Jump to content

Formation


Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, Germanbird said:

https://youtu.be/PIG4yLTlALg

I usually like those SheffCam videos, but this time he suggests to change formation.

Up to now I was 100 % sure that I want us to play 352 - we trained for 352, we signed for 352,  we played well with 352.

And now this!! My favourite vlogger suggests 433.  What's your opinion?

You're right, we have trained and signed for 3-5-2, but we need to be able to switch things up when necessary. Which the manager doesn't seem to be able to. 

Tylluan and KingMong are our resident tactical gurus... I suspect they might have an opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should start with a back three that has three players comfortable in their position. So Famewo at left and Ihekwe at right. Bench Iorfa.

If we continue to get balls in behind the wing backs with the left/right centre back struggling to prevent crosses coming in, then we should switch, in game, to a back 4. Probably 4-3-3. 

We need the right starting 11 to be able to do that switch without using a sub. 

If we play as we did 2nd half of last season, we should stick with 3-5-2 and Smith should make us even more effective. But that’s up front. Defensively, we need better defenders or better organisation, or a different formation.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve been thinking more about last Saturday.  When the 3-5-2 started working last season it was usually because Luongo was in the side.  The division of labour in the midfield three was obvious.  Mass was the holding player who plugged the gaps.  Byers was usually the one occupying the most central average position, the guy who moved us up the pitch.  Bazza was the creative one playing furthest forward. On Saturday, with Byers and Fizz, I wasn’t sure who the holding midfielder was supposed to be.  I think that contributed to our defensive issues.  The Mass shaped gaps weren’t really being filled by anyone when the wing backs went forward.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, owl71 said:

I’ve been thinking more about last Saturday.  When the 3-5-2 started working last season it was usually because Luongo was in the side.  The division of labour in the midfield three was obvious.  Mass was the holding player who plugged the gaps.  Byers was usually the one occupying the most central average position, the guy who moved us up the pitch.  Bazza was the creative one playing furthest forward. On Saturday, with Byers and Fizz, I wasn’t sure who the holding midfielder was supposed to be.  I think that contributed to our defensive issues.  The Mass shaped gaps weren’t really being filled by anyone when the wing backs went forward.

https://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/football/sheffield-wednesday/sheffield-wednesday-have-bold-mk-dons-call-to-make-as-they-find-a-new-china-shop-bull-3793473

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Neville Facking Bartos said:

Decent article, can’t argue with any of it. We started to lose the midfield Saturday after Byers’ yellow card 

Couldn’t agree more. Both re the decent article shocker and that Byers started the game superbly on Saturday and we started to lose the midfield battle when he couldn’t put himself about as much. 
 

In terms of the formation question. I’d like us to be flexible when needed but think we look great going forward in our current formation, so I’d like that to be the focus. However, the back 3 need to be able to play it on the floor, ideally at least one have a left foot and there needs to be one leader in there.
 

Iorfa can’t pass the ball at all and he’s not comfortable with the ball. He’s an amazing last ditch tackler.  He doesn’t suit our system. Maybe at the centre, but not the right side. When he played right back when he joined he bombed forward, but never with the ball under control. 
 

As others have suggested, I’d have Famewo on the left of the three and Iorfa on the bench. I’m guessing Famewo could play LB if we wanted to be versatile and switch to 4 at the back. 

I think Dean, Storey and Gibson (were he not made of porcelain) as a 3 was stronger than the 3 we have now, in terms of suiting our system. 

We could do with someone else as an alternative for Hunt, to save his legs. Maybe someone else up top (or “up the top” as some twit on Radio Sheffield insists on saying) but I think in general our system suits our attacking players much more than our defensive ones. 
 

The back 4 (Inc Keeper) on Saturday didn’t work. It didn’t work for the second week in a row as we shipped 4 at Wigan. On Saturday our weakness was exposed easily and repeatedly. That should have corrected in our tactics/formation after the first goal but our inflexibility in our system / manager meant we allowed it to persist. 
 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I've posted previously, I don't think Moore will deviate from 3-5-2 as that's the only formation that accommodates Bannan with bit of freedom. The captain's armband weighs heavy in that respect, for both of them. When Bannan last played in a middle two he was picking the ball up from defender's toes. He was also no use to his midfield partner. Joey Pelupessy rightfully took a lot of stick for his performances and he just wasn't good enough but Bannan left massive holes for him to have to fill and sold him short on numerous occasions. 

4-3-3, for me, means Bannan doesn't play. If he does then the middle 3 have to become almost a triangle with him just in front. But that narrows the middle and allows the opposition the freedom of width in the middle third. A team playing wingbacks would overload onto our fullbacks and we'd have the same problems we have now unless the wide forwards dropped to help and that takes us 20-30 yards backwards towards our goal, isolating the forward. 

