3-5-2 not working

[Shuffle]

The problem with 3-5-2 is that you usually have 3 defenders marking 1 and then not picking up runners and passing responsibility onto others.  Our WBs offer us very little and our 2 CM are often over run as Weimann is usually the most advanced of our players so in essence it’s 3-4-3. I’m still pissed off about yesterday as the game was there for taking but with injuries as they are do we have the players to adapt to 4-3-3 ?  Start of season we were always in games and appreciate injuries aren’t helping us. We cannot keep on playing 3-5-2 as in 10 of last 11 games we’ve conceded 2 or more.  Appreciate we are scoring lots more as the counter to this point and in fairness we look really threatening going forward but do we have personnel to change & indeed should we?   
 

 

[Davefevs]

6 minutes ago, Shuffle said:

The problem with 3-5-2 is that you usually have 3 defenders marking 1 and then not picking up runners and passing responsibility onto others.  Our WBs offer us very little and our 2 CM are often over run as Weimann is usually the most advanced of our players so in essence it’s 3-4-3. I’m still pissed off about yesterday as the game was there for taking but with injuries as they are do we have the players to adapt to 4-3-3 ?  Start of season we were always in games and appreciate injuries aren’t helping us. We cannot keep on playing 3-5-2 as in 10 of last 11 games we’ve conceded 2 or more.  Appreciate we are scoring lots more as the counter to this point and in fairness we look really threatening going forward but do we have personnel to change & indeed should we?   
 

 

You have my support Shuffs!

Even with Vyner at RB in a Vyner / Kalas / Klose / Pring back 4 feels more solid.

How you play the “forward 6” is open to debate.

Kalas and Klose have played in back 4s the majority of their careers.

If Nige really feels that a back 4 (in probably a 433) is the way he really wants to go, I’d suggest doing that now.

Youd hope Williams can start on Saturday, and hopefully Massengo too with 6 days between games.

Front 6 of:

Scott / Williams / Massengo

Weimann / Semenyo / Wells

Not necessarily as a 433 but those 6.

[Shuffle]

3 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You have my support Shuffs!

Even with Vyner at RB in a Vyner / Kalas / Klose / Pring back 4 feels more solid.

How you play the “forward 6” is open to debate.

Kalas and Klose have played in back 4s the majority of their careers.

If Nige really feels that a back 4 (in probably a 433) is the way he really wants to go, I’d suggest doing that now.

Youd hope Williams can start on Saturday, and hopefully Massengo too with 6 days between games.

Front 6 of:

Scott / Williams / Massengo

Weimann / Semenyo / Wells

Not necessarily as a 433 but those 6.

That team certainly has a more solid feel to it and agree change needed 

[TonyTonyTony]

Surely we have to try something different. I would go for 4 3 3

             Max/Bents

       RB?     TK TK    CP

              JW   HNS

                  AS   

         AW    CM   AS

Only problem with that is we have no cover in midfield really, and JW cant play every game. We also risk burning out HMN and AS.

[Davefevs]

3 minutes ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Surely we have to try something different. I would go for 4 3 3

             Max/Bents

       RB?     TK TK    CP

              JW   HNS

                  AS   

         AW    CM   AS

Only problem with that is we have no cover in midfield really, and JW cant play every game. We also risk burning out HMN and AS.

This is where Weimann might have to occasionally play as a conventional midfielder, or Benarous comes in to take the burden off those 3, at least until James is back.

[Red-Robbo]

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You have my support Shuffs!

Even with Vyner at RB in a Vyner / Kalas / Klose / Pring back 4 feels more solid.

How you play the “forward 6” is open to debate.

Kalas and Klose have played in back 4s the majority of their careers.

If Nige really feels that a back 4 (in probably a 433) is the way he really wants to go, I’d suggest doing that now.

Youd hope Williams can start on Saturday, and hopefully Massengo too with 6 days between games.

Front 6 of:

Scott / Williams / Massengo

Weimann / Semenyo / Wells

Not necessarily as a 433 but those 6.

