BlueStevie35
Player Valuation: £70m
2 are injured so in reality we have 4
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We have to get back to a four man defence
- Thread starter davek
- Start date
- Status
So my take is pretty simple. The formation is not the issue, the lack of focal point is.
Not having someone who can hold the ball up then limits our ability to push up as a unit because if we did, one pass would leave our midfield miles out the game and we’d be overloaded easily
I think his idea is to have a striker who is able to play with his back to goal, allowing the midfielders to move up and the wingbacks to overlap, using the “inside forwards” to isolate the space between opponents CBs and FBs
Going 4-3-3 with Gordon Gray and McNeil causes the same issues, with the added issue of being even more vulnerable at the back
It’s clear as day that Rondon is utter gash to perform a basic job that is required of him
But, yanno, who knows
Not having someone who can hold the ball up then limits our ability to push up as a unit because if we did, one pass would leave our midfield miles out the game and we’d be overloaded easily
I think his idea is to have a striker who is able to play with his back to goal, allowing the midfielders to move up and the wingbacks to overlap, using the “inside forwards” to isolate the space between opponents CBs and FBs
Going 4-3-3 with Gordon Gray and McNeil causes the same issues, with the added issue of being even more vulnerable at the back
It’s clear as day that Rondon is utter gash to perform a basic job that is required of him
But, yanno, who knows
I agree
But...
We may have signed him to give us the option to do 3 or 4 - but 2 injuries put paid to that.
The Back 4 devils advocate-ish view
4 becomes 2 as soon as the fullback push up - which they do.
A Defensive Midfielder...think Barry??...Onana...drops back and patrols just in front
Bingo! a Back 3 again.
Q) But is it really?
A) Not really, it more a Back 4-lite...remember the fullback have more than likely pushed up.
My conclusion; A Back 4 can also be a Back 3, But unless Coady turns into a better player...having better players in front of him might help.
A Back 3...without a top central defender to do the Barry / Onana job - is just a crapper version of back 4
(Did I mention Back 4 ??)
D
Deleted member 48881
Guest
Rare times that I agree with dave K
GoldenToffee
Player Valuation: £60m
Couldn't agree more, although I'd first give a go to Vinegar at left wing back and drop Mykolenko since it looks like Frank will stick with 5 at all costs. Vinegar and Patterson can offer us a great threat going forward, but obviously it will count for nothing if we don't have a striker up there.
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
Lampard played this back 4 against United last season and we were solid:
Coleman Keane Godfrey Mykolenko
(with Allan Delph Iwobi in front of them)
...and against City where we were very comfortable and unlucky lose:
Coleman Holgate Keane Kenny
(with Allan and Doucoure in front of them)
...so no one is going to tell me that we cant make 4 at the back work with Tarkowski's addition to the back four.
You just need defenders who are going to defend and some protection in front of them if the FBs get up in attack. And that'll be even more the case if we add Gueye to Onana in midfield in the coming days.
ForeverEverton
Player Valuation: £50m
I believe Thelwell is building this club with the 5 at the back model, exactly like Wolves and Lampard is following suit. Like I have said if Kevin and Frank think that is the way to go perhaps they should be leaving....
All that needs screwing up and building as a 4-3-3, also Lampard talks about being tactically "fluid". I don`t know another team that is successful doing that, why do we think we can be the 1st team to do this?
Look at every team in the PL, every game you know what shape they will use,
Liverpool 4-3-3
Man City 4-3-3
Arsenal 4-2-3-1
Man Utd 4-3-3
West Ham 4-1-4-1/4-3-3
Leicester City 4-2-3-1
Newcastle 4-3-3
Crystal Palace 4-1-4-1/4-3-3
Villa 4-3-3/4-4-2 Diamond
Southampton 4-4-2/4-2-2-2
Leeds 4-2-3-1
The teams that play 5 at the back
Spurs & Chelsea, £bn`s spent on genuine world class players to make it work, we cant spend and don`t have them players.
Brighton
Wolves - Binned it off this season
davek
Player Valuation: £150m
Spot on mate. Great post.
Lampard has never played it until he got here. Thelwell pretty much joins the same time as Lampard and then Frank is alternating between what he's always done and this 3 CB monstrosity.
Lampard is the manager and he lives or dies here on results. I suggest he takes charge of how this team sets up. Quickly.
ForeverEverton
Player Valuation: £50m
Dying to use it in every game wasnt he, had to save gams by going 4-3-3 at half time or late on, ring any bells.
5 at the back got us 4 points last year, 4 got us 16, that wont change, the 5 at the back will see Frank sacked this season.
Blueclouds
Player Valuation: £35m
You need a striker amd 2 wingers to play 5 at the back, maybe gana and the new kid will be the midfield.
Mr Happy
Player Valuation: £20m
Tripe.
GrandOldSte117
Player Valuation: £20m
I'd be all for this back 5 if we were keeping clean sheets with it
The binman chronicles
Player Valuation: £80m
The point is to have two attacking full backs. Part of the reason we are so bad is we are playing two wingers on top of the full backs leaving nothing in the middle.
ForeverEverton
Player Valuation: £50m
Played 4-3-3 against Newcastle at home and West Ham away where just mistakes let us down, 2nd half v Palace, away at Liverpool, home to Leicester, home to Leeds....
It immediately improves our chances of points.
- Status