Three at the back

[Quist]

in answer OP think answer is no. I could see us in a one off game using 3 at back but not on regular basis. 

 

Actually think 3 at back system has been rumbled as teams push some one up onto each of 3 at back and means they can not get out. We did it against Utd and disrupts play. Nigeria stifled England using similar tactics and they have now given up on it. 

 

the argument put forward equally applies for this system as we are short of centre backs currently have two on books.

[S36 OWL]

Ive always prefered 4-4-2 with a sitting midfielder which allows the full backs to push on. 

[gurujuan]

13 minutes ago, S36 OWL said:

Ive always prefered 4-4-2 with a sitting midfielder which allows the full backs to push on. 

Don’t think you can play that way now mate. If you’ve got a sitting midfielder, in a 4-4-2 system, and you play with wingers, your other midfield man will generally be overrun It is possible I suppose, if you have two all purpose central midfielder, who are equally adept at both defending and attacking. The other way is, how Carlos played it, with inverted wingers, acting as auxiliary midfielders

[York_Owl]

1 hour ago, Blatter said:

Agreed and Reach at wingback has been tried and rejected cos he can’t tackle when covering the defence.

I don't recall Reach playing Left Wing Back.  He played left back a few times under Carlos and, posssibly RWB under Jos.  One of my frustrations with Jos was that he had plenty of opportuinioties to have a look at Reach at LWB but never did.

[keefdave]

3 hours ago, Grassy knoll said:

As well as Palmer has done this season, i think playing  is a step too far

Fixed

[Guest LondonOwl313]

55 minutes ago, S36 OWL said:

Ive always prefered 4-4-2 with a sitting midfielder which allows the full backs to push on. 

I agree... either that or move to a 4-3-3/4-5-1 in games where we're outnumbered in the middle. 

 

Don't see any merit in us moving away from 4 at the back. Over the last 5 years, since we signed Westwood and Lees, we've kept loads of clean sheets under Gray, Carlos and Bruce. It was only under Jos where we messed with the tried and tested players/formation that we started leaking goals. Our problem isn't the defence... it's a lack of goals generally. And under Carlos and Bruce we've been consistently top 6, we don't need to rip things up and start over, just need to add an extra bit of quality, improve the squad's fitness and add some pace/physicality and we'll be there or thereabouts. We should be looking to supplement the squad rather than replace them all.. we'll have to do that if we get promoted anyway 

[owls-swfc]

2 hours ago, Blatter said:

Agreed and Fox at wingback has been tried and rejected cos he can’t tackle when covering the defence.

Fixed it for you.... 

[Utah Owl]

4 hours ago, Hookowl said:

Nope.........................................................13 players in a team never works. 

But isn't our first pre-season friendly v Sheffield Eagles?

[Hookowl]

3 minutes ago, Utah Owl said:

But isn't our first pre-season friendly v Sheffield Eagles?

 

[briggowl]

Hang on Diame/Powell? 

 

[Guest wilyfox]

Reckon we're more likely to see 4-2-3-1