Sorry, move that defender forwards.
You suggested playing wingbacks.
....................................Beto
.......Ndiaye ..........Lindstrom........Young
Mykolenko .......................................... Gueye
................................Mangala
..........Tarkowski .......Keane ...........Patterson
Can you not see how open we are to any counter at all in this set-up? By bringing on Branthwaite to deal with any pacey counters he has closed a hole and allowed us to push up more. Young was occupying more forward spaces anyway as we pushed for the equaliser. Amd I'm not sure what you've seen of Lindstrom yet (I've seen absolutely nothing of him beyong what he's done in an Everton shirt) but I don't see him having the work rate to add any strength into what would be a faily open midfield area, one that we'd not really had control of all game.
We are just going to fundamentally disagree on this, and that's cool. Would I normally condone moving a CH into a striking role? Not at all, but I can see why he made the decision he did, when he did, so I find it difficult to berate him to hard on this occasion.
Had he taken McNiel off and moved Keane forward as an unforced change, regardless of whether it paid off or not, I'd be questioning it as well.
That’s not the formation I suggested at all.
Pickford
Keane Tarkowski Branthwaite
Patterson Mangala Gueye Mykolenko
Lindstrom Beto Ndiaye
The front 3 are a proper front 3 in this setup and Ndiaye isn’t playing as an auxiliary full back, which by default makes us more attacking. Patterson opens the pitch up and allows us to have width on both sides. Mangala and Gueye in midfield means we are secure and not susceptible to counters. There were alternatives available to the manager that weren’t throwing the big centre back up front and looking like a pub side.