have the depth of squad to make wholesale changes but tomorrows starting 11 will be interesting.
 

tazzabear

Well-Known Member
Mearns has posted the assist stats for Tav and BB. That means we are getting a lot of quality balls into the box. If 3 at the back gets us another striker in the box I'd give it a go. I know we paid a lot of money for Kent but he's not giving us much and needs benched. He's young and will come back.

My biggest gripe is the managers lack of imagination with subs. If you're a goal up away from home and just want to see the game out you stick a defensive type player on around 65 minutes. Obviously you hold back an attacking option in case it goes wrong. Likewise you do the opposite if you're level. It's as if he just doesn't trust his bench.
Thing is, we‘d weathered the “Kilmarnock storm“ and were probably back on top when we lost the goal.
 

Recoba

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
It won't matter what formation we play until our players wakeup and show a better attitude and have more desire.
 

JCDarcheville

Well-Known Member
It is a good option against teams who play a low block. Much more aggressive.
How is having 3 centre halves more aggressive? Our full backs play very high, 3 at the back is a negative move, you take an attacker out the team to play an extra defender.
 

CaptainCourageous

Well-Known Member
IIRC Gerrard flirted with a back 3 at Fir Park last season. Didn’t go so well.
One game. We played well, first half especially - Motherwell struggled with our movement and attack. The goals we conceded were down to Goldson slipping and two set pieces conceded. That's not down to formation.

Their 3rd was down to poor marking at a set piece and Gerrard has just brought on McAuley before the corner was delivered.
 

RabSpackman

Well-Known Member
A big issue for me, that you have flagged here MU, is the fact that the tarriers have used injuries to their advantage and have adapted well.

A similar number of injuries pretty much fcuks our entire season.
Formations come & go over a season but players’ attitude is the defining factor in succeeding or failing.

If our lot aren’t playing in a favoured role and have everyone around them playing well they buckle.
Across the city, the players have a different attitude entirely and while their manager may be a vile toad, he understands football and his players will work for him and carry out what he requires of them.

I’m sick of seeing well paid professional footballers in a Rangers shirt getting away with being unable to raise their game or adapt to circumstances being a little less than favourable.
 

Wade Wilson

Well-Known Member
One game. We played well, first half especially - Motherwell struggled with our movement and attack. The goals we conceded were down to Goldson slipping and two set pieces conceded. That's not down to formation.

Their 3rd was down to poor marking at a set piece and Gerrard has just brought on McAuley before the corner was delivered.
That was Lafferty's first game back. Scored twice from memory.

Thought we played really well but looked very shaky at the back. Flanagan was one of the back 3 though.

It was Wallace that was brought on for that final minute
 

MearnsUnionist

Well-Known Member
One game. We played well, first half especially - Motherwell struggled with our movement and attack. The goals we conceded were down to Goldson slipping and two set pieces conceded. That's not down to formation.

Their 3rd was down to poor marking at a set piece and Gerrard has just brought on McAuley before the corner was delivered.

Tbf mate, we started well in that game, but Motherwell were by far the better side 2nd half and missed some good chances before finally getting a late equaliser.

We couldn't keep the ball 2nd half and were pretty much pinned in our own half.
 

Jase

Well-Known Member
One game. We played well, first half especially - Motherwell struggled with our movement and attack. The goals we conceded were down to Goldson slipping and two set pieces conceded. That's not down to formation.

Their 3rd was down to poor marking at a set piece and Gerrard has just brought on McAuley before the corner was delivered.
Fact is we conceded 3 goals. We don’t do that so often.
 

CaptainCourageous

Well-Known Member
Fact is we conceded 3 goals. We don’t do that so often.
We conceded two in midweek, two at Tynecastle, two at Pittodrie. We've won three out our last six league games. It's no surprise people are calling for a change.

Flanagan was on the left side of a back three at Fir Park, we brought on Lee Wallace. Ejaria, Halliday and Lafferty all started. We've got better options these days.

