Stoke v Everton. 4th March at 19.45.

Just who can save us now?

  • Martinez

    Votes: 30 10.2%

  • No one

    Votes: 47 16.0%

  • Darron Gibson

    Votes: 66 22.5%

  • Garbutt singing a contract

    Votes: 28 9.6%

  • Warsaw

    Votes: 63 21.5%

  • Sniderman

    Votes: 59 20.1%
  • Total voters
    293
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
MoutsGoat said:
Putting on a defender for a midfielder is a defensive move, switching to 3 at the back is also a defensive move.

If we played a balanced side Coleman and Baines would have had plenty of scope all season to bomb on, just like they did last season.
Click to expand...

As I said, the fans often don't recognise when Roberto changes tactics.

Last season, when Baines and Coleman went forward, Barry would fall back - effectively making a back three.

Against Liverpool, Roberto brought on Barkley and Alcaraz for Naismith and Besic. He changed to three at the back - Stones, Jagielka and Alcaraz. The two fullbacks - Coleman and Oviedo - pushed forward as wingbacks, creating more movement on both wings. So it was an attacking change!

And it quickly created a great goal scoring opportunity. Barkley made a long diagonal pass to Coleman racing up unmarked the wing. His shot brought a great save from Mignolet.
 
Stanley Parker said:
As I said, the fans often don't recognise when Roberto changes tactics.

Last season, when Baines and Coleman went forward, Barry would fall back - effectively making a back three.

Against Liverpool, Roberto brought on Barkley and Alcaraz for Naismith and Besic. He changed to three at the back - Stones, Jagielka and Alcaraz. The two fullbacks - Coleman and Oviedo - pushed forward as wingbacks, creating more movement on both wings. So it was an attacking change!

And it quickly created a great goal scoring opportunity. Barkley made a long diagonal pass to Coleman racing up unmarked the wing. His shot brought a great save from Mignolet.
Click to expand...

Your spot on about creating that chance mate. But it was done far too late, what was it 84th minute? Basically not only stifled the life out of them but also out of ourselves and has then continued to use the same formation as if it was something that worked. No good waiting until the last 5 minutes to hope to nick a winner at home regardless of who we are playing
 
maccavennie said:
Your spot on about creating that chance mate. But it was done far too late, what was it 84th minute? Basically not only stifled the life out of them but also out of ourselves and has then continued to use the same formation as if it was something that worked. No good waiting until the last 5 minutes to hope to nick a winner at home regardless of who we are playing
Click to expand...

Thank you. And you are quite right that he made the change very late in the game.

The change made the game more open. The wingbacks going forward left space behind them for Liverpool to counter attack.

Yes, he could have made the change earlier, but Roberto really didn't want to lose that game.

Roberto can make subtle and adventurous changes, but he has been strangely reluctant - or perhaps unable - to make them this season.
 
Stanley Parker said:
0/10 - see me.

The more possession you have, the more fouls you commit - that's in direct proportion.

The more possession you have, the fewer fouls you commit - that's in indirect/inverse proportion.
Click to expand...

Direct proportion? Indirect proportion? Does it matter?

The fact is that you're less likely to commit a foul when you have possession. Keep it simple.
 

Home and Dry said:
I'm not sure we need the wingers at the moment, think we need to be more solid in midfield and grind out a few wins/points.
Click to expand...
Correct. To my mind there's nothing wrong with playing with 3 'defensive' MFs since, the way we set up, that still leaves us with 2 attacking, more inventive, MFs. The problem is that the two attacking MFs (usually selected from Barkley, Naismith, Mirallas, and McGeady) have not been producing regularly enough. The RS play with 3 MFs equally as 'defensive' as ours; the difference is that their Sterling/Coutinho/Sturridge combination ahead of them is so much better than any equivalent combination we've been putting together.
 

mrb85 said:
Correct. To my mind there's nothing wrong with playing with 3 'defensive' MFs since, the way we set up, that still leaves us with 2 attacking, more inventive, MFs. The problem is that the two attacking MFs (usually selected from Barkley, Naismith, Mirallas, and McGeady) have not been producing regularly enough. The RS play with 3 MFs equally as 'defensive' as ours; the difference is that their Sterling/Coutinho/Sturridge combination ahead of them is so much better than any equivalent combination we've been putting together.
Click to expand...
Disagree massively. 3 DM's means that NOBODY is helping out up front. I cannot tell you how many times we would have the ball on the cusp of the opponents 18 yard box and LITERALLY only Lukaku would be in there. Goals win games. 3 DM's mean that nobody is helping out since everyone is back defending.
 
mrb85 said:
Correct. To my mind there's nothing wrong with playing with 3 'defensive' MFs since, the way we set up, that still leaves us with 2 attacking, more inventive, MFs. The problem is that the two attacking MFs (usually selected from Barkley, Naismith, Mirallas, and McGeady) have not been producing regularly enough. The RS play with 3 MFs equally as 'defensive' as ours; the difference is that their Sterling/Coutinho/Sturridge combination ahead of them is so much better than any equivalent combination we've been putting together.
Click to expand...

So you think we can solve our problem by either;

playing a better combination - to be purchased at enormous expense - ahead of the three defensive MFs, or

playing two defensive MFs and another attacking MF already available in our squad to create more in midfield.

And how would you address the question of width?
 
riddick said:
Disagree massively. 3 DM's means that NOBODY is helping out up front. I cannot tell you how many times we would have the ball on the cusp of the opponents 18 yard box and LITERALLY only Lukaku would be in there. Goals win games. 3 DM's mean that nobody is helping out since everyone is back defending.
Click to expand...
How does it work over the park then? They invariably perm 3 DMs out of Leiva, Allen, Henderson, Can and Gerard -- and they still create lots of opportunities. You say that we often get the ball forward but only Lukaku is in the box. Exactly. What's stopping at least our second creative MF getting in there as well? And why wouldn't we be able to get one of the 3 DMs up there with play anyway? Everyone else's DMs get up there and get goals.
 
Deco said:
:( I was joking, but it ruins me that he's offside so much haha!
Click to expand...

Yes, it was just to emphasise your point. 24 offside decisions in 23 PL appearances and climbing!

But it's becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish between subtle posts like yours and earnest but completely misguided posts from others!
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top