Should we go to three at the back?

[jts1882]

I think that, within reason, any system can be a success. Reasons why one will work better included getting the best out of your own players and dealing with the way opponents play. Histroically, three at the back was a good system for dealing with two strikers, but in the days on the lone forward you are either wasting a player (three to mark one) or you need someone to step forward, in which case its just another way of doing what the dropping holding player does with a back four. Then it becomes a personnel issue: do you have a CB comfortable in midfield or a holding midfielder comfortable at CB? United have Carrick for the latter, we don't seem to have either.

Looking at our CBs, the ability of Dier/Chiriches and Vertonghen to play fullback makes the back three appealing. But this type with a stopper and two players who can play fullback is different from the back three with a player who can step up. I don't think we want Fazio carrying the ball into midfield. A second problem is depth. Apart from the right we have no obvious cover. Kaboul at his best would fit the central position, but as he is struggling I wouldn't want to see him trying to adapt to a new role. Could Davies could play LCB? Likewise, even if Walker and Rose could play wingback (others have dealt with this) we wouldn't have backup.

Another question is whether it would make the midfield better? Our midfield trio is slowly beginning to take form and I'm not sure we want change now. A back three with a player stepping up to form a midfield diamond could ease the defensive burden, but we don't seem to have that player.

One reason teams switch to three at the back is to allow three in central midfield and two forwards. If you have two good forwards like RVP-Falcao or Suarez-Sturridge then you are adapting to use a strength. This progressive approach could overcome other potential disadvantages, but again this doesn't seem to apply to us. It could allow Soldado to find his feet (even the net) in a suitable partnership, but fitting Soldado in is not a strong enough reason.

Overall, I see no compelling reason why we should change to a back three now and it doesn't seem to fit our squad.

 

[SUIYHA]

My problem with 3-5-2 is the same as it was 10 years ago. It will always give you a disadvantage against a team playing a 4-3-3. The reason being the issue of wing forwards. As teams started to use more of these in the early 00s, 3-5-2 stopped getting results and went out of fashion.

If you're up against wing forwards, your wing back has a dilemma. Stay deep to mark him, meaning that your attacks are too narrow and easy to defend against in numbers? Or push forward to support the attacks, leaving yourself extremely vulnerable to counter attacks down the flanks as you have no full-back to cover. Playing on the wings is one of the more tiring positions to play in anyway, to have to do the role of both full-back and winger requires super human stamina. It's why we regularly got torn to pieces under Hoddle, especially in his last 18 months in the job, though the fact that we were playing without a proper DM and with the slowest team in Premier League history didn't help.

Man Utd have got results this season on the back of an outstanding array of attacking options featuring Van Persie, Falcao, Rooney, Di Maria, Mata and co. But they've hardly been convincing, and have dropped a lot of supposedly easy points against the likes of Burnley, Leicester, Aston Villa, West Brom, Sunderland and Swansea. Leicester even stuck five goals past them! Not to mention them getting dingdonged on by MK Dons in the cup. Yes they're third, but they're only two points ahead of where they were this time last year under Moyes. Hardly the sort of team we should be aspiring to be like. We could have beaten them on the weekend if we had better wingers, but unfortunately this is the weakest part of our squad. Regardless, I don't expect them to continue playing with three at the back next season.

One thing I do have a bit of time for is a 3-4-3 however. Reasons why can be best explained here http://www.zonalmarking.net/2012/05/16/wigan-stay-up-after-a-switch-to-3-4-3/

 

[Maltese Falcon]

Still think this formation (with Dembele instead of Lamela) would have been ideal for a difficult away game like last Sunday's...

 

[Coys300]

It might very well suit us. Unfortunately Pochettino doesn't seem to flexible in his use of formations, so I doubt it will happen. Our full-backs in Rose and Walker are already used as wing-backs, so for them it should work. And let's be honest, our wingers have been pretty average, so it's not like we are missing out on anything if they don't play. Also, the protection in front of the back-four is poor, partly because we usually don't play with a defensive midfielder. In that case we might be better off having an extra CB in there instead of playing with a defensive midfielder that Poch does 't seem to rate (Capoue, Stambouli).

