3 at the back….

[RoyMac5]

2 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Our wing backs were our main attacking threat. Ward's crossing was excellent, Forsyth was fantastic at getting on the end of them, and Wilson showed the rest of thr team how to dribble and take a man on.

We didn't play with 3 CMs and I'm not sure how anyone can describe Smith and Hourihane as "similar".

There seemed little point to Smith and Hourihane yesterday, NML looked like a fish out of water and if all those teams that made 3/5 successful had Collins up front...

[derbydaz22]

29 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

I dont recall our defence getting done for pace yesterday. They got behind our defence twice, the first from Bradley's through ball to Wyke, the second from Bradley being out of position and leaving a massive gap. If that's going to be a reoccurring issue, then it needs on of Nelson or Cashin to tuck inside to fill the gap.

Our wing backs were our main attacking threat. Ward's crossing was excellent, Forsyth was fantastic at getting on the end of them, and Wilson showed the rest of thr team how to dribble and take a man on.

We didn't play with 3 CMs and I'm not sure how anyone can describe Smith and Hourihane as "similar".

Similar as in Smith and Hourihane are not particularly mobile and certainly don’t protect the defence from runners etc. I agree we looked a threat from the right side but that seemed our only plan all game.

[DiggerB]

1 hour ago, chadlad said:

Against Wigan it seemed that the two wide CD’s were often too wide due to the wing backs playing high up the pitch. This left SB as the lone CD. Playing a back 4 may have prevented Wigan’s 1st goal with a covering CB, in my head I have Cashin stepping in to whip the ball of their attacker.A little later on in the game a big hole again appeared in the centre of our defence, giving Wigan a great 1v1 opportunity from which they should have scored.

My take on it is that 3 at the back is quite a difficult system to play and we actually looked much more comfortable later on when we reverted to a back four. Just my opinion…

 

Exactly this. 

Wigan we’re also much more snappy at moving the ball across their back line and had a slick passing game. PW talked about wanting the former in pre-season and I don’t think the blame can be laid fully at his feet if the players aren’t following simple instructions.

Wildsmith takes an age to restart, when there are often options to get us on the front foot quickly, and that sets the tone for a slow transition from the back to the midfield or wingbacks. Maybe if we were a bit quicker here Collins wouldn’t feel the need to keep dropping so deep or wide to help out?

On the upside our goal came from the opposite wing back being in the box , and it was lovely to see Fozzy score our first goal of the season with a super finish. He was unlucky not to add to it from great cross by Nelson. 
 

Disappointed? Yes. Downhearted? No!

[Magicman]

Three at the back works but we are lacking a midfield terrier and creative no 10 so depend on wide crosses which can be easily defended. 

[8Leeds]

Hourihane should be playing the role that Bird was playing. Always felt he was wasted sat further back. 

[Srg]

10 minutes ago, 8Leeds said:

Hourihane should be playing the role that Bird was playing. Always felt he was wasted sat further back. 

Hourihane physically can’t move with the ball at his feet, so he’s useless in tight areas. 

[8Leeds]

1 minute ago, Srg said:

Hourihane physically can’t move with the ball at his feet, so he’s useless in tight areas. 

I wouldn’t be looking at him to be moving with the ball but receive it and find that killer pass or take a crack on goal.

[MadAmster]

3 at the back works, however, when 2 of the 3 seem to have been given permission to join the attack (Cash and Nelson), the MF has to cover when they do bomb on. When they don't cover we are susceptible to quick breaks from the oppo as happened yesterday...

[Curtains]

Don’t like 3 at the back at home. 
Crap system 

[RoyMac5]

2 hours ago, 8Leeds said:

I wouldn’t be looking at him to be moving with the ball but receive it and find that killer pass or take a crack on goal.

He had chances but didn't look keen, none of the midfield did really.

[i-Ram]

Well, after 13 hours of overall travel, I have arrived back on the south coast having experienced 102 minutes of ‘live Warneball’.  My previous viewing of Warneball has all been from the comfort of my armchair, thank god.

Now, as a few might have picked up, I am not a great fan of Warne, but we didn’t lose yesterday because of him, we lost because two stupid avoidable mistakes gifted Wigan their victory. Equally I could see some sense of system/play yesterday - the players had been pretty well drilled, and seemed to give their all for the coaching team. They all tried hard (except NML) to press out of possession, and out of possession I thought we generally played well, particularly when we had some time after attacking to get ourselves back in to a 442 shape; e.g. from Wigan goal kicks or where Wigan didn’t try to quickly counter.

