New Formation Required

[ScottBlade]

We had an off day no need to change a formation thats got us to the top of the league. It's not like we've been shipping goals of late up till now we've generally looked pretty solid defensively, one bad performance and a stinker from Moore doesn't mean we need to go back to the drawing board. A quick change in defensive mentality is all that's needed in a 3-5-2 against teams that pose more of an attacking threat, yesterday we just got the balance wrong is all. The system works we're playing good attacking football scoring for fun it'll be back to business next week no need to panic.

 

[DronnieBlade]

Utter Utter bullocks.

IMHO.

UTB

 

[alcoblade]

No. There was a bit of playing the devils advocate in my OP but I'm also of the opinion that we can improve with a couple of minor changes. I don't see anything radical in that nor do I see it justification for some of the outbursts of vitriol that have been expressed.

Opening with a line of "our formation is a disaster waiting to happen" after the change to it resulted in us going like a train from the bottom to the top doesn't set the debate up well.

 

[Fulwood Blade]

I am staying well out of this thread...............there's enough to comment who like an argument.

UTB

 

[bartman]

Another point to consider

The current formation is more postive and offers better attack options
BUT it leaves us open to be counter attacked by better teams.

It means we're set up to WIN but will get the occasional LOSS.

Where as Clough and Adkins had us set up really cautious so easier to keep things tight
Then hopefully knick a 1-0 or a 2-1. The problem with those managers is when we did go a goal up we'd then start defending and defending really deep in the final minutes.

Draws are no good, so I'd much rather us be postive going for the WIN but being vulnerable.
Attack is the best form of defence.

Agree on the main with that but yesterday the defence and keeper needed to use a bit of game management for about 15 minutes after their second goal. However we went gung ho and lost shape at the back which Walsall took advantage of. Walsall's main tactic was to sit back, wait for Bash and O'Connell to go forward then attack the space behind them .To my mind we should have kept it tight to ensure things don't get worse then go for it in the last twenty. It is easier when we go in front as it is the opposition that then leave space as at Southend.

 

[Grey Blade]

I don't think there is too much wrong with the formation. The three defenders need to be disciplined and and stick to defending an not get sucked forward too much - as they were doing after our initial dominance when Billy hit the bar.

This is where I believe Jake Wright is missed. He constantly organises those around him and I noticed him particularly at Wimbledon haranguing O'Connell to get back and defend when he was charging forward.

 

[NE Blade]

OK I'll throw in my five pen'orth and put the mockers on. That 3-5-2 line up is a disaster waiting to happen. Time after time you can see gaps a mile wide on the flanks and the only reason we haven't been nobbled more often this season is that the opposition has been so fuckin' crap. Any forward with a bit of pace will run rings round that back three. Walsall figured it out months ago, I think the penny might drop now though with the rest of the league from now on and this is where we could hit the buffers.

The wing backs are both suspect defensively and now that Wilder has signed Lafferty permanently, this is a bit of a worry. I'm hoping he's not going to play stubborn bugger and stick with the system just to try and prove his point.

For me the answer is a simple tweak to the system and play 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 with Freeman absolved of full back duties and played wide mid and Lafferty on the bench. However, for the reason given above I can't see this transpiring.

I would give this a go and see what happens:

Moore
Bash-EEL-Wright-O'Connell
Freeman-Fleck-Coutts-Duffy-Lavery
Sharp

Lafferty doesn't play through injury, we lose without him, and he still manages to come in for criticism?

 

[Davalon]

Nothing wrong with dissecting a disappointing performance but not sure why we need to worry about formation changes.

There will always be the odd bad game even in a great season but just because Walsall exploited our system a couple of times doesn't mean we've been rumbled.

Not telling me Whitney is a football genius who managed to highlight the chink no one else has found.

 

[Boxer Blade]

In my opinion in order to maximise the potential of our system there needs to be a negligible amount of stress put upon the theoretical effectiveness of the formation.

Words.

Craig David

 

[Caseh]

Lafferty doesn't play through injury, we lose without him, and he still manages to come in for criticism?