 

Scott and Massengo just advanced on Williams, with Joe in a Cole Skuse role?  Semenyo just behind a Weimann and Wells front line? It seems Antoine and Andi have started to establish a good playing rapport. Hasn't happened yet with any player and Wells however. 

[Finley_Smith10]

Kalas Klose Atkinson Pring could be alright but again I just don’t feel confident in keeping clean sheets. 
hopefully when williams is fully fit we go to a 433

[Waconda]

6 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

This is where Weimann might have to occasionally play as a conventional midfielder, or Benarous comes in to take the burden off those 3, at least until James is back.

As long as we don't attempt to play with only 2 CMs.

3-5-2 works offensively, if only they could work out how to defend !

[Davefevs]

7 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Scott and Massengo just advanced on Williams, with Joe in a Cole Skuse role?  Semenyo just behind a Weimann and Wells front line? It seems Antoine and Andi have started to establish a good playing rapport. Hasn't happened yet with any player and Wells however. 

You suggesting a sort of “diamond” even if it’s a bit squashed?  Massengo played for Monaco / France age-group in a diamond, predominantly on the left point.

 

[Sir Geoff]

442 may take something away from us going forward but gives us the missing ingredient in stopping crosses as it gives us the ability to double up on the 'winger' and force him into areas that are not dangerous to us 

Vyner (for now) Kalas Klose Pring

  Scott Williams Massengo. DaSilva/Benarou

   Weimann  Semenyo

Edited February 14, 2022 by Sir Geoff
Extra text

[Red-Robbo]

17 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You suggesting a sort of “diamond” even if it’s a bit squashed?  Massengo played for Monaco / France age-group in a diamond, predominantly on the left point.

 

 

Indeed. Maximise Massengo's attacking instincts. He can thread a ball around midfielders and feed our strike force better than anyone. Minimise the amount of time he has to be the last man in front of our defence. 

I think when we drop HNM deep, we waste him as much as we were wasting Bobby Reid in a similar position. 

[big dosser]

systems systems systems.11v11 just be as good or  better than your opposing player simple. Football is not rocket science its a simple game that everyone is trying to over complicate.

football is about%110 commitment/movement/ability/confidence and always making yourself available for your team mate and most of all when the apposing team have the ball, hunt them down like a pack of hungry wolves.

i ask this does man city have a certain system or are all there players doing the above

[Davefevs]

2 minutes ago, big dosser said:

systems systems systems.11v11 just be as good or  better than your opposing player simple. Football is not rocket science its a simple game that everyone is trying to over complicate.

football is about%110 commitment/movement/ability/confidence and always making yourself available for your team mate and most of all when the apposing team have the ball, hunt them down like a pack of hungry wolves.

i ask this does man city have a certain system or are all there players doing the above

Agree….ultimately if we could get our best players on the pitch we’d do better in the main, regardless of formation.

But I do think a back 4 foundation is better for our players than a back 3 / 5.

Edited February 14, 2022 by Davefevs

[Waconda]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Agree….ultimately if we could get our best players on the pitch we’d do better in the main, regardless of formation.

But I do think a back 4 foundation is better for our players than a back 3 / 5.

Bigger problem for me is that we never vary the system, far to predictable, we should change for certain games.

I like the 3-5-2 as a default but we need to be more detailed

Currently we are an analysts wet dream.

 

18 minutes ago, big dosser said:

systems systems systems.11v11 just be as good or  better than your opposing player simple. Football is not rocket science its a simple game that everyone is trying to over complicate.

football is about%110 commitment/movement/ability/confidence and always making yourself available for your team mate and most of all when the apposing team have the ball, hunt them down like a pack of hungry wolves.

i ask this does man city have a certain system or are all there players doing the above

Man City have a system.

[1960maaan]

 

1 hour ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Surely we have to try something different. I would go for 4 3 3

             Max/Bents

       RB?     TK TK    CP

              JW   HNS

                  AS   

         AW    CM   AS

Only problem with that is we have no cover in midfield really, and JW cant play every game. We also risk burning out HMN and AS.