-------------------Lloris----------------
-----Dier-Fazio-Vertonghen----
Walker-Bentaleb-Mason-Rose
------------------Eriksen-----------------
-------------Kane----Chadli------------

 

[braineclipse]

It might very well suit us. Unfortunately Pochettino doesn't seem to flexible in his use of formations, so I doubt it will happen. Our full-backs in Rose and Walker are already used as wing-backs, so for them it should work. And let's be honest, our wingers have been pretty average, so it's not like we are missing out on anything if they don't play. Also, the protection in front of the back-four is poor, partly because we usually don't play with a defensive midfielder. In that case we might be better off having an extra CB in there instead of playing with a defensive midfielder that Poch does 't seem to rate (Capoue, Stambouli).

-------------------Lloris----------------
-----Dier-Fazio-Vertonghen----
Walker-Bentaleb-Mason-Rose
------------------Eriksen-----------------
-------------Kane----Chadli------------

Tremendous difference between playing as an attacking full back with a wide player ahead of you and playing like a true wing back in a 3-5-2 type formation where the main wide attacking responsibility is on the wing back. I would say the attacking responsibility for a wing back in a 3-5-2 is closer to the attacking responsibility of a winger in a 4-4-x formation than to that of an attacking full back.

Look at the (top) teams that have been reasonably successful this season with a back 3 and the players they've used in wing back positions. Moreno, Markovic and Ibe for Liverpool. Young, Valencia etc for United. Very different players to Walker and Rose. The only natural full back amongst those is Moreno, and even he is much better going forward than he is defending.

I disagree that Pochettino isn't flexible. He's just trying to implement his system and being patient about it (as he should be imo). Drastic changes in formation like moving to a back 3 doesn't seem like it would aid in this process, at least not to me. Unless we actually believe that a back 3 is the solution long term trying it out now wouldn't serve much of a purpose. Players were signed in the summer to suit a 4-2-3-1, we have players already in our squad that fit that system. Our youth players have been developed playing a back 4 system.

 

[Coys300]

Half of the time our full-backs are playing without a winger infront of them anyway, most notably when Eriksen is on the left and Lamela on the right, they cut inside so much. Rose actually used to be a winger, not sure about Walker? How 'natural' at full-back are they? A couple of the players we signed this summer actually don't seem to suit the system and style of play all that much. Fazio, Davies, Stambouli? I have my doubts. Most players have been developed in a back-four system, probably most players currently playing at United and Liverpool also learned that style, yet that doesn't stop them from adapting to a different formation. As for a back 3 being the solution, I am not sure, that is why I want to try it out. One thing I do know though is that unless we get better performances from our wingers, the current system isn't working out as well as it should be. And with our wingers generally being unreliable I certainly don't think it is a bad idea to get rid of them and push the full-backs slightly more forward. Which also allows us to play one more CB which could definately help keeping us more solid at rhe back. I am not even a massive fan of this formation, but if the current one isn't working I see no reason why we couldn't try it out.

 

[braineclipse]

Half of the time our full-backs are playing without a winger infront of them anyway, most notably when Eriksen is on the left and Lamela on the right, they cut inside so much. Rose actually used to be a winger, not sure about Walker? How 'natural' at full-back are they? A couple of the players we signed this summer actually don't seem to suit the system and style of play all that much. Fazio, Davies, Stambouli? I have my doubts. Most players have been developed in a back-four system, probably most players currently playing at United and Liverpool also learned that style, yet that doesn't stop them from adapting to a different formation. As for a back 3 being the solution, I am not sure, that is why I want to try it out. One thing I do know though is that unless we get better performances from our wingers, the current system isn't working out as well as it should be. And with our wingers generally being unreliable I certainly don't think it is a bad idea to get rid of them and push the full-backs slightly more forward. Which also allows us to play one more CB which could definately help keeping us more solid at rhe back. I am not even a massive fan of this formation, but if the current one isn't working I see no reason why we couldn't try it out.

Again. Huge difference between attacking the space left by a wide player cutting inside, giving the opposing full back and wide midfielder those two players to worry about and being the wide player furthest forward when the attack breaks down.

Rose was moved to a full back position because he just wasn't good enough as a winger to succeed at this level. He does so much better with space to run into, space that is much easier to deny a player that has his starting position further forward.

United have not looked consistently better with a back 3 imo. Sunday was arguably their best game this season and it was with a back 4.

