Robins behind the curve (3 Viewers)

[AFCCOVENTRY]

Interesting insights on how pretty much every team bar 3 have moved to 4 at the back this season. Robins too stubborn to adapt the system and really we saw it for 20mins at Preston and saw a marked difference.

Worth reading the X thread

 

---

[clint van damme]

He can't pay Fadz in a 4, if he goes to a 4 permanently it's over for Fadz. Be a big call, but that's what he paid for.

 

[SBT]

Spending ~£7 million on centre backs to play in a back three, only to switch to a back four after a dozen games is phenomenal stuff from the recruitment team.

 

[David O'Day]

Didn't Preston start with 3 cbs?

 

[covcity4life]

Spending ~£7 million on centre backs to play in a back three, only to switch to a back four after a dozen games is phenomenal stuff from the recruitment team.

Would it be their fault? If they were told to recruit for a back 3

 

[David O'Day]

Spending ~£7 million on centre backs to play in a back three, only to switch to a back four after a dozen games is phenomenal stuff from the recruitment team.

how on earth would that be the recruitment teams fault?

 

[coop]

He can't pay Fadz in a 4, if he goes to a 4 permanently it's over for Fadz. Be a big call, but that's what he paid for.

Fadz days are numbered he's maybe one season to many.

 

[Sick Boy]

Spending ~£7 million on centre backs to play in a back three, only to switch to a back four after a dozen games is phenomenal stuff from the recruitment team.

I think you might be overestimating just how much power the recruitment team has.

 

[SBT]

how on earth would that be the recruitment teams fault?

Well Robins, crucially, is part of the recruitment team. Spending that kind of money on CBs should have allowed us to play the system of the manager’s choosing. And yet here we are.

 

[Gint11]

He can't pay Fadz in a 4, if he goes to a 4 permanently it's over for Fadz. Be a big call, but that's what he paid for.

It’s almost over for Fadz anyway at 36 or whatever age he is. Seems a season too far.

 

[Evo1883]

Hasn't a back 3 always been a minority formation ?

Can't ever remember a time when every team played it

 

[AFCCOVENTRY]

JDS and MVE come in as wingbacks.

Bidwell will defo be comfortable as a traditional LB. Can MVE operate there comfortably?

We have Kitching and Binks for LCB and then Thomas/Lati/Fadz for RCB for a centre 2.

 

[PUSB-We_are_going_up]

JDS and MVE come in as wingbacks.

Bidwell will defo be comfortable as a traditional LB. Can MVE operate there comfortably?

We have Kitching and Binks for LCB and then Thomas/Lati/Fadz for RCB for a centre 2.

Pretty sure MVE played RB at Heerenveen

 

[David O'Day]

Well Robins, crucially, is part of the recruitment team. Spending that kind of money on CBs should have allowed us to play the system of the manager’s choosing. And yet here we are.

nice back tracking

 

[David O'Day]

Pretty sure MVE played RB at Heerenveen

yeah i am sure he did

 

[chiefdave]

Spending ~£7 million on centre backs to play in a back three, only to switch to a back four after a dozen games is phenomenal stuff from the recruitment team.

Surely centre backs costing £7m should be able to cope with playing in a back four

 

[shepardo01]

He's recruited for 5 at the back, said it at the forum the other week.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

You don't need to follow what every other team is doing to succeed. However-playing 7 defensive players, 8 including the keeper, and expecting to create much is a hiding to nothing even with far better players than are at our disposal. The one advantage of doing it should be a tight defence, but it's shipped 7 in 3 games and nearly every goal conceded is farcical.

Not much doubt left for me that 5 ATB needs to go.

 

[Deity]

Leicester play with 3 at the back with the ball and 4 out of possession.

my frustration with our system is that we stick yo 3 central defenders even when the opposition play one up top.

why ? You have to assume Robins doesn’t trust 2 of them to cope.

 

[Hincha]

Hasn't a back 3 always been a minority formation ?

Can't ever remember a time when every team played it

Since Conte’s Chelsea the back 5 has been ever present.

Over the last few years in the EFL more sides have played a back 5 than not.

That has changed this season where it has swung heavily towards a back 4 so that sides can have an extra man in midfield to control the middle.

Our biggest issue this season is that our tactics don’t match our formation (5-2-1-2). We’re trying to control possession while being outnumbered in midfield, which is the most critical area in terms of controlling a game.

 

[fernandopartridge]

Spending ~£7 million on centre backs to play in a back three, only to switch to a back four after a dozen games is phenomenal stuff from the recruitment team.

If we play with 3 or 2 centre backs we still needed to sign at least 3 in the summer to prove adequate cover

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Spending ~£7 million on centre backs to play in a back three, only to switch to a back four after a dozen games is phenomenal stuff from the recruitment team.

All gearing up for 3/5 of Barnsley's back line to be deployed in the Championship

 

[Greggs]

We should play 6 at the back rather than worrying about 4 or 5. The defense is a disaster waiting to happen, backed up by a keeper running the biggest scam of his career.

 

[MusicDating]

Considering Stoke tore us a new one with 3 CBs last season, be interesting to see how we line up on Sat...