Tactics Talk:

[Shane]

Would a front four of Lookman, Iheanacho, Barnes & Vardy in a 4-2-3-1 be too attack minded? Wondering if attack is the best form of defence right now. 
 

[StriderHiryu]

13 minutes ago, Shane said:

Would a front four of Lookman, Iheanacho, Barnes & Vardy in a 4-2-3-1 be too attack minded? Wondering if attack is the best form of defence right now. 
 

Not if Nacho played as a 10. If we played 442 then probably it would be.

 

Today we played 433, and for 60 minutes the experiment was an abject failure. But once we scored it looked great. In this system The front 3 cause carnage, both fullbacks can bomb on and the midfield can still dominate the game. If we played that formation with Barnes and Lookman in and dropping Perez and Maddison, that could be great.

 

So it all comes down to if we want to play a 10 or not. IMO in modern football the 10 position is a relic of the past and too much of a luxury player. So our 10 needs to be part of a midfield 3 like we had today. For all Maddison's quality on the ball, he's too slow to play that system effectively.

 

Perhaps at home we can play 4231 against weaker teams, but there's a reason why very few of the top teams in Europe play that way any more.

[beepee1984]

16 minutes ago, Shane said:

Would a front four of Lookman, Iheanacho, Barnes & Vardy in a 4-2-3-1 be too attack minded? Wondering if attack is the best form of defence right now. 
 

Don't think it would be too attack minded, but in that formation you are playing Iheanacho or Vardy out of position..

 

I noted the positions of Perez, Barnes, Iheanacho and Daka for the 1st 10-15 minutes against Napoli was more like an Attacking 4-4-2 as we started well and went after Napoli, but then we reverted back to our usual ineffective 4-2-3-1 and our performance declined.

[Lambert09]

It’s pretty simple, play 11 players, not 9. 
 

No need to mention their names 

Edited 19 September 2021 by Lambert09

[honeybradger]

12 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

Not if Nacho played as a 10. If we played 442 then probably it would be.

 

Today we played 433, and for 60 minutes the experiment was an abject failure. But once we scored it looked great. In this system The front 3 cause carnage, both fullbacks can bomb on and the midfield can still dominate the game. If we played that formation with Barnes and Lookman in and dropping Perez and Maddison, that could be great.

 

So it all comes down to if we want to play a 10 or not. IMO in modern football the 10 position is a relic of the past and too much of a luxury player. So our 10 needs to be part of a midfield 3 like we had today. For all Maddison's quality on the ball, he's too slow to play that system effectively.

 

Perhaps at home we can play 4231 against weaker teams, but there's a reason why very few of the top teams in Europe play that way any more.

Soumare was clearly playing the more advanced midfield role ahead of tielemans and ndidi, he was as far up the field as maddison and barnes for most of the game. I know he's supposed to be a CM but rodgers seems to be fixated on playing 4231. Seriously watch the game back, we 100% did not play a 433 that match.

[StriderHiryu]

2 minutes ago, honeybradger said:

Soumare was clearly playing the more advanced midfield role ahead of tielemans and ndidi, he was as far up the field as maddison and barnes for most of the game. I know he's supposed to be a CM but rodgers seems to be fixated on playing 4231. Seriously watch the game back, we 100% did not play a 433 that match.

Sorry mate your wrong.

 

In a 433 players get forwards, notably the two players either side of the central midfield pivot. Usually they take it in turns to go forwards when they do so, though sometimes they will both go forwards at the same time. Soumare was the one that was told to get forwards more often that Tielemans, but he was not playing centrally as a player would do in a 4231. Soumare played for the most part left of Ndidi, and Tielemans to the right.

 

 

^ Tielemans on the ball here, further forwards than Soumare and Ndidi.

 

 

^ Tielemans and Soumare level with each other, Ndidi the central pivot behind both. This is the textbook modern day central midfield 433 shape.

 

 

Soumare, Tielemans, Ndidi all in line with one another on a counter attack.

 

In a 4231 you have a double pivot, so in the defensive shapes above you'd see Ndidi and Tielemans in line with one another or close to each other, with the 10 further up field. In a 433 the 3 players are closer together.