Fazio, Davies and Stambouli all fit well into a 4-2-3-1. Less convinced about a 3-5-2.

"Try it out"? For how long. Should we try it out for at least the rest of the season and a couple of months into next season? Or do we drop the experiment if it doesn't work out after a couple of weeks or a month. Is trying it out for a month or so really "trying it out"? Can we possibly expect our players to adjust to it that quickly?

Pochettino has his reasons for what he's doing. He thinks the current formation is the best fit for our current players and for where he wants to take us in the future it would seem. It's the same system he succeeded with at Southampton. He certainly has a plan for how to improve us going forward in that system.

 

[imcallingbullsh*t]

Man Utd almost played 3 up front with Fellani, Mata and Rooney. Not sure that one off creates a need to change.

Our centre backs do not suit 3 at the back as it would mean one of them when we are attacking would be responsible for making the play. Especially if you split the centre backs.
Its not a simple change to make as shown by utd and would need a complete overhaul of our playing style which is completely un-needed. Its the same as the high line argument, it was never a case of Dawson being too slow, it was a case of the front players not pressing and allowing the ball to be played in the first place.

 

[Coys300]

Rose was moved to a full back position because he just wasn't good enough as a winger to succeed at this level. He does so much better with space to run into, space that is much easier to deny a player that has his starting position further forward.

With the way Rose has been playing and Eriksen abandoning his position Rose was already playing very much in a forward position, I don't think the difference between a very offensive LB in a back-four to playing LWB is that big. Rose wasn't good enough as a winger, but I am not asking him to be one. If anything this new position might be his best one, since it also releases him of some defensive responsibilities, defensively he isn't really a natural either being raised as a winger. While at the same time he can attack, but doesn't have to do it to the level that a real winger must. Same applies to Walker btw and arguably Yedlin as well.

Fazio, Davies and Stambouli all fit well into a 4-2-3-1.

Not in Poch's version of the 4231, especially not Fazio and Davies (I haven't seen Stambouli play enough to really judge him). A 4231 without a high-line and no responsibilities for the CB's to really do the build-up might suit Fazio, but the version we are currently using? I am not convinced. Same with Davies, a high-line where his lack of pace can be exploited and an inverted winger in front of him cutting inside which requires him to go on the overlap? That doesn't seem to be his thing either.

"Try it out"? For how long. Should we try it out for at least the rest of the season and a couple of months into next season? Or do we drop the experiment if it doesn't work out after a couple of weeks or a month. Is trying it out for a month or so really "trying it out"? Can we possibly expect our players to adjust to it that quickly?

Just a couple of matches can already tell you a lot. Under Sherwood and even under AVB and Pochettino we did switch systems from time to time, especially to the 442, I don't see why we couldn't experiment with it at times. Good coaches are capable of being flexible with their formations. We have plenty of time now to experiment with kt duei g traini g sessions as well being out of all cup-competitions.

 

[braineclipse]

1. With the way Rose has been playing and Eriksen abandoning his position Rose was already playing very much in a forward position, I don't think the difference between a very offensive LB in a back-four to playing LWB is that big. Rose wasn't good enough as a winger, but I am not asking him to be one. If anything this new position might be his best one, since it also releases him of some defensive responsibilities, defensively he isn't really a natural either being raised as a winger. While at the same time he can attack, but doesn't have to do it to the level that a real winger must. Same applies to Walker btw and arguably Yedlin as well.



2. Not in Poch's version of the 4231, especially not Fazio and Davies (I haven't seen Stambouli play enough to really judge him). A 4231 without a high-line and no responsibilities for the CB's to really do the build-up might suit Fazio, but the version we are currently using? I am not convinced. Same with Davies, a high-line where his lack of pace can be exploited and an inverted winger in front of him cutting inside which requires him to go on the overlap? That doesn't seem to be his thing either.



3. Just a couple of matches can already tell you a lot. Under Sherwood and even under AVB and Pochettino we did switch systems from time to time, especially to the 442, I don't see why we couldn't experiment with it at times. Good coaches are capable of being flexible with their formations. We have plenty of time now to experiment with kt duei g traini g sessions as well being out of all cup-competitions.

