Sticking with a “winning” formation… (5 Viewers)

Jamesimus

Well-Known Member
I will preface this by stating I know only a small amount about football and also I am very much not ‘Robins out’.

But last night, despite winning the recent games with a new (ish) plan / formation I personally thought it was a bit arrogant to go in to the Derby game with the same again (I realise a few things were different, but largely the same).

I know very little about football, but I did assume Derby would come here and play a low block. Credit to them they did it very well; they did so many things I haven’t seen us do almost ever. We didn’t even play the way they did when we first came up to the Championship! It’s terrible to watch but it’s effective in some situations. Where is our pragmatism / ability to do things like that at Leeds away for example?

Was clear to me technical ability of our players far exceeded Derby (with the exception of Lati and BTA…). At least two of their defenders could barely control a football (the midfielder Goudmijn or however it’s spelled being the exception for them).

They knew if the wind favoured them in one half, they’d nick a goal against our porous defence. I bet they don’t play like that all the time - I bet they tweaked things to get a result against us. We don’t do that enough. Oxford should have played like this in their game against us imo.

I largely expected us to be 4 at the back with a 3 man midfield, Wright left, Sakamoto right, BTA central and we only got close to that near the end.

*Too long didn’t read - ‘man angry at our inability to be pragmatic’
 

Sky Blue Goblin

Well-Known Member
Don’t disagree.

Tactical shape is all about getting wide and underlapping in the middle or using the middle to create an overload in the wide areas.

The issue was in a 4-3-3, they had advantage in those wide areas and since they had a low block they just doubled up and in transition exposed out CBS for lack of pace.

We didn’t seem to respect the difference they would bring and without simms or Norman on the bench, would have gone one up front to start so we could bring on another later.

All hindsight but why we kept up to the 60th with a shape that was hurting us only for Robins to say the players should have known as madding to me. Get the goalie down and change shape, everyone else does it
 

Jamesimus

Well-Known Member
Don’t disagree.

Tactical shape is all about getting wide and underlapping in the middle or using the middle to create an overload in the wide areas.

The issue was in a 4-3-3, they had advantage in those wide areas and since they had a low block they just doubled up and in transition exposed out CBS for lack of pace.

We didn’t seem to respect the difference they would bring and without simms or Norman on the bench, would have gone one up front to start so we could bring on another later.

All hindsight but why we kept up to the 60th with a shape that was hurting us only for Robins to say the players should have known as madding to me. Get the goalie down and change shape, everyone else does it

Looked to me like we were 3 at the back, with wingbacks, Eccles and Sheaf in the middle, Saka as the 10 and 2 up top for most of the game.

When we went 4 3 3 we looked better!
 

Sky Blue Goblin

Well-Known Member
Looked to me like we were 3 at the back, with wingbacks, Eccles and Sheaf in the middle, Saka as the 10 and 2 up top for most of the game.

When we went 4 3 3 we looked better!
Sorry that’s what I meant. When I was referring to a 4 3 3 I was talking about Derbys shape and how it hurt us. When we matched them we were much better as you said.
 

skybluecam

Well-Known Member
I don’t mind him being in there. He needs to be subbed off if he tries to make more than 2 touches of the ball though.

He should only be allowed to foul, intercept, head it, tackle, clear it.
Fundamentally he can’t play in a 5 at the back in games where the opposition sits deep as he’s completely ineffective in possession.
 

clint van damme

Well-Known Member
Fundamentally he can’t play in a 5 at the back in games where the opposition sits deep as he’s completely ineffective in possession.

Problem is if we go 4 at the back who plays left back?
Dasilva?
That's the opposition's game plan sorted.
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Expecting another formation switch on the weekend, indication the manager is struggling to know his best 11 or best system for those 11.

I don't think so, it's horses for courses surely and the formation that didn't work last night is probably better suited to playing a team that isn't going to sit in.
 

SkyBlue_Bear83

Well-Known Member
I don't think so, it's horses for courses surely and the formation that didn't work last night is probably better suited to playing a team that isn't going to sit in.
It's a bit disappointing that the manager didn't recognise that then.

It looks like because it worked against Luton and 10 man Middlesbrough then it must surely work also against Derby was the thought process put into the selection

Robins has rarely been a manager who picks a formation or system based on the opposition, it's more find something that works for the squad and play that week in week out. When it's not working, constantly chop and change every few weeks until we find something that works again.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top