I'd play the CB pairing the other way around, but otherwise 

42 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

You suggesting a sort of “diamond” even if it’s a bit squashed?  Massengo played for Monaco / France age-group in a diamond, predominantly on the left point.

 

I was thinking about a diamond yesterday, I do think we are short of a player but it's probably a decent next step.

Back 4 .
Whatever we do it's a bit of a sticking plaster situation ATM. With our record, a solid 4 that didn't worry about the attacking side too much may be the way to go. Problem is how to get a back 4. Kalas at RB wouldn't be a bad move, Pring at LB and Klose at LCB. But we are short of a RCB. Probably means Kalas & Klose at CB, Pring at LB with RB open. Vyner is the obvious one, but would it be time to throw Simpson in, just to defend ?

I think Williams at a deep CMF would work, plus he has a good range of pass so a central role makes sense. Scott & HNM either side.
Weimann & Semenyo pick themselves and that leaves the AMF/No10. Benarous is the obvious one IMO. You could switch AW back and play Wells, but the Semenyo/Weimann pairing looks a threat so I'd want them up top.
Until we can get another CB and CMF fit , to coin a phrase , "We are where we are" . Options are, well none really. I don't see Cundy or Idehen starting any time soon, so it is just juggling the players from Sunday.

One thing I personally would change, I'd rest Martin. How we have been playing, more on the ground and quick breaks , I'd bring in Wells. That may mean AW plays deeper, but needs must.

[big dosser]

9 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

Bigger problem for me is that we never vary the system, far to predictable, we should change for certain games.

I like the 3-5-2 as a default but we need to be more detailed

Currently we are an analysts wet dream.

 

Man City have a system.

hi vt

why i feel systems can be overcomplicated and don't always work showed yesterday with the Swansea keeper sweeper.it would be interesting to know how many touches the keeper had(one for davefevs).i felt there keeper dictated the game and for them was like having a extra player outfield.no matter what system you play as team do you stick or twist.do you put complete pressure on which means one outfield player must commit himself or do you stand your ground mark your player and see how much guts and how far the keeper will come forward.

[Waconda]

1 minute ago, big dosser said:

hi vt

why i feel systems can be overcomplicated and don't always work showed yesterday with the Swansea keeper sweeper.it would be interesting to know how many touches the keeper had(one for davefevs).i felt there keeper dictated the game and for them was like having a extra player outfield.no matter what system you play as team do you stick or twist.do you put complete pressure on which means one outfield player must commit himself or do you stand your ground mark your player and see how much guts and how far the keeper will come forward.

Thought we actually did a good job of shutting the keeper down in parts of the game.

Our problems start after that IMO, far to easy to play through and around, players getting between the lines in lots of space. We don't react well as team in this scenario.

Not a dig at NP but we do not look well drilled enough in that part of the game OR the players are just not following orders.

Similar to the defending set piece issues.

[NcnsBcfc]

2 hours ago, Shuffle said:

The problem with 3-5-2 is that you usually have 3 defenders marking 1 and then not picking up runners and passing responsibility onto others.  Our WBs offer us very little and our 2 CM are often over run as Weimann is usually the most advanced of our players so in essence it’s 3-4-3. I’m still pissed off about yesterday as the game was there for taking but with injuries as they are do we have the players to adapt to 4-3-3 ?  Start of season we were always in games and appreciate injuries aren’t helping us. We cannot keep on playing 3-5-2 as in 10 of last 11 games we’ve conceded 2 or more.  Appreciate we are scoring lots more as the counter to this point and in fairness we look really threatening going forward but do we have personnel to change & indeed should we?   
 

 

I agree @Shuffle

I made the point at the end of FBC podcast , that given that everyone says 352 is our best formation, the fact that we have conceded 2 of more goals in 9 of the last 10 games isn't a ringing endorsement of a winning formula.

Thank goodness we are the 6th highest scoring team in the division is all I can say.

If we can't change the personnel due to injuries/or there's no-one else. Then we have to look at the system we're playing surely.

