Your Thoughts On 5 At The Back (1 Viewer)

[BlueSkiesForever]

Just wondering what people are thinking about sticking with 5 at the back? I know we’ve played it for a while under Robins but just wondering if you think we should be looking at other options? Not saying we definitely should, just wondering what everyone else thinks.
I’ve noticed a lot of the top clubs in the Prem play 4-3-3, not that many top teams play wingbacks these days, I’m wondering if there’s some sort of mathematical/statistical advantage in playing 4-3-3 or 4-4-2 etc. Your thoughts?

 

---

[hill83]

 

[Greggs]

Considering our best player is a right wing back, looks like we're stuck with it for the foreseeable.

 

[shmmeee]

No issues with it really. And it allows freedom elsewhere. Plus we’ve got fuckin loads of defenders and two good wingbacks.

I quite like 4231 for getting our AMs on the pitch, but then you’re back to the same problem with the two at the base. Which suggests a three man midfield is what we need. I don’t think we have the players for 433/451, I hate 4312 with a passion, which brings us back to 532/352.

 

[Evo1883]

It's done us remarkably well over the last few seasons.. but its more a 3412

 

[Legia Sky Blue]

The only time I see us going 4 at the back is in instances like last season, when we are chasing a game and he takes Fadz off so as not to over expose his lack of pace in a back 4.

 

[Evo1883]

All 3 promoted teams last season used wing backs I believe

 

[Robinshio]

back to the box for me

 

[WestEndAgro]

Wingback's for me, box in the middle and one up top.
Two stickers isn't working.
We just need a creative 10, hopefully Callum will be back soon.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

I agree with the comments about us having loads of defenders and great wingbacks, in fact I’d say Dasilva and MVE have probably been some of our best signings so far this season, I just wonder if it becomes a bit predictable for other teams to play against us? I have no issue with any particular formation, I would just love to see some variety in our formations to keep the opposition on their toes.
When you look at the teams in the Prem that play with some variation of 4-4-3, the likes of: Liverpool, Man City, Arsenal, Brighton, Chelsea, Spurs, West Ham, Newcastle etc, and then compare it with the teams in the Prem that play wingbacks, the likes of: Sheffield, Luton, Brentford etc, to me it’s interesting that none of the real top teams play with 5 at the back, I just wonder if there’s something in it?

 

[GaryMabbuttsLeftKnee]

The only time I see us going 4 at the back is in instances like last season, when we are chasing a game and he takes Fadz off so as not to over expose his lack of pace in a back 4.

The last time I got really annoyed we didn't switch to a back 4 was in this corresponding fixture 2 years ago. 1-0 down against a drab side, we were playing awfully. We didn't take off a CB and put an attacker on, and we got done with one long ball over the top against a back 3 for 2-0. May as well have 2 CB's on the pitch if we're going to make it that easy for them. It still annoys me.

I would like to see us go with four at the back as an alternate but I think it's very unlikely. I do wonder if it might actually help our current midfield issue. There is zero chance this happens by the way but wouldn't be against MVE, any two of the four new CB's, Bidwell, then a midfield three of Ayari, Eccles holding, Allen. Wright playing off the left, Saka off the right and Simms down the middle. It's far from perfect but should give us midfield control we (lacked against Hull and) are going to lack without Sheaf, should have enough defensive solidity with that four, some of Wright's best work has been runs down a channel. We all want to see Tats... Not going to happen but still, would liked to have seen us experiment with something like that in the Wimbledon game.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Stick with it, it's quite successful as a defensive unit.

More than half of Friday's starting 11 were new signings, 2 of them making their first start. It's still very early days and possibly not anything to do with the formation as to the lack of wins / good performance as yet.

 

[SBT]

We spent almost as much on CBs as we have on strikers this summer, so I don’t think it’s in Robins’ immediate plans.

 

[rob9872]

No worries with 5 at the back but another here for the box in the middle and 1 up top. Not sure who is best suited to be the 1 though. I think it could be Simms but we've not spent £7m on Wright for him not to play and only Godden scoring!

