Goodbye 4-3-3

[Nuwtfly]

As we've managed to miss out on promotion for the 3rd year in a row, does anyone else think it's about time we scrapped the 4-3-3 and tried something else?

The formation seems to rely on three things. 1) A midfield-dominating CDM, 2) goal scoring wingers and 3) A consistent goalscorer with pace and strength. 

We don't really have any of these three. Thorne is too injury-prone. Wingers have been poor all season, and Martin has been off colour since SMC went...

...time to move on?

 

[kingsy1884]

I would agree with you but we have tried everything else and it was even worse. 4-4-2, 4-4-2 diamond, 4-2-3-1, 3-5-2. 

Personally the players and the issue we have very little versatility. In my opinion the only one that is worth a shot is 4-2-3-1 but that involves 2 CDMs.

[Ted McMinn Football Genius]

4 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

As we've managed to miss out on promotion for the 3rd year in a row, does anyone else think it's about time we scrapped the 4-3-3 and tried something else?

The formation seems to rely on three things. 1) A midfield-dominating CDM, 2) goal scoring wingers and 3) A consistent goalscorer with pace and strength. 

We don't really have any of these three. Thorne is too injury-prone. Wingers have been poor all season, and Martin has been off colour since SMC went...

...time to move on?

 

Absolutely change has been well overdue, we are too predictable. 

If Mrs. (Bruce) Doubtfire can work us out it really is bloody obvious. 

We are trying to work around CM and things have gone stale.

To succeed in this league we need pace and penetration up front and we just don't have that at present. 

Plus a real nasty SOB in midfield, the Midfield general type. 

[Sexydadbod]

Would try the diamond again tbh. Didn't work because Martin is so as hell and doesn't work hard off the ball but with the right front 2 it can be lethal. 

[Derbados7]

We need a new manager with some fresh ideas. Personally think we should be looking at a different type of attack. It's not quite got us there with Martin and 1 either side coming in from the wings. I'd try and get a striker in with some real pace, an Andre gray type player. 

[Day]

Doesn't really matter what formation you use if the 11 players that go out there half hearted like they did today. 

[Duracell]

How about 4-3-3 but with a squad full of players who can play 4-3-3? If we switched to the diamond we'd have the same problem but in reverse.

Don't understand what's so difficult about having a system and signing players who can play in that system.

We capitulated last year because we played 4-3-3 with Martin and Thorne without Martin and Thorne.

This season, we had money to rectify that problem to find cover or even (HEAVEN FORBID) look for players even better. Instead we signed a heap of random players, many of whom play in positions in which we're already oversubscribed.

Get rid of the players who can't play in a 4-3-3 formation, rather than finding a new one and having to get rid of everyone we have. It would be the very definition of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

[nottingram]

I think the problem with our version of a 4-3-3 is that it's just not versatile enough. What do you do if it's not working? It doesn't take much to derail it, probably all it needs is one of the front 5 to be having an off day and it struggles. I often think too much is made of formations because most are just variations of each other but we have become a little reliant on this system.

I don't think drastic changes are needed but I'd quite like to see a 4-2-3-1 which is essentially pretty similar to the 4-3-3, but I'd have Hughes on the right of that 3, where he can cut in and use his timing of the pass to create space. It's a pretty subtle change but I genuinely think it could make a big difference. Think back to his debut against Peterborough were he played almost as an inside out winger and him and Brayford had a lot of joy.

[Guest]

I'm not sure but I don't think changing our system will take long for opposition managers to work out.

[BBG83]

We have to move on from 4-5-1 now. Its too easy for streetwise teams to play against.

Same happened last season, we were out of natural players for the holding position so we tried to shoehorn players in because we had no other ideas.

How can that be at this level of football? How can you not have two or three formations to cover all scenarios?.

It was absolutely shocking on Saturday. Not one player showed anything (not even Bryson, who looked totally pee'd off all game). And Wassall proved that he has no idea. Similar to McClaren he's ridden a wave a little, but when it came to the crunch he could neither pick a formation, change the formation, identify who needed to come off and who needed to come on. Bent should have been on at 70 mins, not 86!.

Nothing to lose now. Go all out attack and start Camara. We know nothing about him, let alone Hull. But I can guarantee he'll have bags of energy and a point to prove.

3-4-3 for me. Long balls all game with Weimann and Camara running in behind. It might be crap to watch, not the Derby Way, but 4-5-1 and tippy tappy football isn't either.

I won't give up on Johnson but his season is done. He needs to get in shape over the summer and start again.

Carson, Shackell, Keogh, Buxton, Hughes, Bryson, Butterfield, Weimann, Martin, Camara, Bent - Looks lightweight but there midfield did nothing all of Saturday, because they didn't need to.

[Srg]

Hull played the same formation.

To put anything down to a simple formation is naïve.

[rynny]

Isn't 4-2-3-1 just a different derivative of 4-3-3, just with 2 holding and 1 floating instead of 1 holding, 1 advanced and 1 doing both?

[rynny]

I have merged the threads, we don't need to keep opening new threads discussing what formation to play.

