Time for a back 4

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

LJBlade said:
The person I replied to originally was talking about playing 4 in midfield, with McAtee as one of the wingers. If you can’t see how different that is to how Man City play then I can’t see us getting much further.

For what it’s worth though, Grealish isn’t a winger, he never has been. And you can’t say anything about skipping comments 😂
Click to expand...
I think you’ll find he’s definitely a winger. Not sure what other position you think he plays tbh.
 

Slim Man said:
I think you’ll find he’s definitely a winger. Not sure what other position you think he plays tbh.
Click to expand...

He plays on the left hand side of an attacking 3. He doesn’t play as a winger in a 4 does he? The person I originally replied to suggested we should play McAtee there.
 
LJBlade said:
He plays on the left hand side of an attacking 3. He doesn’t play as a winger in a 4 does he? The person I originally replied to suggested we should play McAtee there.
Click to expand...
Wingers only play in a 4? Right. Ok. They don’t. This is boring.
 
I was looking at the formations Brentford used over the last season and they have two clear formations - 433 when they think they can beat a team, and a more defensive 532 when they're playing one of the big boys. I also remember Man City changing their formation to 3 at the back when they played us in our first season back in the Premier League, so I don't think it's out of the question that a team shouldn't have a variety of formations to suit a particular situation. I also think 433 or 4231 is the 'modern' way of playing if you want a chance of beating the teams you 'should' be beating.

Unfortunately for us, everything from training to recruitment is geared to one way of playing in any situation, which makes it a little predictable and not very adaptable. The only time we switch to a back 4 is when we're chasing a game, so there's not much pressure on the defence anyway. I think the only defender who would know his role in a back 4 is Luke Thomas (Trusty typically played either LCB in a 3 or LB in a 4 for Birmingham). I think Baldock would probably be a very good RB, but if we think the defence is a bit shaky now, how would Egan, Anel or Robbo cope in the middle with one less man than they're used to and facing world class strikers?

With that said, I don't think the problem is in defence but in midfield. At the moment, we're playing Hamer, Norwood and Souza, which is completely unbalanced. Norwood has been played in the middle and drops very very deep, meaning Souza is LCM or RCM (depending on which WB he's covering for) which I don't think is his natural position. I'm not sure any of them know exactly where they're supposed to be and it's leaving gaps when defending and not enough support when attacking.

McAtee fixes that problem, as surely he comes in for one of Souza or Norwood, meaning we have a balanced midfield again like we did with Lundstram and Fleck. So while I think coaching the team to play with 4 at the back makes complete tactical sense, I don't think we should panic and change to an unnatural formation just yet - let's see how we get on with McAtee in the team first...
 
Slim Man said:
Wingers only play in a 4? Right. Ok. They don’t. This is boring.
Click to expand...

When did I say that?

I was replying to the person who suggested we play McAtee left wing in a midfield 4, you decided to stick your oar in and take the conversation on a very weird tangent.
 
It'd be handy if we had the option of different formations using the same players, like today we could have switched to a back four with Robinson at left back and Larouci on the left of midfield and moved Hamer over to the other side, or after Basham came on, we could have gone to a back 4 for a bit with him pushing on into midfield, with the option to then revert to the normal back three.

The problem with a back 4 is the same as it's always been since people have been suggesting it, we're horribly exposed to pace and balls over the top. With 4 at the back instead of 5 that makes it even worse and if your two in front of the centre backs are Vini and Norwood either way, it doesn't really do anything to strengthen the team defensively. Going forward it would be better though and there's no obvious way to get both McAtee and Hamer in the same team without dropping either a striker or a centre back (unless we go insane and drop Norwood).

Grealish is more of a winger than Beckham ever was, he never beat a man in his life.
 
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'd prefer to see us adopt something siimilar to Pep's tactic of adjusting formation with vs without the ball. Keep the existing 5-3-2 without the ball. However, when we do have it I'd like to see Anel step into a dm role alongside Norwood. This would allow Souza & Hamer more freedom to push higher up the pitch. Hamer in particular can then show between opposition lines and be an outlet. LWB & RWB can still push forward because Anel won't be too far forward that he can't provide some level of cover.

I.e. once with the ball we look like this:

Baldock-Egan-JLT-Thomas
-------Anel - Norwood--------
---Hamer-----------Souza
-------McBurnie-Archer
 
ChemEngBlade said:
I'd prefer to see us adopt something siimilar to Pep's tactic of adjusting formation with vs without the ball. Keep the existing 5-3-2 without the ball. However, when we do have it I'd like to see Anel step into a dm role alongside Norwood. This would allow Souza & Hamer more freedom to push higher up the pitch. Hamer in particular can then slow between opposition lines and be an outlet. LWB & RWB can still push forward because Anel won't be too far forward that he can't provide some level of cover.

I.e. once with the ball we look like this:

Baldock-Egan-JLT-Thomas
Anel - Norwood
Hamer Souza
McBurnie-Archer
Click to expand...
Anything that results in us not being as rigid will do me. Souza couldn’t play there though
 
Slim Man said:
Anything that results in us not being as rigid will do me. Souza couldn’t play there though
Click to expand...
I don't see why not, he's comfortable taking shots from range and would get opportunities to do so from there
 
ChemEngBlade said:
I'd prefer to see us adopt something siimilar to Pep's tactic of adjusting formation with vs without the ball. Keep the existing 5-3-2 without the ball. However, when we do have it I'd like to see Anel step into a dm role alongside Norwood. This would allow Souza & Hamer more freedom to push higher up the pitch. Hamer in particular can then show between opposition lines and be an outlet. LWB & RWB can still push forward because Anel won't be too far forward that he can't provide some level of cover.

I.e. once with the ball we look like this:

Baldock-Egan-JLT-Thomas
-------Anel - Norwood--------
---Hamer-----------Souza
-------McBurnie-Archer
Click to expand...
Lacks creativity. No place for McAtee?
 
If I had to fit our current team into a 4 at the back, I'd probably go with this...

1693699574204.png

McBurnie in the 'Akpom' role behind Archer, and Davies over Norwood as I think he's a bit better defensively (altho Norwood would probably do there as well). Defence I'm not really sure about apart from Thomas and Baldock. Who would be the best pair in the middle?
 
As I said earlier, changing formation with so many new players is too much too soon. We have too many lads struggling to adjust to the different skills and intensity required for any PL team.
Some players are still not match fit, others are still integrating to the club, and most realise that the athleticism and pace of the EPL is much higher.

Even our own players with previous PL experience are finding life difficult, as they have aged and they are facing bigger, stronger and younger players at this level. Egan, Norwood and Bash all finding it harder as they get older.

Have some patience with Souza, Slimane, Traore and Trusty, giving them time to adjust to the club, the league and personal skills and standards.Traore and Larruci are still young development players and we expect them to fit in too soon. Tom Davies has experience at EPL, but is struggling with personal fitness and game time.

Please be patient with individuals before suggesting such radical formation changes. A back 4 is a useful option, but the players are not PL ready yet. Tactical and formation tweaks will come later.

Plenty for coaches to work on before any other changes are appropriate.
 
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 couldn’t agree more and would go so far as to say that if we persist with the present system as Wilder stubbornly did in our second PL season , then our chances of survival are at best remote .

In the past when I and a few others have put forward this suggestion , the counter argument was always that it was in our DNA to play in this formation and didn’t have the players to do otherwise . This argument overlooked the fact that the initial success of our approach was a) as a result of it’s element of surprise and b) the outstanding contribution made to it’s success by a number of players at their absolute prime , notably JOC , Enda , Bash and Baldock .

Both those scenarios are long gone and the reality is that without either , we are struggling to retain possession and link defence into attack and are reduced to hitting hopeful long balls , already the most of any in the PL , whilst at the same time offering acres of space to the opposition midfield .

It is surely no coincidence that most of the successful teams both in England and abroad use a 4-2-3-1 formation and the sooner we adopt that line up the better imo , and one which our current squad is ideally equipped to embrace and make a success of .
 
Last edited:
This is the best formation for the players at our disposal. The problem we are having is our left side due to lack of quality and height. It isn't tactical. You concede poor goals from set pieces and basic balls into your box at any level of football and you get punished. You give the ball away in poor areas and you get punished more often the higher up the pyramid you go (see Larouchi for Man City's second goal). We are being undermined by conceding shocking goals.

I give a pass for Palace for the ridiculous side we put out, but this explains both goals vs Forest. The disallowed goal we conceded from a corner vs Man City. Goal number one today. The last Everton goal was quality. A Premier League quality goal.

Some points we have dropped late on are probably fitness and squad depth related. Legs have gone and we don't have the bench to change it. Forest is an obvious example

For me Larouchi needs to come out for the new lad and Trusty has to come in for Robbo - even if it's harsh on Robbo.. More height, pace and strength is needed on that left side.

Reasons for optimism:

Lads are looking fitter.The likes of Souza and Harmer were on their knees after previous games but finished strongly yesterday. Mcburnie completed the game.

Signs of a burgeoning partnership between Archer and Mcburnie

Macca is still to come in leaving us an able midfielder on the bench.

It's all about scraping enough points to push on in January, hopefully with quality new ownership that will rectify squad quality/depth. I expect a low points total to stay up (30-35) so plenty to play for.
 
Last edited:

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 NOT the worst team in the division
They outplayed wolves and Fulham and created more chances per game than we have in four
Maybe our back three defenders aren’t that good -
Going to a four with Trusty and Anel - Trust can’t get on as a sub so how can you judge he’s competent yet from one game against a league one side ?
 
A 442 diamond would probably work for us, given the players we have available. As people have said, we can’t do a classic 442 as we’ve no wingers.
 
ATL Recs said:
Everton are NOT the worst team in the division
They outplayed wolves and Fulham and created more chances per game than we have in four
Maybe our back three defenders aren’t that good -
Going to a four with Trusty and Anel - Trust can’t get on as a sub so how can you judge he’s competent yet from one game against a league one side ?
Click to expand...
He can play in a 4, it’s all Birmingham used last season and we won their POTY. It’s worth a try. I know we’re terrified to change things for some reason but we are allowed to try.
 
—————Wes—————
Baldock-Anel-Trusty-Thomas
—————Souza—————
———-Davies—Hamer——-
—————McAtee————-
———McBurnie—Archer——

I could see something like this working. Davies and Hamer both self-confessed box to box players. Souza protecting the defence if either full back goes forward. Let’s face it, George is generally quite poor going forwards, so I don’t think it’s a huge loss having him drop back more.

Can easily change it to a 352 by taking a midfielder off for a centre half.
 
For me it's not so much the formation. It's the personnel.

We're simply not getting to grips with the speed yesterday. We didn't cope with how quickly they moved the ball about and in possession we didn't move the ball quickly enough. Souza looks a unit and a good addition but him and Norwood together gives you absolutely no pace in the middle of the park, so you're chasing shadows against players who aren't even particularly nippy but are certainly faster than them two. Norwood is always going to require an extra bit of time on the ball because he's mostly looking for that long pass, which can lead to him getting closed down and forcing the ball backwards.

Norwood isn't crap by any stretch of the imagination but we play a certain way when he plays and it's just not quite going to cut the mustard this year. This was why I was gutted to learn we weren't going to get Doyle. He received the ball from deep, turned quickly and made a pass. We moved the ball forward better. We win that game yesterday if Doyle plays alongside Souza.

So you can fiddle and tinker with the formation and all that but I feel that if you're playing them two together then it's likely to result in problems during matches in the fastest league in the world. But who would we play in CM if Norwood was dropped and would they be any better?

The window has shut and, for me, it's looking like we still don't quite have the staff to get us out of trouble. Even if a few come back off the treatment table I still think we needed more players.

I do wonder when we'll eventually see the back of 3-5-2, though. Said as much in the pub yesterday.
 
IMG_0398.png

That would be my go to. We don’t have wingers granted. But I feel this formation would be ideal. Retains a cdm.
 
