Time for a back 4

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Slim Man

Slim Man

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
5,691
Reaction score
7,639
Argue with yourselves if you want I won’t be hearing opposing views (I’m joking)

Good performance against probably the worst team in the division. Caused us plenty of problems and we have conceded 2 goals.

We need a back 4. We are getting killed by numbers in midfield at the minute which in turn is leading to an overload and making the defence look shocking. We are conceding too many goals to give ourselves a chance of winning games. Down our flanks and particularly our right today we are being completely outnumbered, in the middle there’s always someone of the opposition free and taking the ball when we are pressing - it’s not today it’s been every game.

You shouldn’t be pinned back by Everton like we were today, but our gaps meant we could overload in different areas which meant they could keep us in our own half for long periods. Including the first 10/15 mins after half time.

Baldock - Anel - Trusty - Thomas should be a competent back 4 with a Souza screen Infront of them. And it allows us to get all our inventive players on the pitch in their respective preferred positions.

I think now is the time to cut away from Wilderball for once and for all. And I think we have the players to do so.
 

Slim Man said:
Argue with yourselves if you want I won’t be hearing opposing views (I’m joking)

Good performance against probably the worst team in the division. Caused us plenty of problems and we have conceded 2 goals.

We need a back 4. We are getting killed by numbers in midfield at the minute which in turn is leading to an overload and making the defence look shocking. We are conceding too many goals to give ourselves a chance of winning games. Down our flanks and particularly our right today we are being completely outnumbered, in the middle there’s always someone of the opposition free and taking the ball when we are pressing - it’s not today it’s been every game.

You shouldn’t be pinned back by Everton like we were today, but our gaps meant we could overload in different areas which meant they could keep us in our own half for long periods. Including the first 10/15 mins after half time.

Baldock - Anel - Trusty - Thomas should be a competent back 4 with a Souza screen Infront of them. And it allows us to get all our inventive players on the pitch in their respective preferred positions.

I think now is the time to cut away from Wilderball for once and for all. And I think we have the players to do so.
Click to expand...
Everton are worse than Luton? Or Burnley? Or Bournemouth?

We don’t have good enough players to play 4-4-2, we also have no wingers.
 
Gavlar said:
Everton are worse than Luton? Or Burnley? Or Bournemouth?

We don’t have good enough players to play 4-4-2, we also have no wingers.
Click to expand...
Bournemouth are plenty better than Everton, yeah.

Who said 4-4-2, that’s not the only 4 at the back formation.
 
Slim Man said:
Argue with yourselves if you want I won’t be hearing opposing views (I’m joking)

Good performance against probably the worst team in the division. Caused us plenty of problems and we have conceded 2 goals.

We need a back 4. We are getting killed by numbers in midfield at the minute which in turn is leading to an overload and making the defence look shocking. We are conceding too many goals to give ourselves a chance of winning games. Down our flanks and particularly our right today we are being completely outnumbered, in the middle there’s always someone of the opposition free and taking the ball when we are pressing - it’s not today it’s been every game.

You shouldn’t be pinned back by Everton like we were today, but our gaps meant we could overload in different areas which meant they could keep us in our own half for long periods. Including the first 10/15 mins after half time.

Baldock - Anel - Trusty - Thomas should be a competent back 4 with a Souza screen Infront of them. And it allows us to get all our inventive players on the pitch in their respective preferred positions.

I think now is the time to cut away from Wilderball for once and for all. And I think we have the players to do so.
Click to expand...
I called for a formation change on another post the other day. They seem too static and lost for ideas. All a bit too stubborn.
 
Most of the game today our 3 centre backs had 1 striker to mark but we got absolutely overran (again) in midfield.
It's bonkers how we set up.
I think the defence got better when Egan went off and Anel went central - despite Bash defending like the ball was covered in soap. Don't think he made one clean connection with the ball.
Egan and especially Bash look done to me at this level.
Huge questions for our manager and defensive coach to address. I doubt they will though. They aren't brave enough
Next match it will be 5 at the back and Trusty on the bench again - concede to a header and one crossed from our left side tapped in in the middle (yay)
 
Rudders said:
Most of the game today our 3 centre backs had 1 striker to mark but we got absolutely overran (again) in midfield.
It's bonkers how we set up.
I think the defence got better when Egan went off and Anel went central - despite Bash defending like the ball was covered in soap. Don't think he made one clean connection with the ball.
Egan and especially Bash look done to me at this level.
Huge questions for our manager and defensive coach to address. I doubt they will though. They aren't brave enough
Next match it will be 5 at the back and Trusty on the bench again - concede to a header and one crossed from our left side tapped in in the middle (yay)
Click to expand...
Yep. Mental to me. There’s no need for a back 3 anymore.
 
TomSUFC25 said:
I called for a formation change on another post the other day. They seem too static and lost for ideas. All a bit too stubborn.
Click to expand...
Like talking into a vortex mate
 
Slim Man said:
Like talking into a vortex mate
Click to expand...
Almost like professional footballers have been coached from the under 4s to play one certain formation. Think it’s time for a rethink. When opposition teams have the ball there is so much space in the midfield for them. It’s too easy for them to break through the lines. But of course, you can’t have an opinion unless it suits the narrative.
 
Was also thinking about 4 at the back especially when got to get Jimmy Mac in the team as well.

But more chance of winning lottery back to back than that ever happening.
 
