4-3-3

[Bryn]

I thought this looked a workable formation for us, especially considering we were forced into it and we didn't really have the personnel. Danns free to push forward with Wellens anchoring, movement from the front three.

There's a reason 4-4-2 has been denounced by so many, it offers the backline little protection and it's easily countered. I don't think any Leicester fan will argue we need a plan B.

Obviously we tried this and failed under Sven, but his style was so ponderous. I think a well organised, pressing side playing 4-3-3 is a different proposition completely. I think whatever makes Danns stand out like he did today is something to aspire to next season.

[RowlattsFox]

It's about being flexible, certain games will require 4-4-2 and others 4-3-3. I am a fan of the 4-3-3 though.

[Jace]

[Bryn]

It's about being flexible, certain games will require 4-4-2 and others 4-3-3. I am a fan of the 4-3-3 though.

Yeah my thoughts exactly, we need to be adept at both. Perhaps Marshall will blossom into a player in the hole and we'll be able to take up a 4-2-3-1 as well, but whatever way it goes we need to have more tactical flexibility.

[cc_star]

Pearson played 433 when he came, it didn't work

Sven played 433 at the start, it didn't work

I actually think we should play with 2 defensive mids 4-2-3-1 in the first halves, not sure we have the personel to though, ManCity play like it & Chelsea started like it today.

Peltier - Morgan - SSL - Konch

Drinkwater - Bamba

Marshall - Wellens - Dyer

Nugent

and then sub someone to bring on Beckford/Schlupp and change it up to 442/433, depending if we're in front or behind

Although with a 4-2-3-1 which is a variation of the 451 but with 2 players with a very defined role, and 3 other players who have to be flexible and really mix it up joining the attacker, turning it into a 425 & 451 in the blink of an eye.

Probably not practical, would require a summer of coaching & new players though

but many, many teams are doing it, the 2 defensive mids give a further licence to your fullbacks to attack

[RowlattsFox]

It worked quite well at times under Sven last year.

When we have played it though, we've not really played it properly in my opinion. The attacking wide players are crucial and Nugent can do this well, he played well second half.

Also think Danns is much more suited to the attacking midfield role than King was, the gets the ball and runs at the defence.

[cc_star]

It worked quite well at times under Sven last year.

When we have played it though, we've not really played it properly in my opinion. The attacking wide players are crucial and Nugent can do this well, he played well second half.

Also think Danns is much more suited to the attacking midfield role than King was, the gets the ball and runs at the defence.

It was the sole cause of our dire-to-indifferent start of the season though, it didn't work and Sven cycled through the full range of Fernandes, Johnson, Abe, Danns, Wellens, King... everyone, Danns looked poor no one really got going & we changed to 4-1-2-1-2 diamond... which also never really worked as we had no width

Last season we had Naughton bombing up the wing & the defensively inept PVA doing the same on the other side & whilst scored a few we conceded loads too meaning we never progressed out of mid-table & to be fair it only really worked when we won 4 in a row in Feb, the following 14 games (or however many there were) we were generally poor.

King never played attacking midfield... He did most of his work on the edge of our own box, he can read a game excellently ghosting into the opposition box from deep unmarked.

When tasked with attacking midfield role (usually paired up with Wellens playing defensive role which he can't do either as he needs to be forward slotting balls down the channels) it made both players look awful.

Danns is very good attacking, runs & shoots, and has really shined in a 442 with Wellens, Danns has got more to the rest of his game than King has though

[Guest ttfn]

Pearson played 433 when he came, it didn't work

Sven played 433 at the start, it didn't work

I actually think we should play with 2 defensive mids 4-2-3-1 in the first halves, not sure we have the personel to though, ManCity play like it & Chelsea started like it today.

Peltier - Morgan - SSL - Konch

Drinkwater - Bamba

Marshall - Wellens - Dyer

Nugent

and then sub someone to bring on Beckford/Schlupp and change it up to 442/433, depending if we're in front or behind

Although with a 4-2-3-1 which is a variation of the 451 but with 2 players with a very defined role, and 3 other players who have to be flexible and really mix it up joining the attacker, turning it into a 425 & 451 in the blink of an eye.

Probably not practical, would require a summer of coaching & new players though

but many, many teams are doing it, the 2 defensive mids give a further licence to your fullbacks to attack

Agree with this. Certainly tactical flexibility is something we need to work on.

Probably wouldn't go for the same midfielders as you, but it's your opinion.

