The formation (11 Viewers)
- Thread starter speedie87
- Start date
Irish Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
Two games ago you would have been mincemeat for making that statement.
Pretty much yes.
It's a highly effective formation for the players we have, though I got absolutely pelters off the 'two up front' brigade for saying so.
I know what you mean, I've spent the last 2 or 3 match threads trying to explain this to people!
speedie87
Well-Known Member
That’s because they have 2 players sat behind unlike in the 433 when there was only one.
Can anyone name another English team using this formation?
eastwoodsdustman
Well-Known Member
The system won't suit against all teams we play and I really liked the fact that once the pitch got unplayable yesterday he put Baka up top to help hold the ball up. It changed the game and I'm sure Robins will be happier to do it in future when the need arises. A bit of flexibility in the structure has to be another positive.
Winny the Bish
Well-Known Member
I love that Robins refers to our midfield as 'The Box'. Weirdly endearing.
Esoterica
Well-Known Member
I also think the wing backs have been allowed to push on further up the pitch from the off too in the last 2 games, which has made a massive difference to the way we’ve started those games. It’s not a coincidence we’ve scored more goals in the first 20 minutes of the last 2 matches than we have in the rest of the season combined.
Man City have done on a few occasions this season, although they will sometimes have wider players in the 2 behind the strikers, but it's very similar and they used it the other day against Wolves.
The majority of successful teams in the last 10 years plus have had one central striker. Obviously they will have had varying levels of support and attackers behind them, but yeah most successful teams have 1 central striker.
The days of Fergie's 442 are long gone!
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
I suspect from interviews it’s Viveash that has the most say on this stuff. Robins seemed wedded to 4231 before him.
robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
Esoterica
Well-Known Member
Even Kelly has had his 15 yard string attached to the Centre backs cut and is being allowed to get forward. The quantity of shots he's had from the edge of the box is a clear indicator of that. He’s had more in these away wins than I can remember him having all season. In fact he needs a session or two of practice as they’ve either been shanked or straight at the keeper!
The formation might not have changed but the approach within it has. He’s let the handbrake off, I suppose because of the point in the season, dropping out the top 6 and needing the elusive away win. We've finally seen the true potential of the squad and it’s very exciting.
The formation might not have changed but the approach within it has. He’s let the handbrake off, I suppose because of the point in the season, dropping out the top 6 and needing the elusive away win. We've finally seen the true potential of the squad and it’s very exciting.
Last edited:
I'm still waiting for you to tell me what this point is that I apparently keep missing (or ignoring)!
The point I have been trying to make this whole time is that 2 central strikers does not automatically mean more attacking and more goals than one central striker. I don't see what's wrong with that?
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Also confusing if he wants them to 'get it in the box'
robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
Go read @Esoterica post which replied to you when you were last being a nob. He explained it a lot more patiently and politely than I would
Sky_Blue_Dreamer
Well-Known Member
Big difference to how we were doing it before is that Shipley and Westbrooke are far more advanced and central compared to with the likes of Hiwula supporting. With the two '10's' one can push on as a second striker the other drop to pick up second balls - keeps teams guessing.
Also helps when we did play a more normal 2 up top with a no.10 like O'Hare in the hole because there's now variety and opposition managers aren't necessarily certain how we might set up. Last game MR even switched between them during a game which swung it back in our favour. If we can alternate between these at any time then it's going to give other teams a headache in defending agsint us.
Also helps when we did play a more normal 2 up top with a no.10 like O'Hare in the hole because there's now variety and opposition managers aren't necessarily certain how we might set up. Last game MR even switched between them during a game which swung it back in our favour. If we can alternate between these at any time then it's going to give other teams a headache in defending agsint us.
Yes it was a good post from him.
But he's not claiming that 2 strikers = more goals like many are/were, which is what I was arguing against. And it is seemingly you that is missing the point!
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
Is it that or is it because we've played two games where the others have had 3 meaning we have a lot more in the legs?
robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
Sky Blue Harry H
Well-Known Member
Boooooooooooooooooooooooo !
False9
Well-Known Member
I think quite a few Italian sides play, or have played, this narrow formation.
Oddly, the one that springs to mind in England is when Man City had Nasri and Silva inverted cutting inside in front of Barry and De Jong.
Winny the Bish
Well-Known Member
Weirdly, Pep Guardiola has changed Man City to a 3-4-2-1 in their last few games - and it's been hailed as a revolution for MCFC.
Their two behind the striker are playing a little wider than Shipley and Westbrooke do but that's because Pep doesn't want to move away from their classic goal-scoring move of "wide player in behind > squared across goal > man at back post scores." But it's essentially the same formation that Robins is using.
The only other change is Pep has the right-sided CB (Rodri) move up into the midfield when they're in attack. The equivalent would be Rose moving up into a right-sided central midfield spot alongside Kelly and Walsh when we have the ball.
Coventry and Man City are probably the only two teams in the country that run this formation right now. That is mad to think about.
Here's a little video about Man City's 3-4-2-1 and how they used it to score against Everton.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
Remember when anyone mentioned 3 at back they would get lynched lol
How things can change!
How things can change!
ccfcway
Well-Known Member
Yes. Funnily enough I remember who by as well.
baldy
Well-Known Member
Well us & Fraudiolas lot might not be the only teams who are using it...we don’t know every teams tactics in the football league do we?
Irish Sky Blue
Well-Known Member
I think it is interesting that the group of people that were saying the one up front formation, which was an indication of Robin’s defensive mindset and which was never going to work, are now claiming that the manager has listened to their advice and changed things to make us more attacking. It couldn’t just be that the centre forward he brought in is now fully fit and is taking the chances that were previously created but missed?
Also interesting to note that Kelly, who has apparently been let of the leash in the last two games, had at least 4 shots on goal in the Lincoln match, a game which his detractors had down as a typical Robin’s one up front defensive performance.
Nice to be in the delusional bunch who can see all the faults in the games that we lose, draw or win by only a goal, and then claim that things have been changed in the way that they advocated when we thrash teams.
Last edited:
Liquid Gold
Well-Known Member
To be fair I’ve always been against 3 at the back as every other time we’ve tried it we’ve been slaughtered and then dropped it a few games later.
covcity4life
Well-Known Member
Wasnt a dig at anyone. Just funny to think that 3 at back was deemed way too defensive everytime someone( not even me) suggested it in mstch threads etc and now its providing us some great entertainment