 

With tactics, it's easy to get lost in the nuances of a system, especially as teams can look quite different when attacking to defending. At times when we attacked, the spare central midfielder would get in line with Ndidi to make a double pivot for a turnover, so that's why it can look like a 4231. But it wasn't, it was 433. Look back at the Napoli game from Thursday, we played their system today.

 

[Beechey]

Very clearly a 433 with Maddison drifting inside (also way too deep for my liking). Although this might have been to give Ricardo as much space as possible.

You can see Ndidi is the single pivot, with Tielemans and Soumare ahead of him.

Edited 19 September 2021 by Beechey

[BenTayfour]

I think this should be our regular Formation/XI, very similar to liverpool's 433 in the way it operates Fullbacks Ventures forward more often, midfielders mainly stays narrow & tries to dominate the midfield, Front 3 (Barnes = salah main goal threat with his directness and urge to score), Nacho = Firmino (drop to midfield linking up play and creating space by dragging defenders out of position he is better suited for this role than the other strikers due to his hold up playstyle) lookman = a mix of play.

 

A 4.4.2 like the one used at the opening first half vs napoli also can be good one : 4 man press / compact block on the defence / stretches the opposition defence.                               

[StriderHiryu]

6 minutes ago, BenTayfour said:

I think this should be our regular Formation/XI, very similar to liverpool's 433 in the way it operates Fullbacks Ventures forward more often, midfielders mainly stays narrow & tries to dominate the midfield, Front 3 (Barnes = salah main goal threat with his directness and urge to score), Nacho = Firmino (drop to midfield linking up play and creating space by dragging defenders out of position he is better suited for this role than the other strikers due to his hold up playstyle) lookman = a mix of play.

 

A 4.4.2 like the one used at the opening first half vs napoli also can be good one : 4 man press / compact block on the defence / stretches the opposition defence.                               

This setup would be nice to see! Many will question why we wouldn't play Vardy or Daka in this setup, but as you point out it's because Nacho is good at connecting the dots between midfield and attack, as he showed with his brilliant assist for Barnes against Napoli. So in theory he should work as a false 9. Interestingly Rodgers tried Ayoze Perez in a few games as the false 9 last season when Vardy got injured, but it didn't work out very well. Nacho has never been tried there. That said this same setup with Vardy or Daka would also be pretty tasty!

 

The only thing with a setup like this is that it relies on those other inside forwards to be clinical. Salah gets 20 goals every season, Mane between 10 and 20! Barnes could maybe get 20 if was the main man, Lookman it remains to be seen, though he looks like so much more of a goal threat than either Perez or Albrighton do. He should have had two Leicester goals already! Vardy and Nacho are our most reliable players for finding the back of the net, so that is important to note.

 

In general I really do like the Liverpool system and agree it could work for us too. One thing I admire about Klopp is that he came up with a setup that won the European Cup but without having massively technical players to do it. Players like Wijnaldum, Mane, Henderson, the full backs even are very good players but aren't world class. Their world class players are Van Dijk, Allison and Salah, but that was enough to win two of the biggest trophies in football, because of the setup. Rodgers has admitted that he was influenced heavily by Spanish teams and their style of possession football. Despite going out of favour that can still work, but requires very technical footballers. So if Rodgers used at the Leicester system with Man City players he'd get better results than if he used the same system with Liverpool players, if that makes sense.

 

Anyway I hope we do see us persevere with the 433 for a bit longer as it looked good. But I suppose one real issue is if we use Soumare and Tielemans, then we don't have the players to rotate for them. KDH has only played 10 minutes of Premier League football so whilst he might come good, it's unfair to have big expectations on him this season. Liverpool have about 6 CMs for a reason, the physical load on them is immense.

 

As a result I think we will switch between 4231 and 433 this season, depending on injuries. It's interesting we haven't tried 3 at the back at all yet, though given the amount of CB injuries it might be that we couldn't do it even if we wanted to.

[StriderHiryu]

We started 433 today, Lookman starting instead of Maddison. That's two games in a row now we've started with a 433, so this indicates to me that's the system Rodgers is now favouring.