 

[PVA]

I like it.

Enables Fadz to do his thing, which he probably couldn't in a 4.

Gets the most out of van Ewijk and Dasilva.

And with the number of CBs on the books now we aren't going to 4 at the back any time soon unless in an injury crisis.

 

[napolimp]

If we want to utilise our current fit players, we could play 6-0-1-3.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

The last time I got really annoyed we didn't switch to a back 4 was in this corresponding fixture 2 years ago. 1-0 down against a drab side, we were playing awfully. We didn't take off a CB and put an attacker on, and we got done with one long ball over the top against a back 3 for 2-0. May as well have 2 CB's on the pitch if we're going to make it that easy for them. It still annoys me.

I know what you mean, I could fully see a similar thing happening tomorrow. Cardiff in great spirits after beating Swansea, albeit a very lacklustre Swansea, but Cardiff did look pretty decent. Meite had some cracking efforts at goal and Tanner looks like a real live wire, they seem like a semi-solid and their less expansive style of football is exactly where we usually become unstuck. Can see this being harder than it looks on paper.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

Got to say though, if we don’t beat Huddersfield at home by more 2 goals or more next week then I will be seriously concerned about attack and our general formation going forwards. I think something serious will have to change at that point, I’m not talking about Robins going but surely he’ll have to change the system considerably. All hypothetical at this point but these next 3 fixtures are quite key in my view. No fixture is easy in the championship of course but if we want to feel like a top 10 championship team then we should be getting 6 points out of these next 3 fixtures.

 

[johnwillomagic]

It makes us very solid normally at the back - Watford game aside which was a freak show defensively for both teams tbh,

I think we should stick with it especially with our recent signings and three centrally helps Fadz lack of pace also,

I think the issue lies in if we play a box formation with one up top or if not who to play as the two strikers,
Also with Sheaf's injury Kelly and Eccles look fairly ordinary in the holding roles.

If we went to one up top would probably play Wright then Simms then Godden.
Howevet think I'd only be tempted to go to box when Allen or O'Hare are fit as others do not have their energy.

Definitely stick to three central defenders though regardless.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Do we play with 5 at the back? Cos wingbacks tend to be in more of a defensive midfield position, so then you'd have to include Eccles, Kelly, Sheaf and make it a back seven.

I think it's fine, and CB is one area where at the moment it looks like we've got a bit of depth. Going back four could really hamper JS and MvE especially.

It's more the attacking midfielders/strikers we need to find the better formation for, and that could well be going back to the box and one up top. AM we've potentially got CoH, Palmer, Saka, Ayari and Allen if all fit so plenty of options for two places, with a good blend of skill and industry between then.

That leaves three forwards fighting for the striker role. Not sure who I think would be best but right now I'd go Wright - Simms -Godden.

 

[shmmeee]

It makes us very solid normally at the back - Watford game aside which was a freak show defensively for both teams tbh,

I think we should stick with it especially with our recent signings and three centrally helps Fadz lack of pace also,

I think the issue lies in if we play a box formation with one up top or if not who to play as the two strikers,
Also with Sheaf's injury Kelly and Eccles look fairly ordinary in the holding roles.

If we went to one up top would probably play Wright then Simms then Godden.
Howevet think I'd only be tempted to go to box when Allen or O'Hare are fit as others do not have their energy.

Definitely stick to three central defenders though regardless.

Disagree. We’ve never played the box without a Hamer/Walsh type at the base. To go all Tim Fisher an Eccles and a Kelly do not a Hamer make. I think we need to go to a three in the middle.

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

Got to say though, if we don’t beat Huddersfield at home by more 2 goals or more next week then I will be seriously concerned about attack

Strange benchmark. Huddersfield, whilst no world beaters, have started reasonably well this season. To be 'demanding' 3 goals at home is a high benchmark, yet we've done it 2 times out of 3 at home, already, so maybe our 'attack' isn't quite the disaster it's been made out to be.