Really don't know what I'd change because I've always liked the 3/5 at back.

One thing that stood out to me yesterday was after HT Everton got in behind us at least three times in the first 10, you could tell the goal was coming.
 
I donk know. It could be too early for a formation change.

If Larouci kicks the ball out against Citeh and McB scores that at the end yesterday, we would be sat in 13th place above Fulham.

Fine margins.

Give it another 6 games to see if the team gels more and if Mcatee has a positive impact.

Look at tactics and formations then.

*Also, just can't ever see Egan being left out of the squad.
 
I understand the argument in theory for a back 4.

I also totally see what the likes of Deadbat observe in the midfield being dominated.

Tbh I think it’s been more of a physical thing so far. Doucoure and Onana were awesome yesterday. Most teams have big strong athletes that are also very good footballers.

Bissouma is gonna do it on his own.

If… and only in theory… we went to a back 4 to provide more numbers in midfield, I’d expect Hecky to go with the Christmas tree or 4-2-2-2

Baldock - Anel - Egan - Thomas
Souza - Norwood - Hamer
——Archer - MacAtee
———McBurnie

OR

Baldock - Anel - Egan - Thomas
——-Souza - Norwood
Hamer ————-- McAtee
——McBurnie - Archer

BUT I am concerned where the width comes from with either!
 
We certainly need to be much more willing to switch to a back 4 during games, if not from the start

There have been many times where I've felt we've needed to do this to stabilise and plug the gaps

I don't think it hinders our attacking later in games either, when we're often going more direct
 
The OP doesn't make any sense. You say
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...
Right. So presumably if we move to a back 4 we'll need to play with wingers. Who are those wingers? You say we have the players to change formation, but we clearly don't.

It would also mean that Bogle and Larouci would have to play as conventional full backs. They're clearly not suited to that.

I can't understand how shoving a bunch of square pegs in round holes would be better than playing in a formation that all the players were recruited for.

I also can't quite fathom why we should rip everything up and start again 4 games into the season. Because to my eyes, we've improved every match up until now.
 
Proper Blade said:
The OP doesn't make any sense. You say

Right. So presumably if we move to a back 4 we'll need to play with wingers. Who are those wingers? You say we have the players to change formation, but we clearly don't.

It would also mean that Bogle and Larouci would have to play as conventional full backs. They're clearly not suited to that.

I can't understand how shoving a bunch of square pegs in round holes would be better than playing in a formation that all the players were recruited for.

I also can't quite fathom why we should rip everything up and start again 4 games into the season. Because to my eyes, we've improved every match up until now.
Click to expand...
Back 4’s don’t need wingers, how many times does that need repeating.

Bogle played right back for Derby, never wing back. Larouci I’ll be fine if doesn’t play for us again. Fortunately Thomas and Baldock will be our first choices and they’re very much conventional full backs.
 

S64 Blade said:
—————Wes—————
Baldock-Anel-Trusty-Thomas
—————Souza—————
———-Davies—Hamer——-
—————McAtee————-
———McBurnie—Archer——

I could see something like this working. Davies and Hamer both self-confessed box to box players. Souza protecting the defence if either full back goes forward. Let’s face it, George is generally quite poor going forwards, so I don’t think it’s a huge loss having him drop back more.

Can easily change it to a 352 by taking a midfielder off for a centre half.
Click to expand...
That works.

Or for me 4-2-2-2 works too. Back 4 of Baldock, Anel, Trusty (our only 2 who can effectively play in a back 4) and Thomas, 2 defensive midfielders protecting (take your pick from Souza and Hamer or if required further up then Norwood/Davies can battle it out for the other one). They act as a pivot and also protect the whole back line.

Then you have 2 wide attacking midfielders and this is where the issue lies, we only have one proper one in Mcatee. But I do think Hamer could play one of the roles. Potentially Traore even though he was crap yesterday, Brooks, Slimane. There’s a few options for that but none may be good enough granted. They act as wide attackers like last years 2 10’s for me; with plenty defensive responsibility to go with attacking output.

Then obviously Archburnie upfront.
 
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