 

Despite having 3 central midfielders, it didn't stop our creativity, as we made a lot of chances throughout the game. Soumare I felt was hit and miss, but he put Vardy through for a one on one and was instrumental in our first goal. But despite saying that, when Nacho came on and we went back to 4231, I felt we looked even better and he assisted Vardy's second.

 

Overall though we dominated the game and made a lot of chances. The stats don't quite tell the full story. I think we were unlucky not to win, but the way we defended, perhaps you could say we were lucky to draw. Tough one to analyse in that regard! But I don't think it was the formation or personnel that led to us conceding goals today, more a bit of unluckiness and a great goal from Cornet.

 

 

 

 

 

[davieG]

7 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

We started 433 today, Lookman starting instead of Maddison. That's two games in a row now we've started with a 433, so this indicates to me that's the system Rodgers is now favouring.

 

Despite having 3 central midfielders, it didn't stop our creativity, as we made a lot of chances throughout the game. Soumare I felt was hit and miss, but he put Vardy through for a one on one and was instrumental in our first goal. But despite saying that, when Nacho came on and we went back to 4231, I felt we looked even better and he assisted Vardy's second.

 

Overall though we dominated the game and made a lot of chances. The stats don't quite tell the full story. I think we were unlucky not to win, but the way we defended, perhaps you could say we were lucky to draw. Tough one to analyse in that regard! But I don't think it was the formation or personnel that led to us conceding goals today, more a bit of unluckiness and a great goal from Cornet.

 

 

 

 

 

You can have the best tactics but it doesn't help if we are continually giving the ball away often without any pressure we even passed the ball directly to Burnley players on 2/3 occasions. Then there's Kasper's kicking which seems to be worst than ever.

[StriderHiryu]

2 minutes ago, davieG said:

You can have the best tactics but it doesn't help if we are continually giving the ball away often without any pressure we even passed the ball directly to Burnley players on 2/3 occasions. Then there's Kasper's kicking which seems to be worst than ever.

Yeah that's my summary of the game too.

 

As 433 is a system we've only started to use this season, I wanted to talk about it a bit more. I might even do a full breakdown on it at some point if we keep using it. So far in the two games we've used it, we've lost one 2-1 and drawn the other 2-2, which makes it sound like it's not very good. But actually it's been quite good if you drill into it deeper.

 

But in saying that it also seems like we play best in 4231, but with Nacho in the team instead of Maddison.

 

It will be interesting to see how we lineup against Palace.

[Blue-fox]

Without evans and fofana I think we need to play a back three. Ricardo and castagne wingbacks. 
 

youri ndidi and one of KDH/Sounare/Maddison in midfield 

 

Ian and Vardy up front

[HighPeakFox]

Despite giving the ball away a lot, we had 22 shots. So there's an element of us being result-ish about what happened today, when in fact we were a last ditch heroic block away from several more goals.

 

Frustrating as hell, but not the end of the world, as some might have you believe.

[moore_94]

Just now, HighPeakFox said:

Despite giving the ball away a lot, we had 22 shots. So there's an element of us being result-ish about what happened today, when in fact we were a last ditch heroic block away from several more goals.

 

Frustrating as hell, but not the end of the world, as some might have you believe.

Haven't managed to watch it back yet but should Vardy have buried that header he had in the 1st half? Seemed a really good chance at first glance

[HighPeakFox]

Just now, moore_94 said:

Haven't managed to watch it back yet but should Vardy have buried that header he had in the 1st half? Seemed a really good chance at first glance

Might have been slightly unsighted, but it looked that way.

[StriderHiryu]

In the last 3/4 games we've started with a 433 formation. Here was our average player position against Burnley to show it in more detail. 

 

 

Notice how Tielemans and Soumare push high up the pitch, with Ndidi sitting much deeper than usual. This means that both fullbacks can bomb on forwards and on average played in the opposition half. The "twist" in our setup is that Lookman often drifted into the centre of the pitch so Ricardo could overlap him. This led to some problems in this game with Ricardo getting caught out by Cornet twice, and was why he was subbed for Castagne in the second half, who improved our defensive stability on that wing. The system creates natural passing triangles for LB / LW / LCM and RB / RW / RCM through the half spaces, with 3 players at the back for the turnover.