I fear going into the Boro game with the same set up. Whilst JD is a passable wb on the left, he's next to useless on the right (in my opinion). Pring isn;t a LWB either, and we need to decide if he is a CB,LB or WB in my opinion. The added fitness levels required of a LWB has seen him blowing up again around the 60 minutes mark yet again. I believe he has a medical condition that impacts on his general level of fitness anyhow (Asthma).

Vyner will get murdered by Jones, yet again in a one on one situation. I'm sorry Zak, but that alongside your concentration levels are one of your biggest failings.

No mention of Tanner coming back (I think it was at the end of this month). Would be great to see him even on the bench, but there's no mention of him even being back in training.

Given that Atkinson is still out as well by the looks of it. I'd be possibly think Kalas, Cundy, Klose, Pring in a flat back 4, and go with possibly a 4411 formation with Scott on the right, williams (if fit) & Massengo (ditto) in the middle. JD playing on the left midfield to give some additional defensive support to Pring. Then play Weimann behind Semenyeo.

I'd give Martin a rest, before the inevitable injury forces our hand. He looks dead on his feet last couple of games.

 

Edited February 14, 2022 by NcnsBcfc

[spudski]

Yep...totally agree. 352 rarely works at this level, unless you have the very best wing backs. We don't.

4 at the back would make us more solid imo. 

451 when defending. 433 when attacking is a lot simpler to implement as well imo.

Just got to make sure two forwards track runners back when defending.

[Super]

If you keep making mistakes like failing to track runners or defend crosses it makes no difference what formation you play.

[Waconda]

1 minute ago, Super said:

If you keep making mistakes like failing to track runners or defend crosses it makes no difference what formation you play.

That is the bigger problem, 

[SecretSam]

2 hours ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Surely we have to try something different. I would go for 4 3 3

             Max/Bents

       RB?     TK TK    CP

              JW   HNS

                  AS   

         AW    CM   AS

Only problem with that is we have no cover in midfield really, and JW cant play every game. We also risk burning out HMN and AS.

:laugh: for a minute I thought you had two Kalas' in there 

[Davefevs]

7 minutes ago, SecretSam said:

for a minute I thought you had two Kalas' in there 

Close (or should that be Klose)

[TonyTonyTony]

4 minutes ago, SecretSam said:

for a minute I thought you had two Kalas' in there 

It's called the TKMax defence. 

[chinapig]

2 hours ago, big dosser said:

systems systems systems.11v11 just be as good or  better than your opposing player simple. Football is not rocket science its a simple game that everyone is trying to over complicate.

football is about%110 commitment/movement/ability/confidence and always making yourself available for your team mate and most of all when the apposing team have the ball, hunt them down like a pack of hungry wolves.

i ask this does man city have a certain system or are all there players doing the above

Man City have multiple ways of setting up that they can vary between and within games. That's what you can do with top quality players and coaches. Pep doesn't just tell them to go out and get stuck in, it's all structured and relentlessly practiced. In fact it's exactly the structured nature of their game that leads to some people regarding them as boring.

Remember the stories of him painting marks on the training pitch to show Sterling what his starting positions should be, even physically moving him to get it right?

[Mr Popodopolous]

4 hours ago, big dosser said:

systems systems systems.11v11 just be as good or  better than your opposing player simple. Football is not rocket science its a simple game that everyone is trying to over complicate.

football is about%110 commitment/movement/ability/confidence and always making yourself available for your team mate and most of all when the apposing team have the ball, hunt them down like a pack of hungry wolves.

i ask this does man city have a certain system or are all there players doing the above

Yes, 4-3-3, they almost never deviate from 4-3-3. Having said that, they have such fluidity and depth, ability to interchange..

I actually think that for modern football, 4-3-3 is the optimum setup for the ideal combination of possession and pressing.

1 hour ago, chinapig said:

Man City have multiple ways of setting up that they can vary between and within games. That's what you can do with top quality players and coaches. Pep doesn't just tell them to go out and get stuck in, it's all structured and relentlessly practiced. In fact it's exactly the structured nature of their game that leads to some people regarding them as boring.

Remember the stories of him painting marks on the training pitch to show Sterling what his starting positions should be, even physically moving him to get it right?

