Against city we defended from the front
But ours aren't capable of this. We've seen it multiple times. They end up sitting deeper and deeper until it's all rear guard action.
I'll just make the same point again though.... If playing three at the back then we shouldn't need to have 'a defensive minded by nature' (whatever that is) player in our two man midfield. We already have an extra man at the back by playing with 3 CBs. If we can't defend well enough with 3 CBs covering the middle then either the formation is wrong (I think it is, at least for the players we possess) or at least one of the 3 CBs is not good enough (I also believe this to be true).
Our midfield two play as a double pivot and defend and attack. The 3 CBs should be able cope with men into the box yes. Most teams have only two CBs plus a deep lying midfielder and cope with the opposition getting men into the box with those 3 central players. If the opposition are playing a number 10 type player then it absolutely should be our central CB who picks him up, after all he is the 'spare' man and what else does he actually do in the match if not this?
Ok, most teams play with some variation of a 433, so you're happy for our CBs to mark the 3 forwards and also be responsible for runners from midfield.
So a back three can have 4/5 players flood them because they midfield and WBs get over run or not tracking and be expected to pick up every runner just because there are 3 of them? That's a slightly ridiculous notion.
No…. ‘Most’ teams do indeed play a variation of 4-3-3…. In defence the full backs for those teams will pick up the opposition’s wide forwards and their 2 CBs and defensive midfielder will pick up the opposition’s CF and attacking central midfielder between them.
You don’t think our 3 at the back were complicit in our defensive issues at the weekend?
No, the WBs won't pick up the wide forwards, it's not that simple. With full backs attacking, the WBs will be expected to cover them, and with wide forwards attacking the box the wide CBs will be expected to cover them. Midfield have to cover runners from midfield. Look at any match and there's times when there will be 3+ players in the box, full backs pushing on wide and then players arriving from midfield to around the edge of the box. Everyone has responsibility when we are defending, not just the defenders.
Has anyone said they were not complicit? The whole team was.
That is exactly what our wingbacks do,they pick up the opposition’s wide forwards, our wide forwards are then the ones who come back to pick up the opposition’s fullbacks. If the opposition get 3 players into our box then it is typically where they have the ball out wide, in this situation our wingback from the other side will then tuck in (see how many far post headers Royal contests for example) and give us at least equal numbers in there.
I agree that it wasn’t solely on our back three against Leicester, Porro was terrible and Perisic has shown himself to be a poor defender all season. However I originally came on address the all too frequent blame that our central midfield 2 get for our losses and goals conceded when they are pretty much always outnumbered and should never be having to pick up the opposition’s ‘number 10’ type player.
Who mentioned picking up the number 10? Look at the goals we concede, there are a large number were our midfield has not tracked midfielders that ran past them from deep.
Which goals?…. There was one where Bissouma didn’t track his man a while ago, I suspect that’s one of the reasons why Conte wasn’t picking him when he was fit. Which others?
Our wingbacks don't pick up the wide forwards when a FB is getting forward. Our wide forwards give fudge all help defensively. Kulu gives some, Son nothing, the amount of times that the WB has been left 2 on 1 by Son.
They absolutely do, occasionally our wing back will pass on the opposition’s wide player to Kulu/Son if the full back makes an underlapping run.