 

I've seen some posts on here suggesting "Soumare had an unusual position" but he really didn't. He was the left sided central midfielder in a 433, and was asked to do the same job Tielemans does, just on the other side. He was a bit hit and miss, but this moment showcases what he's expected to do for the team. Progress the ball up the pitch and get it into the final third. He plays a great pass here taking 4 players out of the game and leading to a decent opportunity for Vardy.

 

 

Here's the goal from the Brighton match, an example of the RW, RB and RCM working together to make a chance for Vardy. Notice how high Tielemans is (and at the end of the clip notice Soumare lurking in a mirrored position on the other side of the box).

 

 

So why play 433 instead of 4231? It means we can have better midfield superiority with 3 in the middle of the park when off the ball, but when attacking push up more of the team to attack. We miss a player drifting between the lines who would play the 10 role, but in exchange have a player that on paper contributes more to the game in terms of direct running, power, tackling and meaningful possession. Tielemans definitely fits this description, so it's down to Soumare to match that output. I think he's shown enough to suggest he can do it, and it's still very early in his career so far at Leicester.

 

Now in all the games we've played 433 so far it must be noted that Kelechi Ihenacho came on late on and we went to more of a 4231 and he made a difference in every game. So which is the better system? I can't answer that right now! We have a lot of new players being bedded in, players need to get used to it, and defensively we have not been good. With both systems defence hasn't been down to a fault of the tactical system, but more down to unforced errors and IMO zonal marking at set pieces, Wellbeck beat Vardy in the air against Brighton and then Vardy scored an OG against Burnley.

 

 

Edited 27 September 2021 by StriderHiryu

[escape2victory]

I’m liking the 4-3-3 with Soumare, Tielemans and Ndidi, however, we have to get Iheanacho into this team somehow don’t we ?

 

I think Iheanacho with Vardy and 2 wingers, Barnes/Lookman, is too offensive and will leave us exposed and get picked off, especially away from home.

 

3-4-3 could work or am I guilty of just shoehorning Iheanacho into the side at any cost ?!

 

                     Schmeichel

 

        Soyuncu     Evans   Vestergaard

Ricardo       Tielemans   Ndidi          Castagne

 

           Iheanacho                   Barnes

                           Vardy

[StriderHiryu]

10 minutes ago, escape2victory said:

I’m liking the 4-3-3 with Soumare, Tielemans and Ndidi, however, we have to get Iheanacho into this team somehow don’t we ?

 

I think Iheanacho with Vardy and 2 wingers, Barnes/Lookman, is too offensive and will leave us exposed and get picked off, especially away from home.

 

3-4-3 could work or am I guilty of just shoehorning Iheanacho into the side at any cost ?!

 

                     Schmeichel

 

        Soyuncu     Evans   Vestergaard

Ricardo       Tielemans   Ndidi          Castagne

 

           Iheanacho                   Barnes

                           Vardy

Where's Lookman? He's probably been our best overall player since he signed. He's a threat every time he's on the pitch and terrifies defenders. Nacho has been tried on the right wing before a few times and has been underwhelming. He's at his best either as the main man, second striker or as a support striker.

 

Nacho could play as the 10 in a 4231, or as a second striker in the 442 Diamond we used a few times. We could try him in something else, but he's played enough games and proved what he's best at already IMO.

 

343 can definitely work, see Thomas Tuchel's system at Chelsea. In fact in the tactics world, his setup is getting a lot of praise at the moment because when they attack they seem to have a spare attacker and when the defend they seem to have a spare defender! Obviously it's not possible to do that, but the way he creates traps for opposing teams and creates space for his own is borderline genius. Someone sent me this video a while back and it was really impressive to hear his thoughts on some subject matters.

 

 

 

[Matt]

 

Simple. That’s perhaps abit too far advanced though, if it was just infront of the 18 yard box it’d be a perfect example.

[escape2victory]

6 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

Where's Lookman? He's probably been our best overall player since he signed. He's a threat every time he's on the pitch and terrifies defenders. Nacho has been tried on the right wing before a few times and has been underwhelming. He's at his best either as the main man, second striker or as a support striker.

