• 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

Tactics Thread

There really isn't any tangible difference between a 4-3-3 with a deep midfielder and one of the forwards sitting deep and a 4-4-2 diamond.

Except diamonds need sides...

Out midfielders we’re flat and sat along side each other

It’s just another trendy thing that has been put out there and adopted but actually it’s utter bollcoks
 
Exactly, I'm not sure what the debate actually is? Winks was deepest of the midfield and Lamela was in front of them. To be a 4-3-3- you need 3 strikers. We had two. My post and the pass map above it both show this clearly.

No you don’t

Pool don’t play 3 strikers
 
Except diamonds need sides...

Out midfielders we’re flat and sat along side each other

It’s just another trendy thing that has been put out there and adopted but actually it’s utter bollcoks
The main criticism of the diamond formation is that it is too narrow. The diamond doesn't have sides and relies (much like our brickshow of a formation) on width from the full backs.
 
They play with two wide forwards and one central, the terms are interchangeable. Wide forwards make a 4-3-3, three strikers make a 4-3-3.

The heatmaps tell the story.

Also the diamond midfield has been around for decades, it's the opposite of trendy.
 
The main criticism of the diamond formation is that it is too narrow. The diamond doesn't have sides and relies (much like our brickshow of a formation) on width from the full backs.

May as well be a fudging square or a sausage for all it matters

It’s simple what works with us 4-2-3-1
 
They play with two wide forwards and one central, the terms are interchangeable. Wide forwards make a 4-3-3, three strikers make a 4-3-3.

The heatmaps tell the story.

Also the diamond midfield has been around for decades, it's the opposite of trendy.

Heat maps mean nothing
They just show where players are when they receive a ball... not where they spend most of their time standing alongside another player waiting for someone else to do something
 
Agreed. What's most frustrating is that it was Poch who used that to best effect. He should be better placed than anyone to see that.

Following trends it seems
That’s the catch when you become a better side, the trap is copying others rather than innovating
 
I dont see Poch copying anything.

Last season he adapted to a half bastard diamond to suit the personel we had.

Saturday? No Alli, Eriksen, Lo Celso, Son...

What was he supposed to do? That he stuck with what (half) worked last season should come as no surprise.

It was poorly set up, and happily rectified later on, but I dont see the idea he is copying anyone.

When we have a full compliment to choose from I expect to see much better from him and us. And most likely not a diamond in sight
 
I dont see Poch copying anything.

Last season he adapted to a half bastard diamond to suit the personel we had.

Saturday? No Alli, Eriksen, Lo Celso, Son...

What was he supposed to do? That he stuck with what (half) worked last season should come as no surprise.

It was poorly set up, and happily rectified later on, but I dont see the idea he is copying anyone.

When we have a full compliment to choose from I expect to see much better from him and us. And most likely not a diamond in sight

I agree. Poch is a lot bothered about formations than us fans. He tends to settle on a formation that accommodates his best players which is why his favoured formation has changed nearly every season he has been with us.

I'd expect him to try a few different formations and line ups over the next couple of months before settling on something in the autumn and that being our predominant set up for the rest of the season.
 
The main criticism of the diamond formation is that it is too narrow. The diamond doesn't have sides and relies (much like our brickshow of a formation) on width from the full backs.

Indeed. Hopefully our attackers won’t start the game so narrow at the Emptihad this weekend or our fullbacks will get run ragged by €iteh’s overloads.

25114AC3-F680-4C34-BAF2-24EDAA36994B.jpeg
 
Indeed. Hopefully our attackers won’t start the game so narrow at the Emptihad this weekend or our fullbacks will get run ragged by €iteh’s overloads.

View attachment 7065

I actually think a diamond has some merit against a side like City, as long as you adapt and adjust as a unit. The inherent predictability that makes it a problem against sides like Villa can be something of an advantage against sides like City - as we showed in the CL.

Like, the overload out wide from them are all well and good, but we’re basically giving them the space and showing them into more of a crowded area once it happens. So rather than break through lines, they are just running into space where we don’t intend to be anyway. It can still be exploited, by them pulling us out of position and us not adjusting when we should, but it it’s a decent option to stifle good build up.
 
Indeed. Hopefully our attackers won’t start the game so narrow at the Emptihad this weekend or our fullbacks will get run ragged by €iteh’s overloads.

View attachment 7065
From that picture I have no idea what our formation was supposed to be? Was it a 4-3-3, Or 2 up top with a midfield diamond behind them? Was Lamela supposed to be playing at the tip of a diamond? (if so then his position looks OK). Whether we were playing a 4-3-3 or a 4-4-2 with a diamond I can only say that N'Dombele's position looks completely baffling?
 
City showing how it should be done there.

Look at the width amongst the 4 attacking players compared to ours. If you could lay Villa's positions on the same graphic the amount of dots would be crazy.

One of the more baffling aspects of our play was that we set ourselves up to be counter attacked the way we was by isolating our own full backs.
 
Whilst I'm generally anti-diamond and pro-4-2-3-1, I actually really hope we play 5-3-2 against City at the weekend. As per the graph above and below, they basically play a front 5, and so I think it's impossible for any back 4 not to be overloaded by them - especially given that they have so much possession and so much quality. In fact they basically play a 2-3-5 in possession, so let's mirror that and hit them on the break with Kane and Moura.

upload_2019-8-12_16-42-26.png
 
Whilst I'm generally anti-diamond and pro-4-2-3-1, I actually really hope we play 5-3-2 against City at the weekend. As per the graph above and below, they basically play a front 5, and so I think it's impossible for any back 4 not to be overloaded by them - especially given that they have so much possession and so much quality. In fact they basically play a 2-3-5 in possession, so let's mirror that and hit them on the break with Kane and Moura.

View attachment 7066
From that picture there it looks as though playing 3 up front with pacy left and right sided attackers playing high up the pitch and then long diagonals to those players with Kane exploiting that gap between the two centre halves is the way to attack Emirates Marketing Project.
 
From that picture there it looks as though playing 3 up front with pacy left and right sided attackers playing high up the pitch and then long diagonals to those players with Kane exploiting that gap between the two centre halves is the way to attack Emirates Marketing Project.

Maybe, but to do that I think you’d need to play 4 at the back, and I think with their higher quality and home advantage they’d exploit their 5 vs 4 better than we’d exploit our 3 vs 2. A bit like the second leg of CL semi (albeit with us playing diamond rather than 4-3-3), with lots of goals but more scored by City. Just IMO.
 
Back