I have said a few times that our fans saying players who care and put the effort in won't come under criticism - I point you to Lafferty and Done. Both seem to care, and put everything into it, yet still both constantly come in for criticism.

Football fans have to have a scapegoat or 2, it's like they can't stop themselves.

 

[GrayBlade]

Another point to consider

The current formation is more postive and offers better attack options
BUT it leaves us open to be counter attacked by better teams.

It means we're set up to WIN but will get the occasional LOSS.

Where as Clough and Adkins had us set up really cautious so easier to keep things tight
Then hopefully knick a 1-0 or a 2-1. The problem with those managers is when we did go a goal up we'd then start defending and defending really deep in the final minutes.

Draws are no good, so I'd much rather us be postive going for the WIN but being vulnerable.
Attack is the best form of defence.

I totally agree mate.

We're always likely to concede away from home and have odd odd bad day playing like we are doing, but it's a far better plan with the players we have to keep on going for the wins. Sure we might lose a few but it's points that count, and IMO we'll get more with this squad trying to win regularly away than we would do keeping it tight and settling for the occasional win but regular away draws.

We saw how the alternative strategy away from home panned out over the last two seasons didn't we?

 

[Ginger Gnome]

3-5-2 has always had a weakness if the other team doubles up on the wingbacks, it's the reason it quickly faded from formation of choice for much of the 90s back to most sides using 4-4-2. For 3-5-2 to work you need the centre backs to act as cover for the full backs and the extra man in central midfield to make sure you control possession, we've been doing that well for most of the season, but if a team can get more of the ball, spread it out wide and pull the centre backs out of position it does have weaknesses, this isn't something that Walsall figured out months ago, the flaws of 3-5-2 were exposed decades ago.

Even so, the players we have are more suited to 3-5-2 than 4-4-2, the extra centre back helps cover for individual weaknesses and three in central midfield suits pretty much everyone, whether it's the usual 3 who play there, or Basham or Scougall. Duffy doesn't really fit into a 4-4-2 well, he'd probably slot into a wide position on paper, but on the pitch he'd drift in to where he plays now, leaving an exposed full back just like the wing-back system does, or Swindon in the play-offs the other year where Harris was doubled up on constantly in a back 4 as he was getting no cover from the theoretical left winger.

4-5-1 would keep the third central midfielder, but we don't have any left wingers and would be playing an extra defender instead of a striker. The Clough years showed how that formation works brilliantly when you're the ones doing the counter attacking, but fails dismally when the opposition sits back and you have plenty of the ball outside the box, but just one man isolated in it.

Next season might need a different approach if we actually go up, but this season 3-5-2 works just fine.

 

[blade67]

We shouldn't chuck the baby out with the bathwater based on 1 bad half of football but we should also remember that we do change formation quite often into 4-4-2. Wider said that he sent out instructions for this to happen yesterday at 2-1 but the players didn't respond. He sounded well pissed off.

For what it's worth I think we have the personnel for a very effective 4-2-3-1.
A back four of Freeman, EEL, O'Connell and Lafferty would be tighter as Lafferty is better at defence than attack.
Basham and Coutts as the sitting CMs with a 3 of Duffy, Fleck and Scougal/ Carruthers . Sharp up front of course.
I don't see many teams coping with that.

Other than that a 4-3-3 with Lavery out wide and another winger.

Partof the problem with the change of formation yesterday is that Bashan had gone into midfield but Freeman was still alsobplaying there. A bit of a fuck up that lead directly to the 3rd goal.

Overall we were the better team for the first 58 minutes. Their 2nd was just a good breakaway (goalie could have done better), the shape change cost us the 3rd and the 4th was a fuck up between Freeman and Moore.

We don't need to change the formation, we need to be organised and defend well in the formation we have

 

[blade67]

Another point to consider

The current formation is more postive and offers better attack options
BUT it leaves us open to be counter attacked by better teams.

It means we're set up to WIN but will get the occasional LOSS.

Where as Clough and Adkins had us set up really cautious so easier to keep things tight
Then hopefully knick a 1-0 or a 2-1. The problem with those managers is when we did go a goal up we'd then start defending and defending really deep in the final minutes.

