1 of 1- CCX2 2010
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Online! - Registered: 13/7/2017
- Posts: 1,485
3-5-2 or 3-4-3
Whatever the formation we are trying to play this year,is it working and/or will it?
From what I've seen it's been a bit too open for my liking. The only half decent team we have played to date have been Luton who scored two and really should have bagged a lot more.
That lot scored 2, County should have been out of sight by half time, Buckie Thistle even manages to score with relative ease, Falkirk had us chasing shadows for 90 minutes and gave us a seeing to.
It's not for me, I don't think we have the players to play it, down our right hand side is weak (very) and in the middle of the park it's powderpuff.
Have teams have sussed it out already?
Goodwin highlighted in this weak presser that when Dundee went to a back four in the second half they got a lot more joy, have a guess how Ross County lined up against us🤷♂️
We need a shape that makes us hard to beat first and foremost. I don't care if we are boring to watch, more importantly I don't want to go back the championship.
Finally I have noticed how vocal Goodwin is at the side of the park this season. This for me is not a good sign, the players should know the system, know the shape, know their jobs. Is this further proof that the system we are trying to play is complicating matters.
Thoughts?
- kiwiarab
- Tekel Towers 1st Team
Offline - Registered: 06/11/2014
- Posts: 486
Re: 3-5-2 or 3-4-3
3-4-3 isn't going to work, the overload I'm central midfield most weeks will mean the opposition can control the game.
3-5-2 might work if we have signed the right players, and everyone knows the system and what their job is.
It would be interesting to know the reasons for playing a back three.
Is it lack of pace? Might be easier to sign a few quick players than to try and change the whole system.
Is it to move the ball quicker and open up teams and create chances? Time will tell on this one.
Is it to allow us to press high up the park and win possession? This may work in some games, decent teams will likely work out how to play through it.
- Arabdownsouth
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Offline
- Registered: 25/12/2017
- Posts: 2,672
Re: 3-5-2 or 3-4-3
As Mike Bassett said, four four fucking two!
- CCX2 2010
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Online!
- Registered: 13/7/2017
- Posts: 1,485
Re: 3-5-2 or 3-4-3
Arabdownsouth wrote:
As Mike Bassett said, four four fucking two!
Sign me up.
It worked well at the end of last season.
4 at the back for me all day long and none of that zonal marking.
- •
Thread Starter- CCX2 2010
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Online!
- Registered: 13/7/2017
- Posts: 1,485
Re: 3-5-2 or 3-4-3
3-4-3 isn't going to work, the overload I'm central midfield most weeks will mean the opposition can control the game.
3-5-2 might work if we have signed the right players, and everyone knows the system and what their job is.
It would be interesting to know the reasons for playing a back three.
Is it lack of pace? Might be easier to sign a few quick players than to try and change the whole system.
Is it to move the ball quicker and open up teams and create chances? Time will tell on this one.
Is it to allow us to press high up the park and win possession? This may work in some games, decent teams will likely work out how to play through it.
I think it's to move it quicker and create chances, which it does and has done.
But as you mention in your first paragraph we have very little control. Sibbs is a mile off his form from last season hopefully Docherty makes a difference but we certainly can't rely on him to be fit for a prolonged period.
- •
Thread Starter- Arabdownsouth
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Offline
- Registered: 25/12/2017
- Posts: 2,672
Re: 3-5-2 or 3-4-3
What we can't do is stick rigidly to this new formation if it doesn't work. For me it's already not working, no one seems to know who to mark at the back and our midfield is overwhelmed at times. Get back to fucking basics because I genuinely can't see where our next clean sheet is coming from.
- Tek
- Administrator
Online!
- From: East Kilbride
- Registered: 05/7/2014
- Posts: 19,772
Re: 3-5-2 or 3-4-3
I've always been of the opinion that if you play a back 3 then they need to have pace.
Neither Gallagher, Holt, or Graham have real pace (the reason the latter gave the penalty away last week). Not sure on the new lad Adegboyega, yet.
But i fear we will be cruelly exposed by teams if we persist with this formation.
In all honesty we should be adapting the formation to suit different opponents. I've never been a fan of hanging your hat on any one formation.
- SuperMario
- Tekel Towers LEGEND
Offline
- Registered: 22/7/2015
- Posts: 2,896
Re: 3-5-2 or 3-4-3
I like the formation, however right now we are missing a midfielder who’s job first and foremost is to defend, neither sibbald or Dave are that, odada or doc might be the answer to that.
For the first hour against Dundee we were really good however we tired as we never had the substitutes that were correct for that game imo, never seen county game but from watching the highlights it didn’t look great at all, was far to open
Killie, dundee and st mirren have all had success with playing 3 at the back in this league however all 3 have 3 midfielders playing, VDS did do a job against Dundee but I’m unsure if I like my striker dropping 10/15 yards to man mark a midfielder
Early days there is definitely an improvement with our forward play however I think we will concede a hell of a lot more goals.