4-3-1-2 gives solidity in the middle and pushes Bannan in behind the front two but if we were playing this then I'd be playing Windass there and Smith and Gregory up front (until a paceman arrives, if ever) 

3-4-3 or 4-4-2 could be played with a midfield diamond, rather than a traditional flat middle four but diamonds need a lot of drilling and practice or huge gaps open in the middle. They also work better if we attack by only overloading down one side, which means an end to cross field 'Hollywood' balls unless the ball is recycled out that way. That way there's always a defensive screen.

3-2-2-3, or the box 4, formation is how Pep took Cruyff's 3-4-3 and turned it to go inside out. Either of the two sets of midfielders could break wide and leave the other two inside, so the attack could come from deeper or further up and opposition never knew where, until Bayern Munich played a flat 4-4-2 and nullified it. Enrique turned it into 3-3-2-2 but eventually reverted back to 3-4-3. 

Lastly the formation I think we have the players for. 3-2-3-2. Basically two groups of five. No wingbacks, 3 defenders and 2 holding midfielders. The left and right defenders work in tandem with the holding midfielders to nullify any wide threat. Middle defender acts as a sweeper. This formation would also allow Bannan to be the pivot and would allow Johnson to play further up as part of the attacking middle 3. 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, HoylandOwl said:

You're right, we have trained and signed for 3-5-2, but we need to be able to switch things up when necessary. Which the manager doesn't seem to be able to. 

Tylluan and KingMong are our resident tactical gurus... I suspect they might have an opinion.

I remember him early last season banging on how he prefers 352 but depending on situations may change to 442 433 etc. Don't recall him ever actually doing it mind, the plum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 05/08/2022 at 10:11, Tylluan said:

As I've posted previously, I don't think Moore will deviate from 3-5-2 as that's the only formation that accommodates Bannan with bit of freedom. The captain's armband weighs heavy in that respect, for both of them. When Bannan last played in a middle two he was picking the ball up from defender's toes. He was also no use to his midfield partner. Joey Pelupessy rightfully took a lot of stick for his performances and he just wasn't good enough but Bannan left massive holes for him to have to fill and sold him short on numerous occasions. 

4-3-3, for me, means Bannan doesn't play. If he does then the middle 3 have to become almost a triangle with him just in front. But that narrows the middle and allows the opposition the freedom of width in the middle third. A team playing wingbacks would overload onto our fullbacks and we'd have the same problems we have now unless the wide forwards dropped to help and that takes us 20-30 yards backwards towards our goal, isolating the forward. 

4-3-1-2 gives solidity in the middle and pushes Bannan in behind the front two but if we were playing this then I'd be playing Windass there and Smith and Gregory up front (until a paceman arrives, if ever) 

3-4-3 or 4-4-2 could be played with a midfield diamond, rather than a traditional flat middle four but diamonds need a lot of drilling and practice or huge gaps open in the middle. They also work better if we attack by only overloading down one side, which means an end to cross field 'Hollywood' balls unless the ball is recycled out that way. That way there's always a defensive screen.

3-2-2-3, or the box 4, formation is how Pep took Cruyff's 3-4-3 and turned it to go inside out. Either of the two sets of midfielders could break wide and leave the other two inside, so the attack could come from deeper or further up and opposition never knew where, until Bayern Munich played a flat 4-4-2 and nullified it. Enrique turned it into 3-3-2-2 but eventually reverted back to 3-4-3. 

Lastly the formation I think we have the players for. 3-2-3-2. Basically two groups of five. No wingbacks, 3 defenders and 2 holding midfielders. The left and right defenders work in tandem with the holding midfielders to nullify any wide threat. Middle defender acts as a sweeper. This formation would also allow Bannan to be the pivot and would allow Johnson to play further up as part of the attacking middle 3. 

 

Pep's Box 4 since Haaland. Easier to visualise 82CEB5E6-6667-45AD-94CC-0B287E669CCB.thumb.jpeg.e10fd14f7917d1cfb6d7cb53305dcfa6.jpeg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Andyben said:

Pep's Box 4 since Haaland. Easier to visualise 82CEB5E6-6667-45AD-94CC-0B287E669CCB.thumb.jpeg.e10fd14f7917d1cfb6d7cb53305dcfa6.jpeg

 

And flip it to see what happens w/out the ball.

Haaland Grealish and Foden drop in.

FDB and Ilkley drop

Cancelo and Walker back to orthodox full backs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...