• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

YOU are the manager

thfcsteff said:
In the spirit of this FINE thread, and to further build on some answers I have thinking from the AVB perspective, here is what I would do if I were the manager with the current squad!



Lloris


Kaboul Chriches Verts


Sandro

Walker Paulinho Sigurdsson Townsend

Eriksen

Soldado


subs: Gomes, Lamela, Lennon, Chadli , Defoe, Capoue, Daws


I love the idea of a 3-5-2…again, let's be honest, basically this formation flips and reverts to a 3-4-3 when necessary…but I genuinely believe that with the skill we have in defence we should be looking to play 3 at the back at home, let Sandro patrol, and rely on Walker and Townsend to perform like proper 100% wing-backs. A MASSIVE gamble with Townsend, but given my current squad I'd have him there over Rose as I think he's actually a little tougher and more driven PLUS he offers more on the attack. Of course, allow me to buy Leighton Baines in january and he goes right in!

Paulinho shares workhorse detail with Sandro whilst also having some license, which thus leaves Eriksen and Sig to work their magic with Soldado. As mentioned in other threads I would absolutely love to see Lamela in there at some point behind Soldado/where Sig would be playing, as I think once he's ready he will be a massive, massive creative influence.

My bench has flexibility for sure.

My skipper is Sandro.

Incidentally I find it amazing that NO-ONE has gone for 3 at the back. I think deep down, the swashbucklers out there might be a little afraid of our solidity being potentially compromised!!!!! I believe that as long as your wing-backs are prepared to work, it is a system which (with our squad personnel) could suffocate some sides in the right way!
Click to expand...

Check my long post a bit further up! I advocate 3-5-2 as well in certain games and situations.
 
Bullet said:
Libero made some good points - at present Soldado has 2 men marking just him, and the wide men like Townsend also have 2 men to beat by the time we get the ball to him.

It is all so congested and seems like whichever way we turn each man has 2 men to beat; dammit!

The point for me is that we need more bodies in the box, which could be the free role (Holtby / Eriksen) or someone from deeper (Paulinho) or the other wide man (Sigg for example) or it could be Defoe/Adebayor/Kane as others like OnlyMe are saying... but we do need to get more men in the box, no argument. And sacrifice a little defensiveness.

I can see why some say 3 at the back, that does seem logical, and brings up dreams of Beckenbauer, Hoddle etc. but I seen it as a messy formation. No-one is quite sure who is picking up who. Do you push out and engage the man in possession, or mark your man, or follow the runners from deep? A split second of indecision and you're screwed.

They did a good section on this on MotD the other night when Liverpool played 3 at the back against the Gooners. They weren't sure who to mark, someone (Sissoko?) came out to challenge and runners went in behind him so the centre backs came across and they were all over the shop, swapping over, confused, panicking. Whereas 4 at the back means your 2 centre backs can just stay in the centre and not get pulled all over the pitch, out to the byline etc.
Click to expand...

I agree that sometimes it can get messy but I think it is again down to the opposition you play. Arsenal have superior movement and interchange compared to most teams and 3 at the back might not neccessarily suit in that game. It would also kill the Lloris situation as the spare defender would always be slightly deeper (generally) and possibly cause him to think twice about rushing off his line when it is that which has served us pretty well.

Like I said in my long old post on page 4, I think there is a time and place for 4-4-2, 3-5-2, 4-2-3-1 which would be our primary formations based on the players we have and I would play them on a game by game basis. I think that is really all I am asking of AVB. I don't want us to rigidly stick to one formation but play each game as it comes and base our tactics/formation on the venue and team we are playing at/against.
 
Libero said:
I agree that sometimes it can get messy but I think it is again down to the opposition you play. Arsenal have superior movement and interchange compared to most teams and 3 at the back might not neccessarily suit in that game. It would also kill the Lloris situation as the spare defender would always be slightly deeper (generally) and possibly cause him to think twice about rushing off his line when it is that which has served us pretty well.

Like I said in my long old post on page 4, I think there is a time and place for 4-4-2, 3-5-2, 4-2-3-1 which would be our primary formations based on the players we have and I would play them on a game by game basis. I think that is really all I am asking of AVB. I don't want us to rigidly stick to one formation but play each game as it comes and base our tactics/formation on the venue and team we are playing at/against.
Click to expand...

I'm sure I remember reading an interview with AVB where he mentions that the reason he likes 4-2-3-1 is because it isn't rigid. Because you only need one or two players to shift a little and it readily becomes lots of other formations - the best building block if you like.

