3-5-2

[Tomassi]

On tonights performance it showed the 3-5-2 worked against a premiership class team.

It looked to me like Gary Megson wanted to pack as much in the middle of the park to add steel and strength in the areas most play in. With the two youngsters Stearman and Mattock (who i thought was absolute class tonight) running up and down all night and strikers feeding on whatever they could i thought the formation really worked! This against a pacey, attacking Villa side who maybe weren't at full strength.

We've got the players for it, so why not continue with it? I also thought that with not having a big man up top the players were not 'forced' mentally to hoof it all the time and i think this worked in our favour yet again, as much as i like De Vries and Cort.

3-5-2. worked for O'Neill, works for Megson?

[Sparky]

was defo a 5-3-2 , stearman and mattock hardly crossed the half way line . i like 3-5-2 as long as you have the right personel

[Bert]

It can be either. In the league we'd play it as a 3-5-2 but tonight it was a 5-3-2.

A tight defence and midfield with the strikers playing on the counter attack, which in the end worked well.

[Flynny]

Its our best option. Not only is it the system best suited to our personnel, but allows for a change of emphasis just by pushing the wing-backs on a bit, without drastically changing the system.

[Geo V]

Maybe a solid away tactic has been unearthed? I wouldnt play 352 at home though as we need to bomb forward. Maybe 442 or even 433 at home and then 532 away may work?

On a personal level I am happy that we didnt need a target man today. I wasnt at the game but MF seems like he is in form after shining for the reserves and he looked quite sharp at Charlton in a nightmare team performance. Nice to see Hume forward as well although most people rated him down, the Barber/Walsh commentary team said Hume played well.

[Thracian]

We'll see.

Football is all about ifs and buts.

Fulop made two outstanding saves before we scored - and I really mean outstanding.

That would have been game over and we'd have been talking about another unadventurous outing.

But we won and the boss and the team are heroes.

And why not?

I may prefer a different style. But I'm well aware that football is first of foremost about winning.

[FilboFox]

Its our best option. Not only is it the system best suited to our personnel, but allows for a change of emphasis just by pushing the wing-backs on a bit, without drastically changing the system.

I agree. Leicester City's leaky defence with 3 at the back... it would defo need to change into a 5-3-2 at times for it to work.

[mancunianfox]

I did tell you that it would 5-3-2 and not 3-5-2 though. You can't play 3-5-2 against a side who attack mostly down the flanks. Your two wide players will get pegged back into defense.

[FilboFox]

Yes yes... well done!

[Dames]

Aslong as it gets us much needed wins.

[Geo V]

We'll see.

Football is all about ifs and buts.

Fulop made two outstanding saves before we scored - and I really mean outstanding.

That would have been game over and we'd have been talking about another unadventurous outing.

But we won and the boss and the team are heroes.

And why not?

I may prefer a different style. But I'm well aware that football is first of foremost about winning.

Jesus wept what are you like??!!

I dont know if you realise this but goalkeepers are part of the team and thus part of the actual game. In their job description of tasks is to make saves. Fulop is playing really well this season and deserve sthe plaudits but quite a few teams have good keepers. Its just that we have had such a shower of shite to choose from in recent years that when one starts actually stopping the ball from going into the back of the net, we seemed like we are blessed and have something that no one else has. Agsint Blackpool on match day one, we ran into Paul Rachubka who won them the game with some quality saves but it happens, he was inspired and we were wasteful. Lets not try and belittle this win at Villa by saying that had Fulop not made two outstanding saves that it, in your words would have been "game over". You really are a strange old man.

[SOCCERROO FOX]

I think this will work well and would love to see Kaebi as the right wing back terrorising full backs

[Simi]

Megson seems to be a big supporter of this formation and he feels comfortable with it, then why not carry it on, we certainly have the players to be able to play in it.

[Kent Fox]

3-5-2 was a perfect fromation against a team that could have trounced us. The beauty of 3-5-2 is that it can become 5-3-2 when under pressure.

When I mentioned 3-5-2 the other day, some on here didn't like the thought because that is how we played the 2nd half at Charlton, and we all know how that went.

Personally, I like the flexibility of 3-5-2. And it seems that Megson and the team are comfortable with it.

By limiting Charlton to those two 'gifts', and by changing it against Charlton, Megson was closing the game down. Successfully.