Draws are no good, so I'd much rather us be postive going for the WIN but being vulnerable.
Attack is the best form of defence.

Spot on. Would get multiple likes if possible

 

[Stretch]

Partof the problem with the change of formation yesterday is that Bashan had gone into midfield but Freeman was still alsobplaying there. A bit of a fuck up that lead directly to the 3rd goal.

Overall we were the better team for the first 58 minutes. Their 2nd was just a good breakaway (goalie could have done better), the shape change cost us the 3rd and the 4th was a fuck up between Freeman and Moore.

We don't need to change the formation, we need to be organised and defend well in the formation we have

Yeah I wouldn't disagree with that. 3-5-2 has and will continue to serve us well when applied properly. My point was that there has been and will be times when we need to mix it up.

 

[Silent Blade]

Deciding whether 4-4-2, 3-5-2 or 4-3-3 would be the best formation to play CAN BE like making your decision in the rock-paper-scissors game

 

[anglian blade]

I totally agree mate.

We're always likely to concede away from home and have odd odd bad day playing like we are doing, but it's a far better plan with the players we have to keep on going for the wins. Sure we might lose a few but it's points that count, and IMO we'll get more with this squad trying to win regularly away than we would do keeping it tight and settling for the occasional win but regular away draws.

We saw how the alternative strategy away from home panned out over the last two seasons didn't we?

13 wins and 6 defeats from now on will see us promoted

 

[brewdogblade]

gets my vote

 

[Bartyblade]

OK I'll throw in my five pen'orth and put the mockers on. That 3-5-2 line up is a disaster waiting to happen. Time after time you can see gaps a mile wide on the flanks and the only reason we haven't been nobbled more often this season is that the opposition has been so fuckin' crap. Any forward with a bit of pace will run rings round that back three. Walsall figured it out months ago, I think the penny might drop now though with the rest of the league from now on and this is where we could hit the buffers.

The wing backs are both suspect defensively and now that Wilder has signed Lafferty permanently, this is a bit of a worry. I'm hoping he's not going to play stubborn bugger and stick with the system just to try and prove his point.

For me the answer is a simple tweak to the system and play 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 with Freeman absolved of full back duties and played wide mid and Lafferty on the bench. However, for the reason given above I can't see this transpiring.

I would give this a go and see what happens:

Moore
Bash-EEL-Wright-O'Connell
Freeman-Fleck-Coutts-Duffy-Lavery
Sharp

And Man City need a complete change from 70% possession - it's a disaster waiting to happen.

 

[Ginger Gnome]

And Man City need a complete change from 70% possession - it's a disaster waiting to happen.

That disaster happens far too often with Stones giving it to the other team all the time and a clown in goal, their inability to keep regular clean sheets renders their possession stats meaningless.

 

[Grizzly blade]

Sorry, the OP is just cobblers and here's why.

1. We are top of the league- we changed to a 3-5-2 to deal with defensive frailties after a poor start with the back 4. 3 at the back and solves frailties I hear you say?? Well here's the trick....with the ball its 3 at the back, when we don't have it, it's 5. The key to this formation working is that we only push full backs on when in advanced areas and ensure we are patient and careful with possession. So we move the ball from side to side, wait for an opening that will put defenders under pressure and ensure they don't get a chance to break. We have got better and better with our decision making but will have the odd bad day.

Goals on Saturday came from breakdown of passing and poor decisions leading to breaks away, and I can't help but wonder if losing the often maligned Lafferty is partly to blame.

2. Even though we have done well with 3-5-2, we have still on occasion changed formation and tactics to deal with differing game situations. We have players in key areas we can change and adapt easily to do this well. This again poo poos on the argument.

3. You can't plan for a keeper to have a stinker. Moore, save the odd blob has generally been a lot better than any keeper we have had. He's also saved us more points than cost us when you look back over the season so far with numerous excellent saves at key times that have allowed the team to keep pressure on sides. Having your team on Saturday would have made no difference because Moore was still missing shots from distance and jumping over them, getting his positioning wrong and then lost his head because of it. He will put it behind him, and normal service will be resumed.