Agreed although for the most part, this year especially Pep's Man City largely seem like a 4-3-3 side I think.

[Numero Uno]

5 hours ago, Davefevs said:

You have my support Shuffs!

Even with Vyner at RB in a Vyner / Kalas / Klose / Pring back 4 feels more solid.

How you play the “forward 6” is open to debate.

Kalas and Klose have played in back 4s the majority of their careers.

If Nige really feels that a back 4 (in probably a 433) is the way he really wants to go, I’d suggest doing that now.

Youd hope Williams can start on Saturday, and hopefully Massengo too with 6 days between games.

Front 6 of:

Scott / Williams / Massengo

Weimann / Semenyo / Wells

Not necessarily as a 433 but those 6.

Vyner can only play two positions which are Right Back and CDM. He must never play in the central area of the back three/four ever again (I know the full back has to cover the centre half in a back four but you get my drift).

[Numero Uno]

3 hours ago, Super said:

If you keep making mistakes like failing to track runners or defend crosses it makes no difference what formation you play.

Agreed except to say you can change your formation to make it easier to stop crosses at source. However you can't stop them completely so still need to be able to defend them.

[chinapig]

1 hour ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

Yes, 4-3-3, they almost never deviate from 4-3-3. Having said that, they have such fluidity and depth, ability to interchange..

I actually think that for modern football, 4-3-3 is the optimum setup for the ideal combination of possession and pressing.

Agreed although for the most part, this year especially Pep's Man City largely seem like a 4-3-3 side I think.

Rarely that simple from Pep. You rarely see a conventional back 4 from him for a start.

For instance, sometimes he has both nominal full backs pushed into midfield. Other times Walker will be deeper and Cancelo is high up the pitch.

All sorts of variations going on, sometimes in the same game.

[Mr Popodopolous]

18 minutes ago, chinapig said:

Rarely that simple from Pep. You rarely see a conventional back 4 from him for a start.

For instance, sometimes he has both nominal full backs pushed into midfield. Other times Walker will be deeper and Cancelo is high up the pitch.

All sorts of variations going on, sometimes in the same game.

True tbh. With players like that yoi can...sure at Barcelona eg that an occasional in-game Plan B would be as you say both full backs pushed high...Busquets drops and suddenly you have a back 3.

[The Swan and Cemetery]

Think defensively we look like a team that needs the accountability of man to man rather than zonal in open play. 3 at the back encourages a worst of all worlds hybrid (or at least seems to). Whilst 2 CB’s has risks, it does, obviously, free up another body to be somewhere else. Our LCB and RCB are often unwilling to drift wide to assist the LWB/RWB, despite everything indicating that we’d probably be better preventing crosses than dealing with them. Therefore sensible to shift that challenge (or at least try to), by moving to 3 CM rather than 2, giving freedom for the LCM and RCM to move across to help out the FBs. Reduces width when we’ve got the ball, but not sure we’ve scored many from WBs whipping in crosses, think a front 6 should be able to move defences around and we’ve shown enough to indicate we’re vastly better at playing through the middle than a year ago. 4-3-3 for me (plus a GK who is aware ‘patrol the edge of the box’ relates to 18 yards rather than 6).

[Davefevs]

1 minute ago, The Swan and Cemetery said:

Whilst 2 CB’s has risks, it does, obviously, free up another body to be somewhere else.

This was Southgate’s problem with England.  His 2 CBs weren’t great, so let’s play an extra one…which meant taking a player out somewhere else.  He ultimately ended up with 3 CBs that weren’t great.

Sometimes the solution isn’t to have more bad thinking it will equal good.

[chinapig]

13 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

This was Southgate’s problem with England.  His 2 CBs weren’t great, so let’s play an extra one…which meant taking a player out somewhere else.  He ultimately ended up with 3 CBs that weren’t great.

Sometimes the solution isn’t to have more bad thinking it will equal good.

I certainly subscribe to the view that just adding a defender doesn't make you better at defending and I'm surprised that Nigel seems to think so. Kalas and Klose suit a back 4 better imo. If only we had a midfielder who was good at screening and dropping in between them though.