It might seem defensive, boring football, but at least it is not hoofball. It never suits the traditionalists either.

Based purely on what I was reading from a combination of FT, Match Live and Live Chat, we gave a premiership team a run for their money.

And won!

[eaststandtom]

On tonights performance it showed the 3-5-2 worked against a premiership class team.

It looked to me like Gary Megson wanted to pack as much in the middle of the park to add steel and strength in the areas most play in. With the two youngsters Stearman and Mattock (who i thought was absolute class tonight) running up and down all night and strikers feeding on whatever they could i thought the formation really worked! This against a pacey, attacking Villa side who maybe weren't at full strength.

We've got the players for it, so why not continue with it? I also thought that with not having a big man up top the players were not 'forced' mentally to hoof it all the time and i think this worked in our favour yet again, as much as i like De Vries and Cort.

3-5-2. worked for O'Neill, works for Megson?

YES 100%

[Shit_arse]

I think this is a really good move by Megson. Couple of reasons.

3-5-2 can be played in a defensive manner, as it was last night with Stearman and Mattock who are both defensive players,

But when we come up against a weaker team the same formation can be changed into attacking mode!

Get Kaebi on the right and with Sheehan on the left.

Also, we can play Hume infront of 2 central midfielders with DJ and Fryatt up front.

Starting to look promising if you ask me.

[Staf]

5-3-2 Well done megson

[STUHILL]

Thought it worked ok defensively but bound to if you got 5 defenders behind ball, but going forward, neither Stearman or Mattock could create or add anything. I would be much more happy playing this if had players like Kaebi on. Who can actually get forward and potential beat their man and get crosses in. Not suprised with Stearman but thought Mattock could do this but never looked very good going forward. Our next game has 0-0 written all over it playing like that!!

[Flynny]

Eh? Stearman wasn't too adventurous, but Mattock made a couple of excellent runs.

And it was 5-3-2. Not 3-5-2.

[ithuriel]

maybe im getting forgetfull because it has been such a long time but did'nt o'niell used to play 3-5-2 on a regular basis with whitlow/guppy and grayson/lawrence playing wingbacks in our first couple of seasons back in the topflight?

then again we could pick three from the following four midfield of izzet , lennon , taylor, parker

[ronnup]

Eh? Stearman wasn't too adventurous, but Mattock made a couple of excellent runs.

And it was 5-3-2. Not 3-5-2.

Thought it was good. Rather see Chambers on right with Weso back, that'd be deadly

[TrickyTrev]

I personally dislike the formation because it puts too much workload on your wing backs but I suspect we shall see it being played as it is Megson's favorite and we don't possess any wingers. Christ knows who is going to play the attacking (izzet) role in the central 3 though, Hume?

[davieG]

It was a 532 with an overloaded defensive middle 3, this formation will probably bring more clean sheets but will not solve our goal scoring problem, second worse in the league?.

If we're going down this route we'll need a better midfield than we had last night. As minimum we need Clemence, Weso and a creative Izzett type of player.

As it stands you could select our future results from 0-1, 1-0 or 0-0, if we get lucky we could end up with more 1-0s in our favour.

[Sir Fynwy]

It was a 532 with an overloaded defensive middle 3, this formation will probably bring more clean sheets but will not solve our goal scoring problem, second worse in the league?.

If we're going down this route we'll need a better midfield than we had last night. As minimum we need Clemence, Weso and a creative Izzett type of player.

As it stands you could select our future results from 0-1, 1-0 or 0-0, if we get lucky we could end up with more 1-0s in our favour.

We won't be playing premiership opposition for the rest of the season though will we, the system was chosen to stop Villa playing, against championship opposition I'd expect 3-5-2 with more attack minded wingbacks.

We do still need an attacking midfielder to add into the mix, cover at leftback and some better forward options would be a good idea.

[davieG]

We won't be playing premiership opposition for the rest of the season though will we, the system was chosen to stop Villa playing, against championship opposition I'd expect 3-5-2 with more attack minded wingbacks.

We do still need an attacking midfielder to add into the mix, cover at leftback and some better forward options would be a good idea.

It doesn't matter who the opposition are Chambers is not a competent midfielder and Kish hasn't got the stamina or the creativity to play that role.

Until Megson picks his next team we wont know if this was a one off for Villa or if he intends to pursue this defensively biased team.