In the second half when we were struggling we brought on Middleton instead of Kent or Candeias for 15 odd minutes and resulted in blootering the ball up the park as Motherwell pushed us deeper and deeper. We resorted to their style of play instead of getting the ball down and moving it about the park.

You can question the way Gerrard used that formation that day. His decision making in choice of personnel was questionable.
 

Drumchapel-Bear

Well-Known Member
Because every time we have a dip during the season all the players are sh*te, the manager has been sussed out and we need to change formation etc. You should know that by now mate.

We have came back from the break really sluggish with injuries to key players and have really struggled. Meanwhile the beggars continue relentlessly and don't look like dropping any points. We have proved now that our strongest team when fit and flying is easily as good it not better than them, but obviously over the course of a season you will get injuries and dips in form etc.

They are better equipped to deal with this as they have a stronger squad overall. That's what a 60m wage bill gets you.

In our last successful era, both us and them had a similar wage bill, now they are double ours.
 

cav

Well-Known Member
Even though we finally have the players back who gave us so much success with it before Dubai mate?

We were cruising with it, pretty much every time Borna and Tav were available.

Domestically and in Europe.
Forgive me for butting in mate but I think the issue with playing our ‘best players’ is that so many of them are badly out of form.

Kent,Davis,Kamara and even to an extent the CB’s and Alfie have all shown highly erratic form of late. I know that’s somewhat simplifying things but individually and collectively we’re just not playing well enough imo.

Unfortunately when that happens fans will look at some aspects to change which are,imo at least- unrealistic.Three at the back requires an incredible amount of repetition in training and practice games to get right- Gerrard trying it off the cuff without doing that will only produce a defensive disaster akin to Motherwell away last season when he did just that.

Don’t get me wrong I’ve no issue with tweaking the system and maybe even sacrificing one of the ‘flat’ three midfielders to push one into a more ten type role instead as I think there’s a valid argument for that in certain games- but three at the back is not the answer,that much I’m convinced of fwiw.
 

Blu_ultra

Well-Known Member
If Celtic go 3 at the back versus us, we'll kill them, twice. All we need to do is play our wingers a wee bit higher up the park and we'll split their defenders. The amount of tines we will get 1-1 will end them. The issue? We might be too far behind by then. Mcleish found o'Neill out initially when he did the same. It was the reason lovenkrands scored so many goals against them.
 

Rule Britannia

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
....I'm guessing it's because of the tarrier's recent run of form?

Let's remember this was no tactical masterpiece from Lennon, it was forced upon him.

His 1st choice right back (El Ahmed) was injured and so was his 2nd choice (Frimpong).

He doesn't trust Bauer, so he decided to go with 3 central defenders and play Forrest at right wing back and Taylor (usually) at left wing back.

To be fair, he had the bottle to drop his attacking mid (Christie) and play 3 more central mids in Brown, McGregor and Ntcham.

He's also got 2 strikers who are more comfortable playing in a partnership, rather than on their own.

Gerrard has been without Tav since December and Jack since ht at Tynecastle.
He also lost Borna at Hamilton.

You can argue that Gerrard should've done what Lennon did and adjusted his formation to suit the players he had available.

However, if Borna is fit, for the 1st time this year he now has the personnel to play the same formation that was scoring for fun and winning consistently in Scotland and Europe.

Should we go with.....

McGregor
Tav Goldson Katic Barisic
Jack Davis Kamara
Hagi Kent
Morelos

It's maybe harsh on Arfield, Aribo and Stewart, but they're great options from the bench.

Remember, apart from Hagi, that's the players who destroyed Celtic at the piggery and won consistently in Scotland and Europe and were scoring for fun.

Should we not go back to it, now they are all available again?

If not, why not?
The flat midfield 3 clearly doesnt work. Weve saw time and again how we struggle to break teams down set up this way. 3 sitting midfielders at Ibrox at Livingston is a farcical set up and the reason why were struggling so bad against the low block.