 

Nacho could play as the 10 in a 4231, or as a second striker in the 442 Diamond we used a few times. We could try him in something else, but he's played enough games and proved what he's best at already IMO.

 

343 can definitely work, see Thomas Tuchel's system at Chelsea. In fact in the tactics world, his setup is getting a lot of praise at the moment because when they attack they seem to have a spare attacker and when the defend they seem to have a spare defender! Obviously it's not possible to do that, but the way he creates traps for opposing teams and creates space for his own is borderline genius. Someone sent me this video a while back and it was really impressive to hear his thoughts on some subject matters.

 

 

 

I know ! Felt guilty dropping Soumare too ! Just trying to get Iheanacho in whilst keeping the balance of the team.

 

im a big fan of the 3-4-3, Conte was a master of it too at Chelsea. I think we tried it once or twice last season, Chelsea away I think, and were awful at it ! But with the right personnel it’s a great system 

[StriderHiryu]

13 minutes ago, Matt said:

 

Simple. That’s perhaps abit too far advanced though, if it was just infront of the 18 yard box it’d be a perfect example.

Question for you. Why do you think we use this approach within a match?

[st albans fox]

11 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

Question for you. Why do you think we use this approach within a match?

If the opposition are behaving as in that gif then there’s no point ! 

[turlo]

2 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

In the last 3/4 games we've started with a 433 formation. Here was our average player position against Burnley to show it in more detail. 

 

 

Notice how Tielemans and Soumare push high up the pitch, with Ndidi sitting much deeper than usual. This means that both fullbacks can bomb on forwards and on average played in the opposition half. The "twist" in our setup is that Lookman often drifted into the centre of the pitch so Ricardo could overlap him. This led to some problems in this game with Ricardo getting caught out by Cornet twice, and was why he was subbed for Castagne in the second half, who improved our defensive stability on that wing. The system creates natural passing triangles for LB / LW / LCM and RB / RW / RCM through the half spaces, with 3 players at the back for the turnover.

 

I've seen some posts on here suggesting "Soumare had an unusual position" but he really didn't. He was the left sided central midfielder in a 433, and was asked to do the same job Tielemans does, just on the other side. He was a bit hit and miss, but this moment showcases what he's expected to do for the team. Progress the ball up the pitch and get it into the final third. He plays a great pass here taking 4 players out of the game and leading to a decent opportunity for Vardy.

 

 

Here's the goal from the Brighton match, an example of the RW, RB and RCM working together to make a chance for Vardy. Notice how high Tielemans is (and at the end of the clip notice Soumare lurking in a mirrored position on the other side of the box).

 

 

So why play 433 instead of 4231? It means we can have better midfield superiority with 3 in the middle of the park when off the ball, but when attacking push up more of the team to attack. We miss a player drifting between the lines who would play the 10 role, but in exchange have a player that on paper contributes more to the game in terms of direct running, power, tackling and meaningful possession. Tielemans definitely fits this description, so it's down to Soumare to match that output. I think he's shown enough to suggest he can do it, and it's still very early in his career so far at Leicester.

 

Now in all the games we've played 433 so far it must be noted that Kelechi Ihenacho came on late on and we went to more of a 4231 and he made a difference in every game. So which is the better system? I can't answer that right now! We have a lot of new players being bedded in, players need to get used to it, and defensively we have not been good. With both systems defence hasn't been down to a fault of the tactical system, but more down to unforced errors and IMO zonal marking at set pieces, Wellbeck beat Vardy in the air against Brighton and then Vardy scored an OG against Burnley.

 

 

Do you think part of his recent preference to go with the extra midfielder in a 4 3 3, is it offers more protection to our vulnerable back line with Ndidi maintaining his position in the holding role, rather than pushing further forward like he has been in the 4 2 3 1?

[Matt]

27 minutes ago, StriderHiryu said:

Question for you. Why do you think we use this approach within a match?

There’s a time and place. Exclusively, every game, the main intent? Nah.

 

Edited 27 September 2021 by Matt