Where have all the 3-4-3 boys gone?

[thybluefox]

What a stupid thread.

 

We were leaking goals, therefore people (and I was one of them) suggested going back to 3 at the back given it served us so well towards the end of last season. 

 

Claudio has actually fixed the issue at the moment by playing Fuchs and Simpson, and giving Kante a run of games in the middle (who has been exceptional in breaking down play).

 

If people had been calling for CR's head because we were leaking goals, then you might have a justification for an "I told you so" topic. But we weren't so you don't. 

[Guest MarshallForEngland]

Right bunch of sanctimonious twats aren't we

[filbertstreet]

Claudio needs to try out some of Garth Crooks formations, they're well ahead of their time

[MPH]

You're right, 442 is working brilliantly and most posters on the ratings thread gave Simpson 8/10 for yesterday's performance. If it ain't broke, don't fix it...

 

 

 

And that's where Simpson went wrong in the first place... He was  ( allegedly) trying to fix his girlfriends neck... but it wasn't bring all along! imagine that!

[Thracian]

There's always been more than one way to play winning football. Pearson came up with an adjusted system that proved his salvation last season - and we're all more than grateful, I'm sure.

 

I couldn't give a toss how Ranieri chose to play tactically, or what numerical system, but he made it clear fairly early on that he favoured 4-4-2 and with such emphasis that there seemed little point in even debating the issue...and even more so given the results we were getting.

 

I've always liked the idea of attacking full-backs because they give opposing defences so much to cope with. But, throughout our recent months of success we've had our own style and the particular strengths to mean that wing-backs, overlapping full-backs or whatever you chose to call them aren't so vital as having full-backs who can defend properly and focus simply on offering efficient support when going forward.

 

Why, because we got so much pace and penetration in other ways and because the full-backs we were using just weren't consistently good enough positionally.

 

Simpson and Fuchs have been a noticeable improvement although i'm quite sure Ranieri will find ways to adapt the current system should flaws appear for whatever reason, as I'm sure they will from time to time, depending on the opponent. Indeed, Ranieri seems as tactically aware and decisive as any Leicester manager I can think of. When he sees a problem he acts and I like that.           

[TJB-fox]

On a completely random note, FairPlay to Pearson- his summer signings have been the dogs bollocks so far

(Or the players he supposedly earmarked I should say)

[enmac]

There's always been more than one way to play winning football. Pearson came up with an adjusted system that proved his salvation last season - and we're all more than grateful, I'm sure.

I couldn't give a toss how Ranieri chose to play tactically, or what numerical system, but he made it clear fairly early on that he favoured 4-4-2 and with such emphasis that there seemed little point in even debating the issue...and even more so given the results we were getting.

I've always liked the idea of attacking full-backs because they give opposing defences so much to cope with. But, throughout our recent months of success we've had our own style and the particular strengths to mean that wing-backs, overlapping full-backs or whatever you chose to call them aren't so vital as having full-backs who can defend properly and focus simply on offering efficient support when going forward.

Why, because we got so much pace and penetration in other ways and because the full-backs we were using just weren't consistently good enough positionally.

Simpson and Fuchs have been a noticeable improvement although i'm quite sure Ranieri will find ways to adapt the current system should flaws appear for whatever reason, as I'm sure they will from time to time, depending on the opponent. Indeed, Ranieri seems as tactically aware and decisive as any Leicester manager I can think of. When he sees a problem he acts and I like that.

As much as I totally respect Bloomfield, MON, Pearson. In terms of tactics, how does Claudio compare with Gillies? I read somewhere that Shankly learnt from MG. Anyone here, 60+, with an opinion?

By the way, with De Laet + Sclupp, who IMO, are wingers/ wing-backs 3, 5, 2. With DS + CS 4, 4, 2.