[Ovis aries]

On ‎14‎/‎05‎/‎2016 at 17:48, G STAR RAM said:

I'm not sure but I don't think changing our system will take long for opposition managers to work out.

So don't we ever do that, work other teams out ?.

If your players and system are good enough it does not matter surely.

[BBG83]

So we line up with a 4-3-3 formation but 9/10 games we play 4-5-1 with Martin stupidly isolated.

Proof is in the pudding. Bar Hull we've beaten nobody else in the top 6.

Basically we have the players to beat all the other teams, but when we play anyone with a tactic to stop us, we have zero ideas if plan a doesn't work.

The sooner we change and make Plan a Plan b or c the better.

[jagerbob]

Definately need to sort out that defensive midfield, as Thorne cannot be relied on to play 40 games a season like a keogh,shackell or martin can.

Needs someone who enjoys the physical side of the game and can play a bit, although that is less important when you think what Eustace gave us. More importantly he needs to be strong mentally. Ive seen way too many big games, starting with boro away 2 seasons ago, that when we are denied space and our own attacking game isnt working, they we loose the abilty to stay disciplined defensively out of frustration.

This is the one reason why we actually beat ourselves sometimes.

I know we all wanted to start the first leg with a win, but losing by just the 1 goal would have been preferable to this thrown in the towel sulk streak we have when we get frustrated that the opposition can stop us.

Derby are the championship version of arsenal. So intent on posession based attacking, and are only good when other teams are poor. As soon as we face a side who knows how to stop us, we cant hack it. Arsenal are always good for top 4 or 5 but never look like winning the league (which for us is finishing in the automatic places)

[Dale The Ram]

7 minutes ago, rynny said:

Isn't 4-2-3-1 just a different derivative of 4-3-3, just with 2 holding and 1 floating instead of 1 holding, 1 advanced and 1 doing both?

In a way but in attack you have 4 very attacking players, the number 10 can move and interchange with the wingers and striker whilst the two mid-fielders behind distribute the ball.

It only works for me if you have 2 hard working quick wingers, a striker who knows where the back of the net is and a very very good number 10. The other 2 mid-fielders must also be very patient and cautious and break apart any counter attacks that will likely come from 4 attacking players loosing the ball.

These are the players that would work well in this formation, including signings.

                                         Defense...

                              Thorne                 New CDM

Ince                     New CAM or a McCormack        Russell/Weimann

                                         Bent/Martin

 

Thats my understanding of the 4-2-3-1 system, very attacking but also very cautious in defence

[cannable]

14 minutes ago, rynny said:

Isn't 4-2-3-1 just a different derivative of 4-3-3, just with 2 holding and 1 floating instead of 1 holding, 1 advanced and 1 doing both?

Formations are all a load of *****. You could argue that 4231 is just 433 or 451 or even 442! 

Systems are what's key. Because of player movement, McClaren's team's average positions get would end up looking like a 3412 shape. 

[BBG83]

3 minutes ago, jagerbob said:

Definately need to sort out that defensive midfield, as Thorne cannot be relied on to play 40 games a season like a keogh,shackell or martin can.

Needs someone who enjoys the physical side of the game and can play a bit, although that is less important when you think what Eustace gave us. More importantly he needs to be strong mentally. Ive seen way too many big games, starting with boro away 2 seasons ago, that when we are denied space and our own attacking game isnt working, they we loose the abilty to stay disciplined defensively out of frustration.

This is the one reason why we actually beat ourselves sometimes.

I know we all wanted to start the first leg with a win, but losing by just the 1 goal would have been preferable to this thrown in the towel sulk streak we have when we get frustrated that the opposition can stop us.

Derby are the championship version of arsenal. So intent on posession based attacking, and are only good when other teams are poor. As soon as we face a side who knows how to stop us, we cant hack it. Arsenal are always good for top 4 or 5 but never look like winning the league (which for us is finishing in the automatic places)

To think we paid £6m for Johnson and Burnley took Barton for free. And now he's going to go and play for Rangers in a piss poor league, again for free.

It would be a huge message to the fans if we went and signed him.

His reputation speaks for itself, but you get nothing with 11 'nice' players in the Championship.

[rynny]

1 minute ago, Dale The Ram said:

In a way but in attack you have 4 very attacking players, the number 10 can move and interchange with the wingers and striker whilst the two mid-fielders behind distribute the ball.

It only works for me if you have 2 hard working quick wingers, a striker who knows where the back of the net is and a very very good number 10. The other 2 mid-fielders must also be very patient and cautious and break apart any counter attacks that will likely come from 4 attacking players loosing the ball.

These are the players that would work well in this formation, including signings.

                                         Defense...

                              Thorne                 New CDM

Ince                     New CAM or a McCormack        Russell/Weimann

                                         Bent/Martin

 

Thats my understanding of the 4-2-3-1 system, very attacking but also very cautious in defence

I was just breaking it down into layman's terms, for those who struggle. 

Some of the suggestions for it recently and in the past of having one of the current cm as the number 10. I also think we have too many cm that like to play further forward to play 4-2-3-1.