The problem we had was that our two best pressers, Collins and Bird, I think ended up nullifying their overall effectiveness to actually do what their roles in the team actually were. They ran themselves ragged. The other problem was where Wigan did counter at speed when we lost possession up the field, our 352 (or3421) was so easily played through/bypassed because we left huge gaps for them to run in to, and we had no one with pace to help recover the situation. Bradley in particular looked like he was towing a caravan, but Hourihane, Smith, Cashin and Nelson looked painfully sluggish given it was the first game of the season. 

The squad we had last season, and the one recently assembled, still does not suit a pressing system, nor a 352 when we are being attacked. Not sure Waghorn, Rhodes, or a new No. 10, are going to address that problem either. I think the current squad assembled would be better playing 442, or any other system as long as we had 4 at the back. If Warne insists on playing 3 at the back, we need someone with both pace and energy to do the dirty work in front of them.

I am boring myself, so won’t type on. But in summary not sure I will be rushing up to Derby again too soon, especially where we are playing teams occupying one of the top 10 positions in the league. I can see us again this season not winning against a lot of those better teams based on the set-up Warne prefers to play.

[Leeds Ram]

You can play three at the back, but I don't think we can play it successfully if we do what we did yesterday and I'm not convinced we've got the players to carry it out. Nelson isn't comfortable enough on the ball to be a WCB, and Cashin goes too far up the pitch too often at the same time, leaving Bradley exposed. Bradley isn't positionally adept enough to make up for his lack of pace and also looked uncomfortable on the ball. There were also times yesterday when Ward's positioning left a bit to be desired, and if Wigan had been a bit more accurate with their passing, they'd have been in down the right and caused us more problems than they did. 

The midfield screen was also lacking, especially in the transitions when Wigan penetrated the middle 1/3rd of the pitch too easily and quickly. When we play teams away from home who have a bit of pace in the final third, I can see us conceding many chances and goals as well, unless this is fixed. I also think we need to be more active in blocking crosses than we are, as we struggled to defend well against them, with 3 or 4 crosses causing significant problems, including the goal. Thus, either we need a re-arrangement of the back 3 in terms of who we play or we significantly adapt the implementation of it. 

[RoyMac5]

11 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

You can play three at the back, but I don't think we can play it successfully if we do what we did yesterday and I'm not convinced we've got the players to carry it out. Nelson isn't comfortable enough on the ball to be a WCB, and Cashin goes too far up the pitch too often at the same time, leaving Bradley exposed. Bradley isn't positionally adept enough to make up for his lack of pace and also looked uncomfortable on the ball. There were also times yesterday when Ward's positioning left a bit to be desired, and if Wigan had been a bit more accurate with their passing, they'd have been in down the right and caused us more problems than they did. 

I thought he looked the most comfortable of the three and the best at going forward. But still think all of them look unhappy with a three and not at their best.

Edited August 6, 2023 by RoyMac5

[Leeds Ram]

3 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

I thought he looked the most comfortable of the three and the best at going forward. But still think all of them look unhappy with a three and not at their best.

I thought especially in the first half he looked poor with the ball, was overly negative, and didn't look good in that position assisting ward. 

[RoyMac5]

2 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

I thought especially in the first half he looked poor with the ball, was overly negative, and didn't look good in that position assisting ward. 

I thought all three looked like that 1st half, 2nd half Nelson looked much better.

[Leeds Ram]

Just now, RoyMac5 said:

I thought all three looked like that 1st half, 2nd half Nelson looked much better.

He looked a bit better from memory but i still wasn't convinced of him there.

[Will Hughes Hair]

5 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I thought all three looked like that 1st half, 2nd half Nelson looked much better.

Half Nelson you say? Sounds like he could be the new Bucko!

[chadlad]

8 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

I thought all three looked like that 1st half, 2nd half Nelson looked much better.

I also thought Nelson looked the best of the 3, especially in the 2nd half. Don’t think a 3 suits Cashin who seemed to play more as a LB.

Bradley & Nelson as our two CB’s in a back four, would be the better option for me.

[i-Ram]

Hindsights a wonderful thing, but I would have said the same before the match, that I think with the skill sets of the players we would have had a far better outcome on Saturday if we had played most of the match as:

            Wildsmith

Nelson Bradley Cashin Forsyth

      Ward Smith Hourihane

                Bird

   Mendez-Laing Collins

(At 60-70 minutes being ready to introduce Washington for NML, Elder for Forsyth, Wilson for Ward, Thompson for Smith or Hourihane, and near the death give a youngster a run-out for Collins).

[chadlad]

Looks like a back 4 on Saturday then. My back 4 would probably be:-

Rooney, Nelson, Forsyth & Elder

Other options are available…