Mind you, England conceded only 2 goals at the Euros, neither from open play!

[chinapig]

32 minutes ago, Mr Popodopolous said:

True tbh. With players like that yoi can...sure at Barcelona eg that an occasional in-game Plan B would be as you say both full backs pushed high...Busquets drops and suddenly you have a back 3.

There's an interesting discussion on some of Pep's coaching methods on today's Guardian Football Weekly podcast btw.

People like to say that football is a simple game but at the professional level it really isn't and hasn't been for a very long time!

[Rocking Red Cyril]

10 hours ago, Tafkarmlf said:

Good question and the honest answer is not got a clue suggested rejigging the back  so Klose Sweeper esq. kalas in front and Vyner as effective DM. 

Allows Massengo to not drop so deep and use his energy further up the field. 

I don't think it's a total bust of a formation as like you say we can always score.  Small tweaks rather than overhauls. 

I think there is a lot in Vyner as DM. 

[miketh2nd]

I agree  with most that has been said in this thread and think Pearson would of changed if we had more fit midfielders.

I quite like how Moyes sets up West ham with the 4-2-3-1 formation , As quite easily with this formation it can be fluid from 4-2-3-1 to 4-3-3 attacking and 4-5-1 if needed. 

O'Leary 

 Kalas-- Klose--Pring-- Dasilva

 

Williams/Benarous(45 minutes each)--  Massengo

 

Weimann-- Scott-- Wells

 

Semenyo 

I don't like the lone striker up top but I can see this side creating chances whilst the defence looking stronger . 

 

[Waconda]

1 hour ago, miketh2nd said:

I agree  with most that has been said in this thread and think Pearson would of changed if we had more fit midfielders.

I quite like how Moyes sets up West ham with the 4-2-3-1 formation , As quite easily with this formation it can be fluid from 4-2-3-1 to 4-3-3 attacking and 4-5-1 if needed. 

O'Leary 

 Kalas-- Klose--Pring-- Dasilva

 

Williams/Benarous(45 minutes each)--  Massengo

 

Weimann-- Scott-- Wells

 

Semenyo 

I don't like the lone striker up top but I can see this side creating chances whilst the defence looking stronger . 

 

Can't play DaSilva as a LB in the Championship, he gets targeted with long diagonals.

WB or nothing sadly.

And Pring is not a CH in a 2, left side of a back 3 yes, can't waste Kalas as a RB.

If you want to play 4 at the back need to find an actual RB from somewhere.

                                Bentley

               RB?     Kalas     Klose     Pring

                     Williams     Massengo

                                Scott

                 Weimann            Wells

                             Semenyo

Perhaps, not keen myself but it's a free hit season so maybe give it a go !

Edited February 14, 2022 by VT05763

[Red-Robbo]

7 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

Can't play DaSilva as a LB in the Championship, he gets targeted with long diagonals.

WB or nothing sadly.

And Pring is not a CH in a 2, left side of a back 3 yes, can't waste Kalas as a RB.

If you want to play 4 at the back need to find an actual RB from somewhere.

                                Bentley

               RB?     Kalas     Klose     Pring

                     Williams     Massengo

                                Scott

                 Weimann            Wells

                             Semenyo

Perhaps, not keen myself but it's free hit season so maybe give it a go !

 

Would swap Massengo and Scott around meself, but given the constraints it's OK.  Cundy as RB?

[Waconda]

3 minutes ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

Would swap Massengo and Scott around meself, but given the constraints it's OK.  Cundy as RB?

Yep you could put Cundy at RB or Kalas and then Cundy at CH but you are then back in the realms of forcing players out of their best positions.

Think that is why NP has been playing a 3, historically he favours a back 4 I think.

[Red-Robbo]

11 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

Yep you could put Cundy at RB or Kalas and then Cundy at CH but you are then back in the realms of forcing players out of their best positions.

Think that is why NP has been playing a 3, historically he favours a back 4 I think.

