Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

It amazes me that so many people still don't understand 3atb and seem to think it means a flat back 5.

 

Without Barnes we don't really any other optuins aside from a diamond.

 

 

Edited by murphy
  • Like 3
Posted
Just now, Bryn said:

Think we win comfortably today for what it's worth.

Note to self..

 

 

Remind Bryn what he said earlier.

  • Haha 4
Posted

It's pretty well our best team apart from Barnes but it's disappointing that Rodgers has gone straight to Amartey and 3 at the back with Barnes injured, it's typical Rodgers isn't it?

 

This is a must win game considering the next few fixtures.

  • Like 1
Posted

Also at the end of last season I don't think many on here expected Tielemans in the starting XI for the new season!

Posted
2 minutes ago, murphy said:

It amazes me that so many people still don't understand 3atb and seem to think it means a flat back 5.

 

Without Barnes we don't really any other optuins aside from a diamond.

 

 

But we have the option of a diamond, Castagne and Justin running up all sides and 2 up in front. Today's formation is way too passive and I can't see us creating chances. I hope I'm proved wrong.

If we go down 0-1 in the first 20min game's gone. 

Guest glasgowfox
Posted

Fek...stream I had been taken down...can somebody please message me a link

Posted

If we're playing wingbacks or a back 5, I'd swap Ndidi for Ihenacho. Brentford will be able to deal with just Vardy being isolated even if missing 2 of their best defenders. If Nacho is on he could provide a link that is missing between the 3 in midfield and Vardy and more importantly give their defence something to think about other than tracking Vardy. 

 In short, why is Brendan playing 3 CBs and a defensive midfielder at home to Brentford with just one up top? 

Posted
4 minutes ago, murphy said:

It amazes me that so many people still don't understand 3atb and seem to think it means a flat back 5.

 

Without Barnes we don't really any other optuins aside from a diamond.

 

 

This is true, and from what I've seen is that I'm sure Rodgers ideally wants to play with wingers in a 4231 or 433 but the lack of wingers sees 3atb with wb's is the only way to provide appropriate width to the system in terms of stretching play and attacking from angles.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...