Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
nsno-chris said:
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
Click to expand...
I’ve been saying that for a while
 
davek said:
This present system of three is not us and it's not that effective, as seldom do we have five at the back when we have to transition when the ball is with the opposition. It's alien to us and it's showing. We're playing it because of personnel, not because it's a tactical strength. Lampard is frustrated we dont have the people here to go with 4 at the back and 3 in midfield and said so recently.

We conceded yesterday because the players we have just cant work the system and we end up with non-defenders bundling over the opposition to hand pens and victories to them.
Click to expand...

I agree. I think Lampard is still trying to get rid of the players who hold us back. Going forward I imagine the team will be:

Pickford

Patterson Coady Tarkowski Mykolenko

Gana (?) Onana Iwobi

Gordon McNeill

DCL/New striker
 
The binman chronicles said:
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.
Click to expand...

I think you need wingers snd full backs to play 5 at the back with 2 strong players in the middle, why I don't like 5 at the back cos it's based on 2 central midfielders not 3.
 
Blueclouds said:
I think you need wingers snd full backs to play 5 at the back with 2 strong players in the middle, why I don't like 5 at the back cos it's based on 2 central midfielders not 3.
Click to expand...

Nothing stopping you having 3 in midfield with the 5* at the back. Say we sign Gana, him + Onana + one of the wingers we have now playing or Iwobi. Then you have DCL and Dele or Iwobi up top.

If you play Iwobi off the striker when defending we should be able to form a 541. Going forward it would be more of a 3142. Obviously Dele would show more attacking wise so there is a thought where you would perhaps use Iwobi against the top teams and then Dele against the ones we have to break down.

The problem is with that is we would have Dele/McNeil/Gordon/Gray/Townsend/Iwobi all vying for 1 spot - perhaps 2, Which is plainly bad recruitment if that is the case.

If we want a system to help get more of those on the pitch then we need to revert to a 442 or 4411, make sure our full backs are more for defending than attacking, but then you are committing to 2 in the middle with a possibility the the no 10 comes back to make it a 3 in the middle of a 5 man midfield.

Whatever we are doing now doesn't work as the overlapping full backs take up the space where Gray/McNeil and Gordon might do their best work and none are good enough to boss it from the middle.
 

ForeverEverton said:
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.
Click to expand...
Possibly but I'd be intrigued to see if new personnel will make a difference. I don't think we have played too bad this season so far. Just lack quality and with a decent striker you would expect we would have had a few more points.
 
Anyone think a 4 man defence would have won today? I think there was a good chance. None of the new signings barring coady seem familiar with the 3/5 man defence. We were more successful with 4 last season so maybe should have played with that until the new signings are made.
 
johnjoeefc said:
Anyone think a 4 man defence would have won today? I think there was a good chance. None of the new signings barring coady seem familiar with the 3/5 man defence. We were more successful with 4 last season so maybe should have played with that until the new signings are made.
Click to expand...
Imagine basing your system on what some Kopite with a big gob finds comfortable.
 
To me the problem is simple. We struggle to control the midfield at the best of times, but having a 2 in there as opposed to a 3 is madness.

The issue is what do we with Patterson in a 4? Coady? All a bit of a mess.
 

We created 19 chances/ shots on goal today! A back 5 isn’t the problem!

The personnel in attacking positions is!
 
chopper6 said:
We created 19 chances/ shots on goal today! A back 5 isn’t the problem!

The personnel in attacking positions is!
Click to expand...
We did but I don't imagine there will be too many games easier than forest at home this season in the league and we didn't exactly create many clear cut chances. Took pickford to cut them open
 
lieneverton said:
To me the problem is simple. We struggle to control the midfield at the best of times, but having a 2 in there as opposed to a 3 is madness.

The issue is what do we with Patterson in a 4? Coady? All a bit of a mess.
Click to expand...
Coleman RB, play Keane alongside Tarkowski.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top