 

TBH neither Scott and Massengo are not really defensive midfielders, so I think we've already sailed over that bridge. I don't know how Cundy would fare in that RB role over 90 minutes. It might be a step too far too soon, or it may work?

[The Bard]

I like the way we're playing at the moment as it provides half decent games and suits our available players.  

Trouble with 4 4 2 is we simply don't have decent wide midfield players.  No one like Bryan or Brownhill for example.  We've got weak wannabees like COD and the other suggested formations always have at least one player shoehorned into a position to make the team seem logical. 

4 3 3 would currently involve Vyner at RB (people who suggest Kalas need to put the crackpipe down).  If we had 1 or 2 more fit midfielders it would work, but until Williams is able to play every game or James is back, this isn't an option. 

I see the way we're playing currently as stress testing individuals, especially midfielders and defenders.  Long term I can see us changing to 4 4 2 but only once we've bought in 2 realistic long term options either side to augment Benarous and Scott.  We will do a lot of business in the summer, especially if Webster or Kelly being sold results in a but more financial freedom or we get good money for Massengo. It will be really interesting seeing where he goes with it.  I would be amazed to see any new contracts for COD, Vyner, Kalas, Dasilva or Bentley.  The last 4 plus Massengo will be for sale

[Davefevs]

49 minutes ago, VT05763 said:

Can't play DaSilva as a LB in the Championship, he gets targeted with long diagonals.

You can if you don’t ask him to play so narrow.  If you allow his to play a bit closer to touchline, it becomes a hopeful diag, prone to being intercepted, or over hit, or a long time in the air that you can adjust your defensive  position(s) horizontally.  it becomes a higher risk pass.  But you’ve also got to get pressure on the ball-player too.

Early season, when Atkinson was settling in Jay played narrower than normal, and I hoped they would sort distances out. We changed it up with Baker at LB for Cardiff and the few games after.  Then they both got injured soon after each other.

Jay is short, don’t get me wrong, but he’s proven (when properly fit) in previous seasons he can play LB and not get exposed.  That’s not to say he won’t get targeted, but he has held his own in the past…and I also see Klose happy to be drawn into wider areas than most CBs are usually.

 

[Waconda]

6 hours ago, Davefevs said:

You can if you don’t ask him to play so narrow.  If you allow his to play a bit closer to touchline, it becomes a hopeful diag, prone to being intercepted, or over hit, or a long time in the air that you can adjust your defensive  position(s) horizontally.  it becomes a higher risk pass.  But you’ve also got to get pressure on the ball-player too.

Early season, when Atkinson was settling in Jay played narrower than normal, and I hoped they would sort distances out. We changed it up with Baker at LB for Cardiff and the few games after.  Then they both got injured soon after each other.

Jay is short, don’t get me wrong, but he’s proven (when properly fit) in previous seasons he can play LB and not get exposed.  That’s not to say he won’t get targeted, but he has held his own in the past…and I also see Klose happy to be drawn into wider areas than most CBs are usually.

 

It's only this season that teams started doing the "obvious" against him and us.  Fairly sure it was Swansea and Preston who where the first to pepper his side with great success. This is one of those things that really just boils down to the basics.

Got to keep good distances along the back four, can't have him stationing himself on the touchline.

All the analysts will be aware and combine that with our general flaky defence versus any cross or set piece he will get shredded.

But maybe a lesser of evils and certainly the opposition will not have prepped for it the first game we change (until HT anyway !)

Interesting risk/reward situation.

Edited February 15, 2022 by VT05763

[Rocking Red Cyril]

9 hours ago, Tafkarmlf said:

Aye, think that's a view a few on here share  whether it will happen though is down to the boss. 

Reckon as we're safe got nothing to lose doing it though. 

Yrs , I know it would no doubt need change of formation and shape. But how many times are we out done from a runner or ball from midfield. An area Vyner at DM could poilce.

Just my thoughts 

[Cowshed]

18 hours ago, chinapig said:

Rarely that simple from Pep. You rarely see a conventional back 4 from him for a start.

For instance, sometimes he has both nominal full backs pushed into midfield. Other times Walker will be deeper and Cancelo is high up the pitch.