Drop Kamara out and leave Jack and Davis central. Thats more than enough protection. I would then go either Kent and Hagi behind both Morelos and Kamberi, or at the very least a 3 of Kent, Hagi & Stewart/Airfield behind Morelos.
 

Gers11

Well-Known Member
....I'm guessing it's because of the tarrier's recent run of form?

Let's remember this was no tactical masterpiece from Lennon, it was forced upon him.

His 1st choice right back (El Ahmed) was injured and so was his 2nd choice (Frimpong).

He doesn't trust Bauer, so he decided to go with 3 central defenders and play Forrest at right wing back and Taylor (usually) at left wing back.

To be fair, he had the bottle to drop his attacking mid (Christie) and play 3 more central mids in Brown, McGregor and Ntcham.

He's also got 2 strikers who are more comfortable playing in a partnership, rather than on their own.

Gerrard has been without Tav since December and Jack since ht at Tynecastle.
He also lost Borna at Hamilton.

You can argue that Gerrard should've done what Lennon did and adjusted his formation to suit the players he had available.

However, if Borna is fit, for the 1st time this year he now has the personnel to play the same formation that was scoring for fun and winning consistently in Scotland and Europe.

Should we go with.....

McGregor
Tav Goldson Katic Barisic
Jack Davis Kamara
Hagi Kent
Morelos

It's maybe harsh on Arfield, Aribo and Stewart, but they're great options from the bench.

Remember, apart from Hagi, that's the players who destroyed Celtic at the piggery and won consistently in Scotland and Europe and were scoring for fun.

Should we not go back to it, now they are all available again?

If not, why not?
How is it possible to even think about dropping Arfield, he's the only player who's scoring goals from the midfield.Shooting from distance is the only way were going to overcome these teams, that play a low block system against us.
It's about time others in the team, put their pennys worth in, and tried to do the same as Scotty Arfield.
All they do is tippy tappy football hoping to score the perfect goal.Well as we now know, this isn't working for us, so it's now time for change i think.omo
 

MearnsUnionist

Well-Known Member
Forgive me for butting in mate but I think the issue with playing our ‘best players’ is that so many of them are badly out of form.

Kent,Davis,Kamara and even to an extent the CB’s and Alfie have all shown highly erratic form of late. I know that’s somewhat simplifying things but individually and collectively we’re just not playing well enough imo.

Unfortunately when that happens fans will look at some aspects to change which are,imo at least- unrealistic.Three at the back requires an incredible amount of repetition in training and practice games to get right- Gerrard trying it off the cuff without doing that will only produce a defensive disaster akin to Motherwell away last season when he did just that.

Don’t get me wrong I’ve no issue with tweaking the system and maybe even sacrificing one of the ‘flat’ three midfielders to push one into a more ten type role instead as I think there’s a valid argument for that in certain games- but three at the back is not the answer,that much I’m convinced of fwiw.

Kamara was MOTM on the plastic at Hamilton @cav and then was left out against Killie, again on plastic.

Seemed a strange one to me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cav

MearnsUnionist

Well-Known Member
How is it possible to even think about dropping Arfield, he's the only player who's scoring goals from the midfield.Shooting from distance is the only way were going to overcome these teams, that play a low block system against us.
It's about time others in the team, put their pennys worth in, and tried to do the same as Scotty Arfield.
All they do is tippy tappy football hoping to score the perfect goal.Well as we now know, this isn't working for us, so it's now time for change i think.omo

I'm an Arfield fan mate and it's a tough call.

Him, Kamara and Jack were outstanding in the LC Final and never gave the tarrier midfield a kick.

Equally, Davis, Jack and Kamara dominated at the piggery too.

Any 3 of the 4 is fine for me.

We'd absolutely no problem breaking the defensive teams down with them either, as long as Tav and Borna were both playing.

That's the key.
 
Top