4. We finally go to all games looking to win. And it's worked a treat. Fans enjoying the match, goals being scored, good football....or we can go one up front, keep it tight and defensive. We simply don't have the pace and trickery out wide, or the pace, power and strength from our strikers to play on their own.

So, on the basis of all that I think I am happy to allow the manager to carry on with the job he's done so far rather than tear it up and start again. Not crucify a side after one bad day that let's be honest , if Moore had done his usual job to a basic standard they would never have gone in front second half and then we may well have followed our recent games by building pressure and taking advantage. Those easy goals raised them and deflated us. We then pushed more, rushed and lost patience and conceded further goals.

Some people need to chill the fuck out, stop talking nonesense and get a bloody grip.
I've seen some carp in my time, but calling for a complete change after one defeat in 20 odd after winning 6 on the bounce, and being clear at the top of the league, averaging the ideal 2 points per game and on target for 100 goals....Jesus wept.

If we had lost 3 on the bounce, not won in 3, taken the points tally Scunny have in their last 10....I might be concerned. Our job is to assist the players by forgetting it, and getting right back behind them to give them the confidence to carry on as they were.

 

[Kev Gee]

Lost 1 game and wants to rip up everything and start afresh?

Yep thats the op!!

 

[Jordo63]

Think this system will win us the league this year without a doubt very confident but looking ahead to nxt yr we'd be far too open to contemplate playing it in championship in my opionion.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Only 6 teams have conceded fewer than us in League 1, despite us shipping in 4 last Saturday.

4 of those teams are in the Top 6, one is in the bottom 3.

Surely the biggest plus from last season and previous seasons has been the defenders and the goalkeeper, i.e. the Back 4 players in 3-5-2.

3-5-2 is such a flexible system depending on the stage of the game.

Any system is vulnerable to counter attack if the team over commits forward. It's my view that 3-5-2 is far more secure than 4-4-2 but it's all about opinion as is the simple defintion of the role of 'wing back', which can differ between individuals above.

IMO, essentially the Back 3 are defenders who should never get drawn out of position and should play close together and narrow if necessary, let the opposition go wide if need be and defend the crosses if they knock them long.

If a defender is out of position then in our team Coutts and Fleck should cover primarily and also the wing backs in wide areas, though they may have pushed up. All the midfield 5 have reponsibilities to protect the Back 3 depending on the type of opposition attack. In our team Coutts plays the deepest and yet he is the worst defensive midfielder, positionally and physically, he lacks a tackle and is easily outpaced frankly and that is a problem. In 3-5-2 the deepest midfielder is usually the main protector and enforcer.

 

[The Crab]

Purely based on what bit I saw, Moore and EEL (two of our key performers so far) had a bad day. I've always seen Keepers and Centre Defence as part of the spine of the side. so when they have a bad day, it's not going to make much difference what formation you play. I myself think 3-5-2 is a bold formation and when it works it works well (we are top after all). But if you come up against a side that can exploit the gaps it leaves, you are going to struggle.

We're still top, we move on. I trust CW and AK to work on the wrinkles in traiing this week.

 

[kennyblade]

Sorry, the OP is just cobblers and here's why.

1. We are top of the league- we changed to a 3-5-2 to deal with defensive frailties after a poor start with the back 4. 3 at the back and solves frailties I hear you say?? Well here's the trick....with the ball its 3 at the back, when we don't have it, it's 5. The key to this formation working is that we only push full backs on when in advanced areas and ensure we are patient and careful with possession. So we move the ball from side to side, wait for an opening that will put defenders under pressure and ensure they don't get a chance to break. We have got better and better with our decision making but will have the odd bad day.

Goals on Saturday came from breakdown of passing and poor decisions leading to breaks away, and I can't help but wonder if losing the often maligned Lafferty is partly to blame.

2. Even though we have done well with 3-5-2, we have still on occasion changed formation and tactics to deal with differing game situations. We have players in key areas we can change and adapt easily to do this well. This again poo poos on the argument.

3. You can't plan for a keeper to have a stinker. Moore, save the odd blob has generally been a lot better than any keeper we have had. He's also saved us more points than cost us when you look back over the season so far with numerous excellent saves at key times that have allowed the team to keep pressure on sides. Having your team on Saturday would have made no difference because Moore was still missing shots from distance and jumping over them, getting his positioning wrong and then lost his head because of it. He will put it behind him, and normal service will be resumed.