It may have been someone else though - my memory is terrible.
 
scaramanga said:
I'm sure I remember reading an interview with AVB where he mentions that the reason he likes 4-2-3-1 is because it isn't rigid. Because you only need one or two players to shift a little and it readily becomes lots of other formations - the best building block if you like.

It may have been someone else though - my memory is terrible.
Click to expand...

Gary Neville said recently that 4-2-3-1 is a con and it's actually no different to 4-4-2. He was hoping to do a segment on it in MNF at some point - not sure whether it's been done yet.
 
scaramanga said:
I'm sure I remember reading an interview with AVB where he mentions that the reason he likes 4-2-3-1 is because it isn't rigid. Because you only need one or two players to shift a little and it readily becomes lots of other formations - the best building block if you like.

It may have been someone else though - my memory is terrible.
Click to expand...

I remember him saying something along those lines, it was AVB so your memory isn't failing you. In theory, it should be easy but during a fluid game situation to suddenly switch between 3-4 different formations is a difficult ask and somewhere along the line someone is not quite sure of what their responsibility or positioning should be. It becomes over complex for a footballer to digest when they are concentrating on a number of other factors that are ever changing in a game, never mind a formation that changes everytime you lose or gain possession of the ball which is what 4-2-3-1 is supposed to do. I am also a great believer in going with a formation that feels comfortable to those playing it and using a system that feels right to those employed within it. I am not too sure that offensively, those players are enjoying or feel comfortable with what we are playing at the moment.

I think sometimes with footballers at this level, it is about just getting them to go out there and play. Pick a formation, make them aware of the other teams dangers but ultimately, let them go out and play. Of course, I wouldn't say that is the right way to go for every game, some games need better planning and higher levels of awareness but Thursday for instance, pick a team and let them loose to use their greater quality and it will find a way.
 
Nezza said:
Gary Neville said recently that 4-2-3-1 is a con and it's actually no different to 4-4-2. He was hoping to do a segment on it in MNF at some point - not sure whether it's been done yet.
Click to expand...

It's inherently different from 4-4-2 (in a bad way imo) because you have a desparity between what is expected of each of the 3 behind the forward and what they should/shouldn't be doing based on turnover of possession.

The only reason I am happy for it to be employed for us in specific games is that it forces alot of what the opponent does wide and generally keeps them out of harms way. if they choose to go through the middle then it is over congested and chances are they won't make much impact. That obviously though has an effect on what we then offer in terms of our offensive ability which we are seeing now with Soldado. His ability and impact is being compromised at times because the tactics are not geared to getting the best out of offensive players but more geared to making sure you are durable and difficult to negate initially.
 
I d go with the same tactical setup as AVB, but these are my squads:

PL:

Lloris ----- Walker - Vlad - Daws - Verts ----- Lamela (AMR) - Sandro (DM) - Capoue (CM) - Eriksen (AMC) - Andros (AML) ---- Soldado.

Subs: Ade, Siggy, Holtby, Chadli, Lennon, Dembele - preferably in that order and we switch to 4-4-2 with Ade and Soldado when we need goals, take off Holtby/Capoue. Replace tired or subpar midfield when we are comfortably into the lead or stuck in no man's land.

EL:

Lloris ---- Walker - Vlad - Kaboul - Verts/Rose ---- Townsend/Lamela (AMR) - Sandro/Dembele (DM) - Paulie CM - Siggy (AMC) - Holtby/Lennon (AML) ---- Ade

Subs: Soldado, Eriksen, Capoue, Lamela, Kane, Chadli - same idea as the above, switch to Soldado and Ade for a 4-4-2 and bring on Eriksen for more fire power up front. Kane could get some time too and I'd use Paulie more up front than his current position with AVB.

Yes, that pretty much does the trick for me with the current individual performances. Big question mark for Lamela, but I would risk 2 PL starts to give him a final chance - I think he is very eager to prove himself right now and something tells me he'll have an outburst in the United and City games.

I fully support AVB and think the results have been great - it's difficult to get more with the current lad's form. We will be so much deadly and sharp when the team is gelling and honestly I'm looking forward to those times. Soldado, Eriksen and Lamela will be great by the season's end. COYS!
 
Okay lads, start sharpening your pencils - Euro game coming up - who is looking likely to be picked? Surely an easy selection for this but what formation??
 
Papercut said:
Okay lads, start sharpening your pencils - Euro game coming up - who is looking likely to be picked? Surely an easy selection for this but what formation??
Click to expand...

I went with 4-4-1-1 purely to accomodate both Adebayor and Lamela as they both need game time and a chance to boost their own personal morale.
 
