Left Midfield

[ScouseFox]

chilwell has been our best player by an absolute distance this season, but tonight again showed that it is literally, completely and utterly impossible to have a whole side of the pitch manned by ONE player. 

 

it’s absolutely insane and it’s costing us goals regularly. why the hell we aren’t going 3-5-2 is beyond quite simply everyone who’s ever watched our side play footy, but beyond that, what the shit are the options? we cannot keep conceding goals based on a right winger or right back being able to just stroll, unopposed towards our box. 

 

pissing me off every week. 

[Fox seen in Norwich]

Now sure playing 352 resolves your first paragraph but agree the personel we have would appear better to a 352

[ScouseFox]

Just now, Fox seen in Norwich said:

Now sure playing 352 resolves your first paragraph but agree the personel we have would appear better to a 352

because 3-5-2 with evans as a left centre back gives chilwell cover when he moves out. evans has played a bit at left back and is left footed and can move with chilwell.

 

instead, every time we attack chilwell is caught upfield. every time he even steps up to try and win a ball we are completely fu cked because nobody is tracking back and nobody is helping him win the ball either. 

 

its ludicrous. 

[Jimmy]

15 minutes ago, ScouseFox said:

chilwell has been our best player by an absolute distance this season, but tonight again showed that it is literally, completely and utterly impossible to have a whole side of the pitch manned by ONE player. 

 

it’s absolutely insane and it’s costing us goals regularly. why the hell we aren’t going 3-5-2 is beyond quite simply everyone who’s ever watched our side play footy, but beyond that, what the shit are the options? we cannot keep conceding goals based on a right winger or right back being able to just stroll, unopposed towards our box. 

 

pissing me off every week. 

We literally played 352 tonight until we made subs

[Bayfox]

2 hours ago, Jimmy said:

We literally played 352 tonight until we made subs

Certainly looked like 3 at the back the way amartey was tucked in. But it looked more like 343 the way madders was nearly as high up the pitch as vardy and nacho and often in a false 9 role with vardy pulling wide.

 

But I get your point essentially we did play with 3 at the back and wing backs in the 1st half.

[davieG]

When we were attacking we looked like 343 and defending 541 with the 2 wide midfielders and the 2 wide front men all dropping back.

[Finnegan]

7 hours ago, Jimmy said:

We literally played 352 tonight until we made subs

 

And we were literally drawing the game until we made the subs. 

[Pete Campbell]

For all his faults, Gray had something good going with Chilwell on the left early in the season.

[st albans fox]

2 hours ago, davieG said:

When we were attacking we looked like 343 and defending 541 with the 2 wide midfielders and the 2 wide front men all dropping back.

But in any fast transition phase we couldn’t get to a back five quickly enough - emery eventually realised that the space was down our flanks and exploited it ......

[Munshi]

Who the fvck was playing left mid in the second half? 

 

For their third goal we honestly had noone there and Arsenal switched the ball leaving Chilwell 1v3.

 

 

[Jimmy]

6 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

And we were literally drawing the game until we made the subs. 

That had more to do with their subs tbf

[Hanan96]

The arsenal match is obviously much more clearer view to see our back 3 system,  especially during attacks. Now not only the pitch and the comentator but there's written article as well. 

 

I wonder why people keep only watching starting lineup and going blind 

It seesm so difficult to watch the match in unbiased view

[st albans fox]

26 minutes ago, Hanan96 said:

The arsenal match is obviously much more clearer view to see our back 3 system,  especially during attacks. Now not only the pitch and the comentator but there's written article as well. 

 

I wonder why people keep only watching starting lineup and going blind 

It seesm so difficult to watch the match in unbiased view

Seriously mate, you need to take a break on this ..... last night was three at the back ..... previous games haven’t been three at the back 

 

there are times during a game that shape changes due to the evolution of the match and how the opposition are dragging our players around./ how we are forcing the play. 

 

 

[Hanan96]

15 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Seriously mate, you need to take a break on this ..... last night was three at the back ..... previous games haven’t been three at the back 

 

there are times during a game that shape changes due to the evolution of the match and how the opposition are dragging our players around./ how we are forcing the play. 

 

 

Explain to me why whenever we build the play from the back, maguire, morgan, and amartey are stand in line, why didn't chilwell drop back to made it 4? Why did amartey not stay wider or made overlap? Why did madison not stay wide as gray did? Why did nacho not drop deeper? 

[st albans fox]

35 minutes ago, Hanan96 said:

Explain to me why whenever we build the play from the back, maguire, morgan, and amartey are stand in line, why didn't chilwell drop back to made it 4? Why did amartey not stay wider or made overlap? Why did madison not stay wide as gray did? Why did nacho not drop deeper? 

Last night amartey was clearly a right side CB

 

previous games he has been a right back with almost no licence to go forward - as chilwell pretty much had to cover the whole left side so the remaining members of the back four shuffled across when he was forward and we lost possession....

[coolhandfox]

Doesn't matter what formation you play, if players don't follow the runners of mark men, Agyemang is unmarked twice in the in the middle of the six yard box.

[Hanan96]

40 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Last night amartey was clearly a right side CB

 

previous games he has been a right back with almost no licence to go forward - as chilwell pretty much had to cover the whole left side so the remaining members of the back four shuffled across when he was forward and we lost possession....

Well. You either didn't see the match or either biased.we have those 3 player cover the defence area during possession. Chilwell didn't do alone as maguire often shuffled wide, even almost like a left back. And the pundits, the bein comentator also confirm that. 

And those of my question which you ignore did tell how things happen. 

There's no point to talk about permanent back 3 just to cover defence area, or to accommodate madison nacho and vardy, when we are already did that 

[Stadt]

39 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

Agyemang

[ScouseFox]

it did seem a bit like a 5 at the back in the first half. but in the second half they drifted ozil out wide more often and we regularly had chilwell vs ozil, iwobi and bellerin. by himself. no cover from evans, no cover from maddison. 

 

weve been done down that side before as well because one man cannot handle two players, let alone three. it’s insane. 

[Beechey]

On 23/10/2018 at 23:20, ScouseFox said:

it did seem a bit like a 5 at the back in the first half. but in the second half they drifted ozil out wide more often and we regularly had chilwell vs ozil, iwobi and bellerin. by himself. no cover from evans, no cover from maddison. 

 

weve been done down that side before as well because one man cannot handle two players, let alone three. it’s insane. 

This is exactly why Albrighton was brought on, nobody seems to be able to see that, it's very weird.