 

[Malaka]

If he is playing Fadz (IMO he should) He's not the quickest anymore and needs two with him. I don't think we can play 4 at the back if Fadz is starting.

 

[fatso]

5 at the back works for us, if the wingback can get forward enough.
Unfortunately we don't have too many options at the moment with the new strikers failing to make any kind of impact, and not even being able to hold the ball up or retain possession. The second half performance at Hull from Godden and Wright/Simms was nothing short of a shit show.

I'd be tempted to try 1 upfront and play another AM once O'hare is upto speed, and I'm disappointed that we haven't given Sakamoto more game time in midfield.
I even think Allen would be more of a goal threat than Simms or Wright if he's given a chance in a no10 position.

 

[Esoterica]

I could see a 4-2-3-1 working. MVE has shown enough to suggest he can defend well enough to play in a back 4. Da Silva has played well but not produced enough so I’d have no issues playing Bidwell. The fullbacks can still get forward in that formation. Kelly spent most of the league 2 season covering Grimmer while he got forward. There’s less pressure on the DMs to break lines (Hamer style) when you already have 3 AMs and a forward. They would have to do more lateral work instead but i actually think it suits Kelly and Eccles better. Wright also seems to naturally drift to that left side.

Godden or Simms
Wright, Palmer, Sakamoto
Eccles, Kelly
Da Silva, 2 mobile centre backs, MVE

Anyway, can’t see Robins changing it when a back 3 has brought us success or when it’s this early in the season. Or dropping Fadz from what is a brand new defence, so it’s all FM stuff. I think it could work though, at least as a plan B.

 

[rob9872]

If he is playing Fadz (IMO he should) He's not the quickest anymore and needs two with him. I don't think we can play 4 at the back if Fadz is starting.

I'm a 5 at the back fan but when we're chasing a game I'd like yo see Fadz off and an extra creative midfielder with eg 15 to go as a plan B. For all Robins great things he does, he's very rigid.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

Strange benchmark. Huddersfield, whilst no world beaters, have started reasonably well this season. To be 'demanding' 3 goals at home is a high benchmark, yet we've done it 2 times out of 3 at home, already, so maybe our 'attack' isn't quite the disaster it's been made out to be.

I said 2 goals or more, of course I’d inevitably take the 3 points but personally I don’t think I’d be walking away from that game laughing and cheering if we came away with anything less than a 2-0 win, and I’d be thoroughly disappointed if we lost or drew that game.

Huddersfield have just lost Neil Warnock who has a decent ability to get teams in shape, if we simply can’t beat a Huddersfield team in disarray who so far have only beaten Rotherham and West Brom (who I don’t rate at all) and lost 4-0 to Norwich and 3-1 to Plymouth then we’re in for a shocking season. It’s at home as well, what message does it send to the league if we can’t beat a managerless Huddersfield by more than a goal in our own backyard?

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

I said 2 goals or more, of course I’d inevitably take the 3 points but personally I don’t think I’d be walking away from that game laughing and cheering if we came away with anything less than a 2-0 win, and I’d be thoroughly disappointed if we lost or draw that game.

Huddersfield have just lost Neil Warnock who has a decent ability to get teams in shape, if we simply can’t beat a Huddersfield team in disarray who so far have only beaten Rotherham and West Brom (who I don’t rate at all) and lost 4-0 to Norwich and 3-1 to Plymouth then we’re in for a shocking season. It’s at home as well, what message does it send to the league if we can’t beat a managerless Huddersfield by more than a goal in our own backyard?

By the same rationale, you could say that losing 4-0 at home to Stoke, or failing to beat Cardiff or Bristol City at home over Christmas would define how our season was going to go. It's meaningless trying to determine where we'll end up on a single game at this stage of the season. I'd happily take a single goal win with a Watford style own goal. Of course I'd prefer a 5-0 Man City style display, but it still wouldn't tell me where we'll finish nearly 40 games later.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

For all Robins great things he does, he's very rigid.