I'd like to see Capoue behind Erkisen and Sig with Lamela on the right and Townsend on the left behind Soldado or Ade.
I expect to see Sandro and Dembele behind Eriksen with Sig on the left and Lamela on the right behind Defoe.

Still wondering whether or not to make the journey up, tickets are on general sale and I haven't been up to the Lane for years
 
My side?


Gomes


Kaboul Daws Chiriches

Capoue

Lennon Holtby Eriksen Lamela

Defoe Kane


subs: Friedel, Fryers (if fit), Paulinho, Andros, Sigurdsson, Soldado, Verts



Absolutely only use Verts or Paulinho under the greatest of desperations. Give Sandro the absolute night off.


This one would be a big gamble simply because our left-side is rather dodgy in defensive terms, but again, this can quickly become a straight 4-4-2 when we cede possession with Capoue slotting right in next to Daws. Holtby to do his Freundy impression and Eriksen to feed TWO strikers if he wants…I would back Kane to perform a great link-up role here…no pressure on Lamela and I'd be stressing a free role for him to come in from a wide position and do what he in terms of creative expression.
 
Papercut said:
Okay lads, start sharpening your pencils - Euro game coming up - who is looking likely to be picked? Surely an easy selection for this but what formation??
Click to expand...

It's not my intention to underestimate FC Sheriff but if we can't play with two men up front at home against a team from Moldova then surely we'll never be able to. I would really like to see Adebayor with Defoe up top.

Considering Sheriff will probably come with a very defensive approach I think it should be possible to play with 3 at the back but knowing AVB he'll probably stick with 4 at the back so it'll be 4-4-2. With only two men in the middle I would play Capoue as I think he has a better work rate than Sandro. Ideally I would play Paulinho alongside him but he should definately be rested so I would play either Holtby (who I rate more as a CM than as a number 10) or Dembele.

On the wings I would go for one speedy winger to create width and an iverted winger to play in between their defensive and midfield lines. Considering Townsend should be rested i would go for Lennon on the right and Chadli or Gylfi on the left. I would definately rest Lloris, Vertonghen, Walker, Paulinho and Townsend which leaves me with a team looking like this:

..........................................Friedel......................................

Naughton........Kaboul/Dawson..........Chiriches............Fryers

...........................Capoue.........Dembele/Holtby...................

Lennon.........................................................<---Gylfi/Chadli

...........................Adebayor............Defoe.............................


Subs: Gomes, Dawson, Dembele, Eriksen, Chadli, Lamela, Kane
 
Last edited:
For tomorrow

-------------------Gomes
Naughton Kaboul Chiriches Fryers
-------------Capoue Holtby
---------Lamela Eriksen Townsend (assuming Chadli is out???)
--------------------Defoe
 
I'd like to give this team a spin out and see what happens. Need some triangles, triangles I tell ya.

--------------Soldado-------------
Eriksen--------Paulinho-------Lamela
--------Demeble---------Sandro------

With Rose and Walker to supply the width. Paulie to stay forward more than not.
 
Last edited:
for tomorrow

..........................Friedel
............Kaboul....Dawson...Chiriches......
Lennon...........Capoue...Holtby..........Townsend
..........................Eriksen
..................Defoe..........Lamela
 
Rorschach said:
I'd like to give this team a spin out and see what happens. Need some triangles, triangles I tell ya.

--------------Soldado-------------
Eriksen--------Paulinho-------Lamela
--------Demeble---------Sandro------

With Rose and Walker to supply the width. Paulie to stay forward more than not.
Click to expand...

Just out of curiosity, why would you play 3 CM's against a significantly weaker team when lack of creativity so far has been the main issue?

Eriksen on the left however could be interesting although he hasn't really played there much in his career.
 
I love the idea of Gomes in goal, admiteddly - Archer is likelier.

I wouldn't use 3 CBs for this purely because I want to rest some of them.

My issue is the left side again - is Fryers fit? Shame Rose isn't because it would be a good game for him. Other than those would be Andros...

I also do not want to underestimate our opponents.

As a manager, throwing in bit part players may not give me any indications of the system I want - working. Perhaps Roberto should start with a different approach behind him? More technical players rather than direct? This way, he could ascertain whether the inverted powerful wingers actually works?

I'd be tempted with:

---------------------Gomes/Friedel-----------------------------

Naughton--------Kaboul---------Chric/Daws------------Fryers

----------------Capoue--------Dembele-------------------

------Lamela-----------Eriksen-----------Kane----------------

----------------------Soldado-----------------------------

Subs--- Friedel, Veljkovic, McEvoy, Holtby, Bentaleb, Defoe, Ade,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back