4. We finally go to all games looking to win. And it's worked a treat. Fans enjoying the match, goals being scored, good football....or we can go one up front, keep it tight and defensive. We simply don't have the pace and trickery out wide, or the pace, power and strength from our strikers to play on their own.

So, on the basis of all that I think I am happy to allow the manager to carry on with the job he's done so far rather than tear it up and start again. Not crucify a side after one bad day that let's be honest , if Moore had done his usual job to a basic standard they would never have gone in front second half and then we may well have followed our recent games by building pressure and taking advantage. Those easy goals raised them and deflated us. We then pushed more, rushed and lost patience and conceded further goals.

Some people need to chill the fuck out, stop talking nonesense and get a bloody grip.
I've seen some carp in my time, but calling for a complete change after one defeat in 20 odd after winning 6 on the bounce, and being clear at the top of the league, averaging the ideal 2 points per game and on target for 100 goals....Jesus wept.

If we had lost 3 on the bounce, not won in 3, taken the points tally Scunny have in their last 10....I might be concerned. Our job is to assist the players by forgetting it, and getting right back behind them to give them the confidence to carry on as they were.

great post grizzly thats all i can say spot on

 

[HeCanDoMagic]

OK I'll throw in my five pen'orth and put the mockers on. That 3-5-2 line up is a disaster waiting to happen. Time after time you can see gaps a mile wide on the flanks and the only reason we haven't been nobbled more often this season is that the opposition has been so fuckin' crap. Any forward with a bit of pace will run rings round that back three. Walsall figured it out months ago, I think the penny might drop now though with the rest of the league from now on and this is where we could hit the buffers.

The wing backs are both suspect defensively and now that Wilder has signed Lafferty permanently, this is a bit of a worry. I'm hoping he's not going to play stubborn bugger and stick with the system just to try and prove his point.

For me the answer is a simple tweak to the system and play 4-5-1 or 4-4-2 with Freeman absolved of full back duties and played wide mid and Lafferty on the bench. However, for the reason given above I can't see this transpiring.

I would give this a go and see what happens:

Moore
Bash-EEL-Wright-O'Connell
Freeman-Fleck-Coutts-Duffy-Lavery
Sharp

You've just given me the biggest positive from this weekend.

Thank christ you're not our manager.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Taking the post seriously, I see what your saying but as said above the formation has been effective so far. Maybe a switch against teams who will attack us but in general, especially at home people park the bus. And as we know, in our time in this division breaking them down has been a huge problem and the current formation basically let's us throw the kitchen sink at them. maybe wrong but I think a change would see us draw alot of games we need to win. If every now and again it means we get spanked so be it because in general it wins us games.

Agreed. We’ve been playing this system since the Gillingham game. So with this formation our performance reads like


P 22

W 16

D 4

L 2

Points 52

GD +25

Points per game- 2.36.


Extrapolated over a season that form would see us collect 109 points.


Long live high pressing, high tempo, attacking 352!

 

[1danewhitehouse]

3-5-2 has taken us to the top of the league and has worked brilliantly away, just look how many goals we've scored. Yesterday was the first away game we've lost using that formation - and we were without Lafferty and the goalkeeper had a stinker, the latter being the sole reason behind the emphatic scoreline. Abandoning it at this stage would be hideous.

At home, possibly we could change things to include an extra midfielder while sticking with two strikers. We have that much of the ball that the full backs in a back 4 could get forward very often anyway. And the full backs would still be Freeman and Lafferty so it's not like we'd be taking any attacking quality out of the team to move to a back 4.

I thin that’s at least partly why Wilder goes with Basham over Wright in the back 3. If we’re dominating we can push Basham further forward to press home our advantage leaving EEL and JOC back.

 

[mattbianco1]

all I'm saying is that we beef the defence up. For a club in our league position we are shipping in far too many goals

Luckily we are very potent upfront. 2nd highest scorers in the league.

Just checked and our 30 goals conceded is below average for the division (34.58)