1. Disagree. Part of the problem in our attacking play stems from our wide players moving inside too quickly. Some of the best combination play between Lamela and Walker has come when Lamela stayed wider a bit longer into the attacks imo. Removing that wide player ahead of Walker just amplifies the problem for me.

2. Disagree. Fazio did well. Davies did well when in form.

3. And finally I disagree here as well. Successfully implementing a back 3 takes more than a couple of weeks. And 4-4-2 is much closer to a 4-2-3-1 than a back 3 is, I don't get why you would use that as an example.

Good coaches are capable of being flexible with their formations. But I don't see many good coaches just experiment for the sake of experimentation. And plenty of good coaches are fairly rigid in terms of the system they want to develop over time. Look at Klopp or Guardiola for example. Or Bielsa (one of Pochettino's mentors). That's not the same as saying we can't play 4-4-2 from time to time, I would say we have done just that at times actually. We (like some of those coaches) have also been flexible with our system without changing our formation... I think the formation thing is a bit of a red herring and a system of play is much more important.

 

[Coys300]

1. Disagree. Part of the problem in our attacking play stems from our wide players moving inside too quickly. Some of the best combination play between Lamela and Walker has come when Lamela stayed wider a bit longer into the attacks imo. Removing that wide player ahead of Walker just amplifies the problem for me.

In theory this is indeed how it should be, both attacking down the right-flank. I remember one particular match where Lamela and Walker did this and it worked out great. Unfortunately I don't remember a lot of other matches where this happened. Most of the time Lamela and Eriksen on the left both cut inside extensively (Chadli and Townsend do stay on the wings more, but their overall play isn't really good enough imo). I can only assume this is what they are instructed to do by Poch in this system and it's not working. If Pochettino is so reluctant to have his wingers stay on the wing I would rather get the full-backs higher up the pitch to compensate for the absense of the wingers on the wings. Pochettino actually seems to have done this in his system, the main problem with that is that he asks so much of our full-backs to provide the width that he is almost giving them an impossible task to also have to defend. That is why I want that extra CB on. Pochettino is basically asking our full-backs to play as wingers, while at the same time still requires them to defend in a back-four system, it doesn't work well enough imo.

2. Disagree. Fazio did well. Davies did well when in form.

And yet both of them have been benched for players who seem to be more suited to the system/style of play.

 

[braineclipse]

1. In theory this is indeed how it should be, both attacking down the right-flank. I remember one particular match where Lamela and Walker did this and it worked out great. Unfortunately I don't remember a lot of other matches where this happened. Most of the time Lamela and Eriksen on the left both cut inside extensively (Chadli and Townsend do stay on the wings more, but their overall play isn't really good enough imo). I can only assume this is what they are instructed to do by Poch in this system and it's not working. If Pochettino is so reluctant to have his wingers stay on the wing I would rather get the full-backs higher up the pitch to compensate for the absense of the wingers on the wings. Pochettino actually seems to have done this in his system, the main problem with that is that he asks so much of our full-backs to provide the width that he is almost giving them an impossible task to also have to defend. That is why I want that extra CB on. Pochettino is basically asking our full-backs to play as wingers, while at the same time still requires them to defend in a back-four system, it doesn't work well enough imo.



2. And yet both of them have been benched for players who seem to be more suited to the system/style of play.

1. Or you could assume that Pochettino's system is still being developed and that the players are still adjusting. Just a suggestion.

2. Both of them have also been dropped in favour of players that have been in form and playing well. But you can of course assume that it's the reason you're choosing that's behind Pochettino's decision...

 

[Coys300]

Lol, look at it how you will, the facts are that Davies and Fazio have been benched for players more suited to our system and that neither Eriksen nor Lamela on the wings is working out all that well.

 

[Raziel]

Don't have the depth - we really only have 3 selectable CB's, one of which is extremely young/inexperienced. Formation choice with no sub option?

We need to sort our RW dynamic, I still think Poch fudged up with Lennon
- The best midfield dynamic I've seen us have was Everton game with IIRC Chadli/Eriksen/Lennon
- We have tried repeatedly swapping Townsend/Lamela in that RW role, and despite the occasional moments, it really doesn't work.

To me, we need to have a RW option that works so the three in front of Bentaleb/Mason function, i.e. Chadli/Eriksen/+1 before anything else

I'd also opt for a DM in front of back 4 before back 3, we used to be poor defensively even with King, Palacios -> Parker -> Sandro is what made us much tougher defensively.