Definitely agree with that, I wouldn’t swap him for any other manager in the championship but at times I find myself getting wound up about how stubborn he is when it comes to formations or certain players. It doesn’t matter what the opposition is we’ll be playing the same system and the same players week in week out, even if there’s a player on the bench that’s been doing bits recently or a player that’s starting that’s been frustrating recently, we will still have a very similar team sheet, which of course has its positives but also comes with its negatives.

 

[BlueSkiesForever]

By the same rationale, you could say that losing 4-0 at home to Stoke, or failing to beat Cardiff or Bristol City at home over Christmas would define how our season was going to go. It's meaningless trying to determine where we'll end up on a single game at this stage of the season. I'd happily take a single goal win with a Watford style own goal. Of course I'd prefer a 5-0 Man City style display, but it still wouldn't tell me where we'll finish nearly 40 games later.

No of course it wouldn’t tell you how we’re going to finish the season but I don’t know how you can excited going forwards if we’re losing or drawing to Huddersfield at home? It’s certainly not going to help our momentum or team moral if we come away with anything less than 3 points from that game. Like I said if we get the 3 points then fair enough, it’s 3 points at the end of the day, but I want to see us put bottom 7-8 sides to bed.
Tbh I’m sort of a bit shocked at how you’re making a case that it’s alright if we don’t win at home to Huddersfield?! It’s a massive game in terms of the rest of the season, there’s not many teams this season that are clearly in the bottom third of the table, Huddersfield are definitely one of them, and they’ve just lost their manager. We should be aiming to smack them 3-0 tbh, it’s seems strange to suggest otherwise.

 

[Sky Blue Harry H]

No of course it wouldn’t tell you how we’re going to finish the season but I don’t know how you can excited going forwards if we’re losing or drawing to Huddersfield at home? It’s certainly not going to help our momentum or team moral if we come away with anything less than 3 points from that game. Like I said if we get the 3 points then fair enough, it’s 3 points at the end of the day, but I want to see us put bottom 7-8 sides to bed.
Tbh I’m sort of a bit shocked at how you’re making a case that it’s alright if we don’t win at home to Huddersfield?! It’s a massive game in terms of the rest of the season, there’s not many teams this season that are clearly in the bottom third of the table, Huddersfield are definitely one of them, and they’ve just lost their manager. We should be aiming to smack them 3-0 tbh, it’s seems strange to suggest otherwise.

I'm a City fan - have been for years/decades. Yeovil at home 2-6, Wimbledon at home 0-0 iat Highfield Rd with about 5,000 others. I'm not fixated about any result in any game ('87 cup final. perhaps excepted), there will always be the next game and the game after that. For me it's about the day out with mates, and following the team unerringly; positive results are a bonus, (and the events post Notts County 1-4 victory have been pretty much a constant buzz, I just think some fans need a reminder that you cannot constantly demand/expect results. There are 2 teams on the pitch for every match, with an opposition set of players/supporters wanting the same. Of course I want to smash Huddersfield 3-0, but have followed us long enough not to be demanding it.

 

[Northants Sky Blue]

Kitching/Lati have previously played LB and RB respectively so a 4-4-1-1 might let the handbrake off Milan/get some crosses in.

Square pegs etc but we def need a plan B

 

[TomRad85]

Think the back 5 is the only part of the team that's really working atm, we've also recruited to play this way. Leave as is.

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

 

[shmmeee]

Kitching/Lati have previously played LB and RB respectively so a 4-4-1-1 might let the handbrake off Milan/get some crosses in.

Square pegs etc but we def need a plan B

View attachment 31879

Fuck me a back six!

Don’t let Robins see this!!

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Already making errors at the back and not getting much cohesion going forwards, changing the system at this point wouldn’t help. We know that it takes time for Robins teams to get to grips with it, just got to expect indifferent form while that happens.

Though Esoterica’s idea is interesting if we’re still struggling for form come January.