All sorts of variations going on, sometimes in the same game.

The players are following a pattern. There are very simple principles across the pitch. The team avoids having more than three players in a line across vertical and horizontal lines. The base formation to support their possession is 4-3-3. It creates more triangles and diamonds across the pitch to support the possession football. 

[Davefevs]

5 hours ago, VT05763 said:

It's only this season that teams started doing the "obvious" against him and us.  Fairly sure it was Swansea and Preston who where the first to pepper his side with great success. This is one of those things that really just boils down to the basics.

Got to keep good distances along the back four, can't have him stationing himself on the touchline.

All the analysts will be aware and combine that with our general flaky defence versus any cross or set piece he will get shredded.

But maybe a lesser of evils and certainly the opposition will not have prepped for it the first game we change (until HT anyway !)

Interesting risk/reward situation.

Certainly Swansea, but only second half when they pushed Laird on and Pring at LW got a bit “lost”.

Preston, Dasilva was sub.

But your last sentence is correct…everything is risk / reward…everything is cause and effect!

[Waconda]

14 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Certainly Swansea, but only second half when they pushed Laird on and Pring at LW got a bit “lost”.

Preston, Dasilva was sub.

But your last sentence is correct…everything is risk / reward…everything is cause and effect!

There were definitely 2 games where I saw Dasilva get ruined. Must have been Fulham ?

[Mendip Broadwalk]

The team is not good enough to play three at the back. Its too complex for average players.

[Waconda]

24 minutes ago, Three Lions said:

The team is not good enough to play three at the back. Its too complex for average players.

No it isn't, I played in a back 3 for years at a level much lower than this.

Not in any shape or form "complex".

[Mendip Broadwalk]

Too complex and too demanding for average players which is why City are struggling with basics. Top teams with quality do. Average dont.

[GrahamC]

17 hours ago, VT05763 said:

Can't play DaSilva as a LB in the Championship, he gets targeted with long diagonals.

WB or nothing sadly.

And Pring is not a CH in a 2, left side of a back 3 yes, can't waste Kalas as a RB.

If you want to play 4 at the back need to find an actual RB from somewhere.

                                Bentley

               RB?     Kalas     Klose     Pring

                     Williams     Massengo

                                Scott

                 Weimann            Wells

                             Semenyo

Perhaps, not keen myself but it's a free hit season so maybe give it a go !

The RB? Has to be Tanner but as I’ve said before it is an indictment of our squad that we are struggling without a lad who started the season in L2.

16 hours ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

TBH neither Scott and Massengo are not really defensive midfielders, so I think we've already sailed over that bridge. I don't know how Cundy would fare in that RB role over 90 minutes. It might be a step too far too soon, or it may work?

Only got 11 minutes first team action to go on, but Cundy is the size of a tree & I don’t think it would be remotely fair to ask him to make his first start at this level out of position. He gets a go as a CB or is a sub for me.

[Cowshed]

2 hours ago, VT05763 said:

No it isn't, I played in a back 3 for years at a level much lower than this.

Not in any shape or form "complex".

Having three v four players means there are more variables to cover and players need broader qualities to cover tasks. 

The team is conceding a few (??) and that could mean the team is finding the shape complex. A sympton of players being overburdened by complexity is poor decision making and disorganisation - Bristol City may be displaying those behaviours. 

 

Edited February 15, 2022 by Cowshed

[Mendip Broadwalk]

Twenty one goals conceded in the last eight games. Thirteen in six. Watertight this 3-5-2.

[BCFCGav]

I was playing around with some formations earlier and landed on a 4-4-2 diamond. I caveat this with my only experience of management is FIFA career mode (back to back titles with Liverpool). 
 

                       Bents

Kalas     Cundy        Klose   Pring

                    Williams

          Scott                HNM

                    Weimann

          Semenyo       Conway

Kalas to coach Cundy through, and Pring to cover for Klose’s lack of pace. Lots of movement and pace up top with Martin as a last 30 option. I don’t think Nige would go for it but it’s an idea.