[Albion] 3 at back

A

amexer

Well-known member

Aug 8, 2011

6,209

• Oct 3, 2020

• #1

Will Potter persevere with 3 at the back. We had great success post lockdown when we played Hughton style and 2 CBs and 2 fullbacks. If he does will he feel obligated to play all 3 with either Webster out of position at fullback.

 

S

seagully

Cock-knobs!

Jun 30, 2006

2,955

Battle

• Oct 3, 2020

• #2

Seemed to me we played the whole second half with a flat back 4 this afternoon anyway. After Lamptey went off Webster went to LB with Veltman at RB

 

F

Farehamseagull

Solly March Fan Club

Nov 22, 2007

13,975

Sarisbury Green, Southampton

• Oct 3, 2020

• #3

I think we should persist with it starting games as it suits our players but be prepared and ready to be flexible and change it mid game when necessary.

I’m surprised Potter wasn’t quicker to change it today as it clearly wasn’t working very well today, we needed one less centre back and an extra man in midfield.

 

Swansman

Pro-peace

May 13, 2019

22,320

Sweden

• Oct 3, 2020

• #4

We will see more tactical adaption as the season goes on. Currently there is not much data on how different teams are shaping up in different games but once that settles a bit, there will be more opportunities for "tactical outplay". We'll see four man at the back in some games, even if the current tactic might be the "go to" option.

 

nwgull

Well-known member

Jul 25, 2003

13,769

Manchester

• Oct 3, 2020

• #5

Is 3 at the back responsible for conceding 5 from set pieces and 2 from giving the ball away in our own half? If we were getting sliced through in open play I’d say that the formation was more of an issue, but we’re not.

 

Eeyore

Colonel Hee-Haw of Queen's Park

NSC Patron

Apr 5, 2014

23,578

• Oct 3, 2020

• #6

nwgull said:

Is 3 at the back responsible for conceding 5 from set pieces and 2 from giving the ball away in our own half? If we were getting sliced through in open play I’d say that the formation was more of an issue, but we’re not.

Click to expand...

This.

Looking at the goals conceded so far this season, three at the back has had little part to play. It's mainly been individual errors.

The responses here are post-match knee jerk.

 

F

fleet

Well-known member

Jul 28, 2003

12,222

• Oct 3, 2020

• #7

So the 2 goals with an unmarked man - should Solly have tracked back as cover or should one of the back 3 have been over there? Or should someone else have been there?

We also need to learn set piece defending - just shocking.

 

Javeaseagull

Well-known member

Feb 22, 2014

2,503

• Oct 3, 2020

• #8

Bearing in mind how many CBs we have it would seem pretty obvious to play 3 at the back, no?

 

zefarelly

Well-known member

NSC Patron

Jul 7, 2003

21,823

Sussex, by the sea

• Oct 3, 2020

• #9

Javeaseagull said:

Bearing in mind how many CBs we have it would seem pretty obvious to play 3 at the back, no?

Click to expand...

Given the performance ratings 5 may be nearly enough.

 

Stato

Well-known member

Dec 21, 2011

6,585

• Oct 3, 2020

• #10

nwgull said:

Is 3 at the back responsible for conceding 5 from set pieces and 2 from giving the ball away in our own half? If we were getting sliced through in open play I’d say that the formation was more of an issue, but we’re not.

Click to expand...

This is true. Defending at set pieces has been poor and we have given the ball away in dangerous spaces for a few goals. The first needs work. The second however, seems a system problem.

I understand that we want to play out and break the press in order to benefit from space further forward. This involves a level of risk because sometimes it will fail and we will present an opportunity high up the pitch. What is annoying me about this is that I can think of repeated instances where the approach has gifted goals, Chelsea this year and last, United at the Amex last year, Liverpool, Everton today, but struggle to think of incidents where it has worked and we have scored. The risk/reward seems out of balance. We have looked good playing higher up the pitch, pressing and harrying defenders in possession. We also now some have pace that can benefit from occasional longer balls in behind. Can anyone convince me that the continued obsession with knocking it around at the back is worth the goals we are handing to some very good teams?