Four at the back

[blader]

can someone please compile a list of results of where we played 4 at the back? We look a completely different side, and utterly toothless when we have 2 centre backs.

We don’t play between the lines, there never seems to be options or width in the side, our fullbacks are nullified and obviously the centre backs don’t join the attack.

We have built a success in our 3-5-2 because the players are well drilled and suited to those positions. Changing it after 10minutes in some games never ever works, really disappointed Wilder doesn’t see this. Us under performing at 3-5-2 is better than us playing 4 at the back.

Should have just swapped Crainie for Bash. Bizarre.

 

[Scooter_mcgavin]

TBH we took Billy off and put crainie on, so for majority, we did play 3 5 2 until the re

 

[orlandoblade]

what bothers me is changing shape at HOME against a low end of the table team--adjusting our successful methods to cater for the opposition who after 40+ games show they are not that good.

stick with what WE ARE GOOD AT and let THEM worry about us .

 

[robbiez666]

can someone please compile a list of results of where we played 4 at the back? We look a completely different side, and utterly toothless when we have 2 centre backs.

We don’t play between the lines, there never seems to be options or width in the side, our fullbacks are nullified and obviously the centre backs don’t join the attack.

We have built a success in our 3-5-2 because the players are well drilled and suited to those positions. Changing it after 10minutes in some games never ever works, really disappointed Wilder doesn’t see this. Us under performing at 3-5-2 is better than us playing 4 at the back.

Should have just swapped Crainie for Bash. Bizarre.

I think Wilder realised he'd dropped a bollock not starting Madine. I was expecting Cranie to replace Bash. Logical. Oh no. A 4 man midfield with Duffy and McGoldrick in it? It worked in a way as it confused Millwall and the goal came through the middle but I was shocked when we scored as we looked so toothless.

 

[Barney]

It was always a recipe for disaster playing that system.

The constant over rotation of our starting 11 has also been to our detriment overall.

We needed to continue with 3 at the back and keep team consistency.

 

[dc_blade]

Don’t think is true. Last 10 minutes of first half and first 10 of the second we played quite well. Not at our very best but moving the ball pretty well and getting up the pitch. Felt to me just like the final ball was lacking but we looked solid enough at the back. It was when we scored and they came at us that we wobbled. Not the formation for me.

 

[DeanLearner'sCat]

It's pretty incredible when a manager is being criticised for bringing on a sub who scored.

 

[Caseh]

We must be changing formation an average of 3 times a game in the last 5, I can't keep track of it

 

[AWetFlannel]

We played better in a back four, we got worse when we switched back to a back three.

 

[stan100]

can someone please compile a list of results of where we played 4 at the back? We look a completely different side, and utterly toothless when we have 2 centre backs.
We don’t play between the lines, there never seems to be options or width in the side, our fullbacks are nullified and obviously the centre backs don’t join the attack.

We have built a success in our 3-5-2 because the players are well drilled and suited to those positions. Changing it after 10minutes in some games never ever works, really disappointed Wilder doesn’t see this. Us under performing at 3-5-2 is better than us playing 4 at the back.

Should have just swapped Crainie for Bash. Bizarre.

 

[Akinbiyi]

We were winning with a back 4 in the last 2 home games and lost it when we went back to a 5. Both times.

 

[Selly]

We must be changing formation an average of 3 times a game in the last 5, I can't keep track of it

We played better in a back four, we got worse when we switched back to a back three.

We were winning with a back 4 in the last 2 home games and lost it when we went back to a 5. Both times.

It's not either of the systems per we that are the issue, it the fact we are changing the system during the game.

We did it, twice, against Bristol, and did the same today. Today was particularly criminal as we looked better with 4 at the back and needlessly changed.

By all means change it if the other team are starting to cause us issues, but to change it in anticipation. Grrrrrrrr....