 

[Gutter Boy]

Don't have the depth - we really only have 3 selectable CB's, one of which is extremely young/inexperienced. Formation choice with no sub option?

We need to sort our RW dynamic, I still think Poch fudgeed up with Lennon
- The best midfield dynamic I've seen us have was Everton game with IIRC Chadli/Eriksen/Lennon
- We have tried repeatedly swapping Townsend/Lamela in that RW role, and despite the occasional moments, it really doesn't work.

To me, we need to have a RW option that works so the three in front of Bentaleb/Mason function, i.e. Chadli/Eriksen/+1 before anything else

I'd also opt for a DM in front of back 4 before back 3, we used to be poor defensively even with King, Palacios -> Parker -> Sandro is what made us much tougher defensively.

I do think our 3 AMs work well. We've scored a lot of goals this season remember. I think it's a nice blend - Chadli is the big powerful goalscorer who gets up closest to Kane, Eriksen as the creative one, and Lamela/Townsend as the high-tempo, hard-pressing, positionally-disciplined ball-carrier. If we played an old-fashioned winger like Lennon, I think that would have negative knock-on effect on the more attacking two of the trio.

Again I don't think a traditional DM works with our system either. We need both our CMs to be high-tempo pressers and rapid transitioners. A cumbersome destroyer type just doesn't fit in.

People are nostalgic for wingers and crunching DMs, but to me the progress we've made in the last 6 months is due to moving to a modern system that moves beyond heroic individuals. We need system players now, not individuals.

 

[Coys300]

Don't have the depth - we really only have 3 selectable CB's, one of which is extremely young/inexperienced. Formation choice with no sub option?

I am not sure whether Chiriches is still an option, I don't think he is good enough defensively in a two CB's system, but in a three as the RCB? It could work. Also, Davies as a LCB? Could also work, personally I think he would actually be more suited to that role as compared to how he is required to play as an overlapping full-back in the current system.

 

[Raziel]

I do think our 3 AMs work well. We've scored a lot of goals this season remember. I think it's a nice blend - Chadli is the big powerful goalscorer who gets up closest to Kane, Eriksen as the creative one, and Lamela/Townsend as the high-tempo, hard-pressing, positionally-disciplined ball-carrier. If we played an old-fashioned winger like Lennon, I think that would have negative knock-on effect on the more attacking two of the trio.

Again I don't think a traditional DM works with our system either. We need both our CMs to be high-tempo pressers and rapid transitioners. A cumbersome destroyer type just doesn't fit in.

People are nostalgic for wingers and crunching DMs, but to me the progress we've made in the last 6 months is due to moving to a modern system that moves beyond heroic individuals. We need system players now, not individuals.

2 of our 3 AMs work well, I'm not arguing the case of winger/inverted, I'm pointing out neither Lamela/Townsend can deliver a consistent 75 minute performance, and every opposition team manager knows the RW side is our weakness.

Re the DM, you and I have different opinions, I'm looking at a destroyer with a little more intelligence (Sandro at his prime/form), even parker when he played well, won the ball, passed to Modric. And I don't believe the DM should be every game, just certain and just to get more control/close out games. conceding 2 a game is not acceptable.

 

[Maltese Falcon]

Our current formation sucks! Eriksen and Kane papered the cracks but now that they are going through a lean spell, it is clear that the rest of the squad is mid table at best. And our defence continues to more accommodating than a 50 year old hooker.

No width whatsoever and no protection from the Masaleb combo which has finally been found out for its limitations.

We need something massively drastic against Emirates Marketing Project or they will wipe the floor with us.

--------------------------------------------------------------------LLoris----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


----------------------------Dier------------------------------------Fazio--------------------------------------------------Verts------------------------------------------------


Yedlin------------------------------------------------------------Bentaleb------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Rose


-----------------------------------Eriksen--------------------------------------------------------------------------Chadli-------------------------------------------------------


-----------------------------------------------Soldado--------------------------------------------Kane-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please: No Mason, No Townsend; No Lamela....

 

[Maltese Falcon]

They used to say that Martin Peters was ten years ahead of his time.

In the case of this post, it was just two years... with much better players!