Spent all summer recruiting from 3-5-2. Scouting,’ the ideal players for each position. Wild be nonsensical to pack it all in after 4 games to move to 4 at the back. It’s instantly obvious we don’t have an LB, RB, LW or RW do it just wouldn’t make sense.

I really don’t think the formation is the problem, it’s a combination of small moments not going our way and a more general issue of us having worse players than almost every team we come up against. Formations won’t change that!
 
blader said:
Spent all summer recruiting from 3-5-2. Scouting,’ the ideal players for each position. Wild be nonsensical to pack it all in after 4 games to move to 4 at the back. It’s instantly obvious we don’t have an LB, RB, LW or RW do it just wouldn’t make sense.

I really don’t think the formation is the problem, it’s a combination of small moments not going our way and a more general issue of us having worse players than almost every team we come up against. Formations won’t change that!
Click to expand...

We are dominated in midfield every game. Mostly we are playing better players as you say but we have to see more of the ball. Every time it dropped they got in it around the middle of the field. It was the same in the other games. I'm not sure it's as simple as 4 or 5 at the back but if we don't get hold of the ball more, then we will be constantly under pressure as we have been many games.
 

blader said:
Spent all summer recruiting from 3-5-2. Scouting,’ the ideal players for each position. Wild be nonsensical to pack it all in after 4 games to move to 4 at the back. It’s instantly obvious we don’t have an LB, RB, LW or RW do it just wouldn’t make sense.

I really don’t think the formation is the problem, it’s a combination of small moments not going our way and a more general issue of us having worse players than almost every team we come up against. Formations won’t change that!
Click to expand...
We haven’t. What makes you think that? The only thing we don’t have are proper wingers, but we have 10’s. Plenty of sides play diamonds.
 
blader said:
Spent all summer recruiting from 3-5-2. Scouting,’ the ideal players for each position. Wild be nonsensical to pack it all in after 4 games to move to 4 at the back. It’s instantly obvious we don’t have an LB, RB, LW or RW do it just wouldn’t make sense.

I really don’t think the formation is the problem, it’s a combination of small moments not going our way and a more general issue of us having worse players than almost every team we come up against. Formations won’t change that!
Click to expand...
The formation is a huge problem.
Having a manager who is tactically aware is a huge advantage. It will help get the best out of players who might be mismatched and give them a psychological advantage.
Hecky is a great coach but does not seem to have any tactical matchday nous.
We have had the same tactic and formation for 5 years, its not working and the world has moved on. It's killing us this season so far. There are far too many players marking empty space in our defence and not enough bodies contesting midfield.
As you say we need to stop scouting and recruiting for the system and instead recruit good players and then put them into a formation that maximises our chances of winning.
 
The main problem is we don’t have team that is dynamic and moves about quick enough. We stand like statues and expect Norwood to pick out a player who is stood in between opponents all the time. It is basic coaching that fixes the problem. Just fucking move and create space, it is Sunday league basics.
 
LJBlade said:
Our formation is actually supposed to give us an extra man in midfield.
Click to expand...
Not when they’re all stood in the same place it’s not. And it leaves you totally vulnerable down the flanks
 
blader said:
Spent all summer recruiting from 3-5-2. Scouting,’ the ideal players for each position. Wild be nonsensical to pack it all in after 4 games to move to 4 at the back. It’s instantly obvious we don’t have an LB, RB, LW or RW do it just wouldn’t make sense.

I really don’t think the formation is the problem, it’s a combination of small moments not going our way and a more general issue of us having worse players than almost every team we come up against. Formations won’t change that!
Click to expand...
LB - Thomas
RB - Baldock
RW - Bogle
LW - McAtee

There you go.
 
Deadbat said:
We are dominated in midfield every game. Mostly we are playing better players as you say but we have to see more of the ball. Every time it dropped they got in it around the middle of the field. It was the same in the other games. I'm not sure it's as simple as 4 or 5 at the back but if we don't get hold of the ball more, then we will be constantly under pressure as we have been many games.
Click to expand...

“Many games”.

One of those being Man City, another being when we had Basham and Osborn in midfield? We weren’t constantly under pressure today or against Forest.
 
The problem wouldn’t be moving to a back four, it’s how we set up the other six players ahead of them.

We don’t have the midfielders/wingers to suit 4-4-2, 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1
 
crazyblade1889 said:
LB - Thomas
RB - Baldock
RW - Bogle
LW - McAtee

There you go.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t even need to be wingers. We have the players for a diamond. We can play 2 10’s. Traore is a winger not a striker.
 
Slim Man said:
Not when they’re all stood in the same place it’s not. And it leaves you totally vulnerable down the flanks
Click to expand...

Who was stood in the same place,
Is it more about the players then? Our formation shouldn’t leave us vulnerable down the flanks either, providing we move across quickly enough.
 
YES Blade said:
The problem wouldn’t be moving to a back four, it’s how we set up the other six players ahead of them.

We don’t have the midfielders/wingers to suit 4-4-2, 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1
Click to expand...
We could play a 4-2-2-2. Norwood and Souza sitting, Mcatee and Traore playing behind Archer and McBurnie.
 
LJBlade said:
Who was stood in the same place,
Is it more about the players then? Our formation shouldn’t leave us vulnerable down the flanks either, providing we move across quickly enough.
Click to expand...
Souza and Norwood both want to be deep.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom