The diamond

[Guest]

the diamond formation seem to be one of the main topics.

altho its ridiculously early to judge, what are people's views?

I didn't like it v Villarreal. No doubt some people will get all high and mighty and see even a debate of the system as 'wrist slashing' but it would be interesting to hear a few considered views.

Personally i  don't like the system whoever plays it, and i don't think it suits us either altho as i say it is early days. 

But any tactical system which creates space for the opposition seems counter productive to me.

The diamond is a variation of 442. The central two midfielders specialise.

 one becomes primarily defensive and drops deep and the other has freer role to create high up the pitch. As a consequence there is a big hole in the centre and the wide midfielders tuck in to try to cover this space. However this exposes the full backs, and gives the opposition freedom to attack down the flanks

It also means that the midfield is narrow and there is no natural width.

in order to attack down the flanks the full backs have to bomb forward, leaving more gaps for the opposition to exploit on the counter attack. I think the idea is that the diamond shifts left or right depending on the opposition threat but its a mess. The two midfielders who tuck in end up chasing shadows and have to work their socks off. perhaps if you have a couple of James Milners it helps.The disadvantages seem to far outway any supposed benefits.

It would help if a team has the players to suit it. 

Apart from Thorne, i'm not sure that we do. ince likes cutting in from wide. He's not a Charlie George type deep lying striker or an attacking central midfielder who will dominate the game. Neither hughes, hendrick or bryson are effective if forced wide. Hughes is best in the central role. The full backs don't like bombing on and are both in theirs 30s. 

Over the last couple of seasons people have waxed lyrical about our "expansive" football.

The diamond  is the antithesis of that. 

I'm hoping that PC has the sense to drop it if it doesn't produce effective and attractive football. 

 

[CheltenhamRam]

We were class v villareal?

[SaintRam]

Genuinely don't think I've seen enough to be able to make a decision.

I will say, what I have seen so far hasn't been positive. Our midfield playmakers, Thorne and Hughes, have been stifled by compacted midfields and our attack has lacked width.

I don't know if we'll persevere with it, if we do and it ends up being very successful then that's great, but right now the players are not adapting to it quickly enough and I don't feel as though using Warnock when you already have a defensive full back in Baird is going to work in a formation where you're relying on a FB to give you width.

As above, we were good v Villarreal, but only going to judge based on what I see in competitive games.

[Philmycock]

It might work if we had a decent right back, Shotton is so out of his depth going forward

[North_Stand_Ram]

The main concern for me is the width when defending. Warnock and Shotton/Baird were doubled up on constantly and Hendrick in particular didn't adapt to the defensive role of his new wide left central position. 

Ince was wasted in the hole also. He kept finding space but no one seemed to pick him out. Martin was hopeless today but I'm not sure that was a result of the formation. His first touch/decision making has nothing to do with the formation, which was lacking massively today

[Tombo]

It depends on the game, there's a time and a place for the diamond. It doesn't leave the fullbacks exposed when you have any two CMs who can cover full back and help out wide. It's primarily to get width defensively, but to bring the play centrally, which is a good way to win a midfield battle against a possession side. In a passing battle, I back us to beat any team in the league on any day. If we draw them into the middle and lure them into playing our game, the rest is simple.

Maybe today wasn't the day for it, but that's not why we didn't win. I'm happy with a point. By the way, how many goals did we concede from wide spaces today? And how many from wide spaces v Villarreal? The answer is none.

The reason we didn't win today was we had our game disrupted by injury and unfitness. Our key defender Shackell has had a mismatch of a preseason. Martin is still recovering from a long time out and is getting his fitness back. Hughes went off injured. That's 3 key players disrupted today. And if it's width you worry about, Baird/Shotton and Warnock didn't exactly do their job in the formation and provide the width. Again, I don't think width was the issue today but if you think it was, then there are other places for your criticism rather than blaming the entire system.

[Bris Vegas]

I've never liked the formation to be honest, and it seems counterproductive playing with our three star players - Hughes, Martin and Ince - all suffering as a result of it.