[inckley fox]

I agree that we need tactical flexibility, but a dear friend with a head for conversation-stifling data regurgitation came up with something very interesting a few days ago, after Birmingham:

This year we've started the following number of games with the following formations, achieving the number of points in brackets:

4-4-2 15 games (25) avg: 1.67 points per game

4-1-2-1-2 11 games (18) avg: 1.64 points per game

4-3-3 8 games (5) avg: 0.63 points per game

3-5-2 1 game (3) avg: 3 points per game

In other words, we'd be among the play-off places, or extremely close, were it not for our dalliances with 4-3-3, under both managers. 4-3-3 has cost us our season, factually speaking at least.

I daresay our next trial run will go exactly the same way. Apart from a brief good spell under Sven, we've largely struggled with 4-3-3 whenever we've used it, since 2009 (see Pearson spring 2010, Sousa autumn 2010). In fact, our decision to build a squad for 4-3-3 this season has probably cost us a lot of points in those games when we've gone 4-4-2, as well, simply because of our squad's unsuitability for such a formation.

[Guest Col city fan]

I agree that we need tactical flexibility, but a dear friend with a head for conversation-stifling data regurgitation came up with something very interesting a few days ago, after Birmingham:

This year we've started the following number of games with the following formations, achieving the number of points in brackets:

4-4-2 15 games (25) avg: 1.67 points per game

4-1-2-1-2 11 games (18) avg: 1.64 points per game

4-3-3 8 games (5) avg: 0.63 points per game

3-5-2 1 game (3) avg: 3 points per game

In other words, we'd be among the play-off places, or extremely close, were it not for our dalliances with 4-3-3, under both managers. 4-3-3 has cost us our season, factually speaking at least.

I daresay our next trial run will go exactly the same way. Apart from a brief good spell under Sven, we've largely struggled with 4-3-3 whenever we've used it, since 2009 (see Pearson spring 2010, Sousa autumn 2010). In fact, our decision to build a squad for 4-3-3 this season has probably cost us a lot of points in those games when we've gone 4-4-2, as well, simply because of our squad's unsuitability for such a formation.

Again.. Spot on

[Libertine]

The problem was we didn't properly build a squad for 4-3-3. Or for any formation really. Fair enough we got in a shed load of CMs but the problem was the lack of wingers, so we ended up with Danns/Schlupp out there half the time. Can't see NP going for it in the long run but it's probably my favourite formation when done properly.

[leicester4life]

I agree that we need tactical flexibility, but a dear friend with a head for conversation-stifling data regurgitation came up with something very interesting a few days ago, after Birmingham:

This year we've started the following number of games with the following formations, achieving the number of points in brackets:

4-4-2 15 games (25) avg: 1.67 points per game

4-1-2-1-2 11 games (18) avg: 1.64 points per game

4-3-3 8 games (5) avg: 0.63 points per game

3-5-2 1 game (3) avg: 3 points per game

In other words, we'd be among the play-off places, or extremely close, were it not for our dalliances with 4-3-3, under both managers. 4-3-3 has cost us our season, factually speaking at least.

I daresay our next trial run will go exactly the same way. Apart from a brief good spell under Sven, we've largely struggled with 4-3-3 whenever we've used it, since 2009 (see Pearson spring 2010, Sousa autumn 2010). In fact, our decision to build a squad for 4-3-3 this season has probably cost us a lot of points in those games when we've gone 4-4-2, as well, simply because of our squad's unsuitability for such a formation.

bold therefore clearly shows 3-5-2 is the way forward, back to the MON future!

[Heart-Shaped Fox]

I think if we play 433 we might score more but i worry about the defence.

But it might be the change we need as we don't always score enough.

[inckley fox]

I think if we play 433 we might score more but i worry about the defence.

But it might be the change we need as we don't always score enough.

I'm confused... We've scored ten in the last five games but conceded twelve in the last four games, why should we change our formation to one which - as you say - destabilises the defence but favours the attack?

Plus, we've scored eleven goals in the ten games we've started with a 4-3-3 this season (including four in one game against Bury); seven in eight in the league.

Attack isn't our problem now and, if it were, 4-3-3 wouldn't be the solution.

I suspect Pearson's only consideration re:4-3-3 will be whether it shores up the back line which, today, it didn't. Neither did it when we conceded two at home to Barnsley, one of the most recent experiments with 4-3-3.

4-3-3 is a good formation if you know how to play it. We are the very definition of a side that doesn't know how to play it.

[Legend_in_blue]

We can't play a 4-3-3 because the midfield isn't bright enough.

If we could get rid of Wellens, that might be a start in the right direction. At the moment, apart from Danns, we don't have a fluid enough midfield to run it successfully.

[jonlcfc1990]

Who would of thought that after booing Sven off at half time away at Barnsley and chanting 4 4 2 at him we now open a thread on his formation...