Plastik Man Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 There were plenty of fans who suggested early in the season we should be playing 3 at the back, that it suited our players better. At the time I was ok with Puel sticking to his philosophy of a back 4 with 2 attacking fullbacks. We've seen how Puel had to select 2 defensive midfielders to protect the defence, it worked in reducing goals conceded but also reduced the forward passing and creativity from midfield. Facing criticism of lacking creativity Puel tried 433 (but all 3 being defensive!) then he got his man Tielemans. Against Spurs he selected him with Mendy (despite his recent errors and poor form) but had to switch to Ndidi due to injury. I think he preferred Mendy due to his much tidier short passing - winning the ball and moving it on. Ndidi kept his starting spot but has shown again his limitations in attack and creativity, he just gives the ball away too often. He's a great tackler and I think he also adds height in defensive situations, the rest of our midfield are quite short in stature. With Tielemans in the side we now have just 1 defensive midfielder, and it seemed like he and Ndidi were both taking turns to get forward against Palace. This has left us much more vulnerable in defence, still with attacking fullbacks and just 2 central defenders. Unsurprisingly we've started to concede more goals. I do wonder now whether 3 at the back is the obvious selection? We have plenty of CBs, it would provide more defensive cover and allow the fullbacks to bomb on with their pace and attacking intent, yet at the same time release our midfield to be more than just a defensive shield, with more freedom to get forward and link with the attackers, particularly Tielemans, who looks quality, but was completely knackered against Palace covering defensively but also getting forward to create. 3 at the back might suit Maguire better too. It worked with England, he does love to get forward but also has a ricket in him, and is quite slow. An additional CB would give him more freedom, with Ndidi able to drop in when necessary. Its open to debate if you'd go 343, with the wing backs it would still leave just 2 CMs, and still Vardy up front with 2 inverted wingers. Or if you selected 352 it would allow a balanced midfield 3 (Ndidi DM, Tielemans box to box, and Maddison the 10), with Vardy up front with a partner to help create more space for him. Just a thought, Puel obviously didn't get the best out of the team and was stubborn in his selections, formations and tactics. Looking at what has malfunctioned perhaps a back 3 might solve a few of these issues?
Aus Fox Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 Maybe we could swap the Family Stand and the Kop too
Ric Flair Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 No, now we have Tielemans and Barnes back it's not the right formation.
StanSP Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 Can't see it happening. I suspect we'll stick with attacking full-backs.
Plastik Man Posted 25 February 2019 Author Posted 25 February 2019 1 minute ago, StanSP said: Can't see it happening. I suspect we'll stick with attacking full-backs. I don't think it will happen either, but we do have a problem. We should keep attacking fullbacks, but need to solve the issue of covering for them when they attack, and also allow the midfield to add to attacks centrally. There is a disconnect between defence and attack, and half of our defence is actually part of our attack!
lcfc sheff Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 Kasper evans morgan maguire ricardo Chilwell Youri Ndidi Maddison Vardy Barnes
Ric Flair Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 2 minutes ago, lcfc sheff said: Kasper evans morgan maguire ricardo Chilwell Youri Ndidi Maddison Vardy Barnes That back 3 is criminally slow, Soyuncu has to play of we are going to bother with it.
lcfc sheff Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 20 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: That back 3 is criminally slow, Soyuncu has to play of we are going to bother with it. Slow you say? I raise you wasyl huth Morgan! Its not fifa.
Mint23 Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 The whole point of 3 at the back is that they can be slow because one will always drop deeper and sweep
Ric Flair Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 4 minutes ago, lcfc sheff said: Slow you say? I raise you wasyl huth Morgan! Its not fifa. Wasyl was clocked as one of the fastest in the PL that season during that back end of the season somehow!!
The Doctor Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 I don't think 3 at the back has ever suited this squad, people only think it does because we've got attacking full backs - but so do most top clubs and Contes Chelsea aside I can't think of any that have played a 3atb variant
Beechey Posted 25 February 2019 Posted 25 February 2019 7 minutes ago, The Doctor said: I don't think 3 at the back has ever suited this squad, people only think it does because we've got attacking full backs - but so do most top clubs and Contes Chelsea aside I can't think of any that have played a 3atb variant Spurs and Arsenal both have a lot this season (Spurs especially). Pretty sure Manchester United have done so, as well.
yorkie1999 Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 3 at the back is great if you’ve got a skillfull pacey centre back who’s confident with both feet.
southfox66 Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 I don't think today is the day for 3 at Watford they look too dangerous on the break
Guest Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 Certainly not worked in the first half. Morgan back in the squad let alone the team is a step backwards. The 3 has also slowed us down. We'd just found a way to play forwards with Tielemans in the team and now we're back to the back 3 passing amongst themselves and with Ndidi in front of them our passing game has stalled.
Corky Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 I imagine next season it will probably be Soyuncu and Benkovic alongside Evans should Maguire go.
Nicolo Barella Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 Morgan should only start again for us if 2 of `soyuncu, Evans, and Maguire are injured.
KrefelderFox666 Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 1 hour ago, Nicolo Barella said: Morgan should only start again for us if 2 of `soyuncu, Evans, and Maguire are injured. I am not a massive fan of Morgan but I must say he was better than Maguire today. He has seriously declined
KrefelderFox666 Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 3 minutes ago, buzzer_b said: Will Soyuncu ever get a decent look in? Should do now. I think Rodgers will experiment a bit for the 9 games remaining. Try different formations and players. It's essentially an extended pre-season
mozartfox Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 On 25/02/2019 at 22:04, Ric Flair said: That back 3 is criminally slow, Soyuncu has to play of we are going to bother with it. Next season we have Benko who is quick and can pass forward which would be a novelty. Although we will probably lose Harry so Soyuncu needs to step up.
Ric Flair Posted 3 March 2019 Posted 3 March 2019 18 minutes ago, mozartfox said: Next season we have Benko who is quick and can pass forward which would be a novelty. Although we will probably lose Harry so Soyuncu needs to step up. I get why Rodgers tried it today, we are too exposed with only 4 at the back at the minute but Morgan, Maguire and Evans is limited as a three. I hope he doesnt persist with this.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.