Yes it may benefit Russell, Weimann and Bent more, but we were fine without the latter two playing a 4-3-3 formation and instead of building on that, we seem to be pulling it apart and going in a different direction.

Only time will tell to see if we benefit from it. But as of my opinion today, I look at our better players' attributes and the skill set of our main squad in general and I think we've made a mistake changing shape.

Problem is, if we revert back to 4-3-3 now, what happens to Weimann and Bent? The former prefers a central role and the latter can't play as a lone striker.

 

 

[Sexydadbod]

Lack of width is concerning. We should go back to 4-2-3-1

        Carson

Ssewankambo Keogh Shackell Forsyth

           Thorne Baird

Ince          Martin      Russell

               Weimann

That's pretty balanced and interchangable

Just while Hughes is injured

[needles]

Don't like it. Not going to write it off yet. I'd give it another whirl at Pompey just to get the experience at it, but surely we go 433 at home? If we need to tighten up, the 4231 would seem better suited to our staff.

[Tombo]

I still like 4-3-3. I know that formation reeks of McClaren but that phrase about babies and bathwater springs to mind. Not everything from the last regime was disastrous. But 4-3-3, 4-2-3-1, 4-1-2-1-2, I like them all. I'm much more interested in the personnel and the instructions the players are given. I'd be more than happy playing Weimann out on the wing in a 4-3-3 even though many don't like him there, as long as the team are aware that he has licence to come inside a little more and the CMs cover his wing when he gets space inside. It's not about how they're positioned on the tactics board, it's about WHO is on the board in the starting XI and what Clement has told them to do.

[Rampage]

If it was not producing shots on goal, why did we not change it?

[SaintRam]

If it was not producing shots on goal, why did we not change it?

It was producing chances - players weren't getting to the ball quickly enough to get shots off, and when they did they missed.

[Uptherams]

I didn't see the game, only heard on the radio. Whatever formation leaves our players least isolated is best. Today was tough losing two of our midfielders in the first half away from home to a physical side that is as dirty as their mangers breath. Forsyth has to come back. I don't care if our two wide men are pushed back because of our formation. They need to be able to cover and pick the ball up deep. Having players just congregate in the final third and be more or less stationary is something that never works. 

After the injuries today perhaps this:

 

:Baird Keogh Shackell Forsyth

           Thorne Hendrick

Ince          Martin      Russell

               Weimann

 

[Rampage]

It was producing chances - players weren't getting to the ball quickly enough to get shots off, and when they did they missed.

8 shots, 1 on target SaintRam. Would you have changed it?

[SaintRam]

8 shots, 1 on target SaintRam. Would you have changed it?

Depends on what reasons I thought were behind the chances not being created. 8 shots is a pretty normal return for an away game when you're not at your best physically. The one on target is the problem, not the 8 shots, and it had nothing to do with the formation.

[StringerBell]

I wish people would stop pulling the clean sheet card when they hit the bar 3 times. 

[Alph]

I disliked it today. 

Bolton had loads of freedom on the flanks. They were just too pooh to exploit it and we quickly got out to them.

We have no width of our own so the ball gets bogged down. The width comes from fullbacks who are deep. Today the passing from them was quite negative and slow from Warnock and Baird had to come inside or play a percentage ball down the flank 

Ince doesn't look natural there. His awareness drops.  He turns into trouble. He has his back to goal too much and he just doesn't enjoy the lack of space. 

The 2 wide diamond players only have an infield pass option. Or they have a fullback to go sideways to. 

Thorne looks happy with it. 

To sum it up today? 

Tedious, slow passing that went inside and backwards until Shotton came on. And then it went forward to him, then he went forward and then the ball came inside and backwards. 

Needs work

[MrsRam]

First game, away from home, new system, new manager, few new players.

We're not kicking on from last season, we're a new Derby.  We'll be reet. 

 

[Gary Teale]

Its not just the system I haven't been a fan of thus far, I liked under steve mc how we played with freedom, Clement looks to have a more pragmatic approach, it may be more successful, I just enjoyed the attacking football and it made me enjoy it more after the boring clough years

[Ram a lamb a ding dong]

Will only work with christie and forsyth at FB