IslandExile Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 Justa, RoyMac5, Steve Buckley’s Dog and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LN747 Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 No it doesn’t work - does anyone else play it anymore and I’m not talking about prem teams who push one fullback onto midfield Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SecretDave Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 Long term, I'd go back to 4-2-3-1 Wildsmith Wilson Nelson Cashin Elder Bird Hourihane Ward Sibley Mendez-Laing Waghorn Subs: Vickers, Forsyth, Bradley, Smith, Barkhuizen, Washington, Collins dilkie 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram1988 Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 I agree. A back 3 isn't working for me. We need to go back to a back 4. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zag zig Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 3 at the back can and does work, some fans forget the success Jim Smith had and he was an early adapter of it. 3 at the back doesn’t work if all 3 are told to push up and get exposed to any sort of pace. Our back 5 yet alone 3, are struggling to work together, that’s before we get to the lack of creativity from midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevinhectoring Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 as much as anything it depends who the back 3 are. Don’t have a fundamental problem with the formation. It also depends how they link with the midfield but sadly our midfield is often the missing link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alram Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 (edited) 2012 called it wants its formation back it would be less painful if we had legs in the team to get up and down the pitch he just seems to play system after system that is completely incompatable with the players he has and worse yet SIGNS himself Edited August 15, 2023 by alram plymouthram and RoyMac5 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plymouthram Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 Mr Paul Warne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CornwallRam Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 Nothing wrong with 352. Lots wrong with 352 if your the centre backs are painfully slow and you play three holding midfielders. I don't think he should ditch the formation yet. The one thing showing promise the wing backs. I'd try Rooney, Forsyth and Cashin as the three and start Thompson with Hourihan along side him as attacking midfielders and Bird as the holder. Waghorn as the 10, Collins as the 9 and swap the wingbacks at 60 mins. NML as one of the four wingbacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plymouthram Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 3 at the back will only work with at least 2 of them having some pace when the wingbacks have gone forward and the other team have won possession and counter attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich3478 Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 36 minutes ago, alram said: 2012 called it wants its formation back it would be less painful if we had legs in the team to get up and down the pitch he just seems to play system after system that is completely incompatable with the players he has and worse yet SIGNS himself Calling out the lack of pace is breaking me!! Sign some then! alram 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rampant Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 In the Jim Smith side the three at the back included Igor Stimac tbf. Who were the others? A typical side from that period would be what? Hoult Rowett Igor Yates Carsley Trollope? Flynn VDL Willems Sturridge Gabbiadini Who was the LWB? I'm sure I've missed a couple out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
inter politics Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 We have one player who looks suited to the system and that's Wilson. That's not enough is it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walkley Ram Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 13 minutes ago, Rampant said: In the Jim Smith side the three at the back included Igor Stimac tbf. Who were the others? A typical side from that period would be what? Hoult Rowett Igor Yates Carsley Trollope? Flynn VDL Willems Sturridge Gabbiadini Who was the LWB? I'm sure I've missed a couple out. Only Chris Powell, nobody important. LazloW and vonwright 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ollycutts1982 Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 15 minutes ago, Rampant said: In the Jim Smith side the three at the back included Igor Stimac tbf. Who were the others? A typical side from that period would be what? Hoult Rowett Igor Yates Carsley Trollope? Flynn VDL Willems Sturridge Gabbiadini Who was the LWB? I'm sure I've missed a couple out. Chris Powell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellafella Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 1 hour ago, IslandExile said: It’s not working with the players we have right now. The problem is glaringly obvious. No outlet from the back through midfield & our so-called wing-backs too deep and not successful thus far in supplying the width. A good manager can see this & Warney has admitted as much post-game tonight. So, structural overhaul this Saturday v Fleetwood. Waghorn must start & possibly Thompson. Still time to recover but must just must stop supplying passes to opposing strikers to slot home. Football is a simple game made complex by unnecessary dogma & theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
valakari Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 Both Ward and Bird will be out so i would start with this team on saturday Wildsmith Rooney Forsyth Cashin Elder NML Thompson Hourihane Sibley Washington Waghorn IslandExile 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rampant Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 1 hour ago, oodledoodle said: Only Chris Powell, nobody important. 1 hour ago, ollycutts1982 said: Chris Powell Yeah, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IlsonDerby Posted August 15, 2023 Share Posted August 15, 2023 2 hours ago, Zag zig said: 3 at the back can and does work, some fans forget the success Jim Smith had and he was an early adapter of it. 3 at the back doesn’t work if all 3 are told to push up and get exposed to any sort of pace. Our back 5 yet alone 3, are struggling to work together, that’s before we get to the lack of creativity from midfield. He did have Igor tbf IslandExile and Zag zig 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaspode Posted August 16, 2023 Share Posted August 16, 2023 Once upon a time, playing a back five would involve 3 centre halves and wing backs who would take it in turns to go forward so that the defence always had cover (or else the holding midfielder would drop back to fill a wide position when the wing back was charging forward) - Warne's version seems to have both wing-backs permanently stationed in the opposition half and the DM running aropund like a headless chicken - at one point last night, Fozzy was our most advanced player (by a long way) - I don't get what he's trying to achieve... plymouthram and angieram 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account.
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now