[Albion] Back 3 or a back 4 from now on?

[KeegansHairPiece]

Is that the conventional LB who should have scored in the first half, being the furthest player forward or the one that had a header on target or the one that created the goal? Just asking

You've never seen a conventional full back from a back 4 get forward before? You didn't read what else I wrote about it being dynamic, changing from a 3 to a 4 to a 5? Just asking.

 

[JBizzle]

I've wanted us to shift to a back 4 at home for a while now as 5 at the back hasn't been working. I know we just beat Tottenham, but I'm not sure 5 at the back really works when we need to try and break teams down. Playing 4 at home would let us play with 1 or 2 wingers and would make us a little less predictable.

I'm fine if we continue to play 5 at the back away from home, even without Lamptey and March. Just hope that if we continue to be without both of them for some time, and our attacking threat diminishes in their absence, that Potter is willing to change it up.

If he's fit (Potter said he needed building up), it's a huge opportunity for Karbownik to get some minutes. Excited to see him play if he gets a chance!

I get what you're saying but to say "5 at the back hasn't been working" after 4 clean sheets suggests that perhaps it is actually working quite well... The problem against Fulham wasn't that we couldn't break them down, we could and did frequently, we just missed 80 chances. I actually think the system works pretty well. Keeping clean sheets is the bedrock of winning a match and we're doing it very well currently.

 

[Blue3]

We play 3,4 and 5 all during the same game total football the pundit on my stream said it was

 

[blue-shifted]

What’s wrong with playing Burn there? Bloke was amazing last night.

Played very well.

I suppose my opening post was based on a concern about quality of crossing if Veltman and Burn are going to be our first choice wing backs for a while. I don't doubt both can bring other qualities to the role.

The thinking was maybe we can set up with attacking players in those wide areas, maybe Tau, Trossard, Lallana, MacAllister, even Izquierdo, who should be able to provide more quality of delivery whilst letting Burn and Veltman be defenders first and foremost.

Just a thought anyway. I agree with everyone saying GP will mix it up and he knows better than any of us.

 

[SittingbourneSeagull]

Any news on Lamptey?! Been a while now.

GP said he was still a few weeks away. That type of injury needs to be carefully nursed otherwise it become an ongoing issue for him. As long as Veltman is fit there is no rush.

 

[hoof hearted]

I suppose there's quite a few options (as we've seen already from Potter, who has the team used to different formations).

4231 might also work well.

------------Sanchez
Veltman Webster Dunk Karbo
---------Biss -----White
----Tross -- Gross ---- Mac
------------Maupay

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Looked very much like a 'Back 11' for long stretches last night, albeit with the always-open option of SPRINGING forward

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

Looked very much like a 'Back 11' for long stretches last night, albeit with the always-open option of SPRINGING forward

Hilarious. Honestly, he who cannot be wrong only sees what they want to see.

 

[jackanada]

Burn, Veltman, Karbownik, Alzate, Jahanbaksh.
With the injured March and Lamptey that's seven possible wing backs, though skewed right sided it's not bad.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Hilarious. Honestly, he who cannot be wrong only sees what they want to see.

What would be your count of players behind the ball when it counted then?

 

[blue-shifted]

What would be your count of players behind the ball then?

Or you could focus on the number of players in the box when we attacked (which we did quite a lot because we had more shots on target, higher xg etc) .... you know ... if you want to

 

[Shins]

I get what you're saying but to say "5 at the back hasn't been working" after 4 clean sheets suggests that perhaps it is actually working quite well... The problem against Fulham wasn't that we couldn't break them down, we could and did frequently, we just missed 80 chances. I actually think the system works pretty well. Keeping clean sheets is the bedrock of winning a match and we're doing it very well currently.

I get what you're saying too and the form we're showing does lessen the need of course.

To clarify, it's just for home matches I'm suggesting we could change it up. A back 5 has us 11th in the league for away form. We've only won one game at home all season, good performances or not. If we're without Lamptey and March for a while, maybe Alzate or Karbownik are the answer and our home form will click into place, who knows. I'd just rather not see both Veltman and Burn playing wingback at home when we're already struggling to win a game there. I'd much rather see the two of them in a back 4 supported by a winger ahead of them. Although granted, Potter will devise a plan that would get the best out of them and the team, should they both be required to start at wingback in a back 5.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Or you could focus on the number of players in the box when we attacked (which we did quite a lot because we had more shots on target, higher xg etc) .... you know ... if you want to

Which I did. In post #27

 

[blue-shifted]

Looked very much like a 'Back 11' for long stretches last night, albeit with the always-open option of SPRINGING forward

You could also talk through your blueprint for getting Brighton to win at Anfield?

Looking forward to hearing your tactical masterplan.

So you were saying, the starting point would be to not get as many men behind the ball when Liverpool were in possession .... OK, tell me more?

 

[perseus]

Blue-shifted, are you talking about changing the formation that has just got us a win at Anfield? Changing the defence that has just got us 4 clean sheets? Are you some sort of blithering idiot?

Ok, ok. Maybe you're right.

But I suppose i'm now adjusting to the reality that our wing back system relies on us having quality wing backs who can deliver in defence and attack.

Very sadly, i'm not sure we're seeing Solly or Tariq for a little while.

Now, we could have Veltman and Burn play there ... but they are blatantly both centre backs. Are either of them going to provide the sort of quality delivery that March did for the goal last night?

Or we could fast track Karbownik? In some matches we might.

But surely 4-3-3 looks a viable option for a while ... Just until we can get our first choice wing backs fit ... Something like

------------Sanchez
Veltman Dunk Webster Burn
---Gross White Bissouma
----MacAllister Trossard
------------Maupay

The main difference I suppose is that the width is more likely to come from the advanced players than the full backs

I see arguments for and against. What's your view?

We only need four players to cover the width of the pitch. Wing-backs are an inefficient use of space. We can only play on one wing at a time.

 

[blue-shifted]

We only need four players to cover the width of the pitch. Wing-backs are an inefficient use of space. We can only play on one wing at a time.

Possibly true at Anfield. Certainly not true at the Amex

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

What would be your count of players behind the ball when it counted then?

All 11 when the game kicked off 3 times.

The rest of the time I saw 2 teams going at each other, both needing to defend in numbers through different phases of the game. You saw us defend with 11 men behind the ball for 'long periods'. The rest of the footballing world saw a vibrant Brighton take the game to the Champions in their own backyard.