5 at the back? (1 Viewer)

DT-R

Well-Known Member
I don’t know how you say our form has been far from fantastic when we’ve just strung more wins together in a 10 game period than any point in our history
Wins don't = fantastic form. In our 9/11 wins, we played well against Blackburn and Swansea, 2 teams in current appalling form. We were out possessed at home by another poor form team Watford but managed to grind out a win. We were absolutely dog shit v Leeds. We outplayed Preston, but in typical fashion for this season, gifted them an easy goal and made what should've been a comfortable victory hardwork. We managed to beat Wednesday JUST, from a GK error at the death. We also made hard work of beating both Oxford and Stoke, 2 poor teams with poor form. And the least said about last night the better. In 11 games, we played well for 2, looked good and scraped through for 1, managed to grind out wins playing average in 6, and was absolutely dog shit in 2. That is NOT "fantastic form"!
I'm not knocking it, I'd rather win and play bad than play well and lose (like we're used to) but nobody can say we've had "fantastic form" when in reality, we haven't even had good form. We've been bang average at best, grinding out wins in what is a very poor league this season.

Sent from my SM-S711B using Tapatalk
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
I’ve only seen Derby’s second goal live and the posts obstructed my view, have you seen anything conclusive on social media (or Sky) which shows the ball out of play?
Where the player crosses the ball in his left foot is planted no more than 8inches inside the line his other foot is contacting the ball which is 1foot to 18 inches away.
 

stupot07

Well-Known Member
Updated:

Back 5 -
P7 W6 D0 L1 GF10 GA 5
- 4 clean sheets
- 1.43 goals per game scored
- 0.72 goals per game conceded.

Back 4 -
P6 W4 D0 L2 GF12 GA 10
- 1 clean sheets
- 2 goals per game scored
- 1.66 goals per game conceded
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
Updated:

Back 5 -
P7 W6 D0 L1 GF10 GA 5
- 4 clean sheets
- 1.43 goals per game scored
- 0.72 goals per game conceded.

Back 4 -
P6 W4 D0 L2 GF12 GA 10
- 1 clean sheets
- 2 goals per game scored
- 1.66 goals per game conceded
For away games yeah, bit Naive to go suicidal away, but I'm not not a philosopher.
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
I think we need to pivot back to it away from home. Would also consider using it at home depending on the opposition. We're just so open to conceding 'on the transition'.

Why? Our opponents away from home are: Plymouth, Hull and Luton.

I don’t think playing 5 at the back would’ve made a difference v Sheff U. We conceded a fantastic goal from a FK against a team that thrives on countering, the primary issue for me was that we didn’t create chances to score.

The formula under Lampard has been simple so far: score first and win. In Lampard’s 21 game tenure so far:

Record when scoring first:
W - 12
D - 0
L - 2

Record when conceding first:
W - 1
D - 2
L - 4

It might seem a bit reductive but given how statistically important the first goal is in football, it makes sense. This trend is consistent even pre-Lampard (5 points from 9 when conceding first).

If anything, Lampard’s ‘flaw’ is how can he impact the game when we’re trailing and this can take time to develop as it did under MR when he first joined.
 

wingy

Well-Known Member
Where the player crosses the ball in his left foot is planted no more than 8inches inside the line his other foot is contacting the ball which is 1foot to 18 inches away.
Going back to this we should use it lambast the officials more.
We can determine accuracy from the still,there applications that do this, let's go the full hog on it!!
 

Sky Blue Goblin

Well-Known Member
Key word has to be flexibility.

Under Lampard, we’ve played three different formations. We’ve played the 4/3/3, 5/3/2 and the 3/4/3.

The 4-3-3 and 3-4-3 have been more attacking with a view to keep possession but not an obsession as more then happy to use the width or target forward to go long if needs be. Not my picture but shows the point.

IMG_6607.jpeg

The Back five means we keep our direct but drop the lines and lose our control. Think both are good and we should be flexible between the two. Although not sure we should be wiling to lose control at home as I know the pressure is a lot to manage.

IMG_6608.jpeg

Not my pictures as taken from the total football analysis on Lampard here and agree with a lot of the points here

 

wingy

Well-Known Member
So,all teams apparently have to do is out physical us and have a bit of luck with decisions,who out our upcoming games are going to do this.Then we have the answer to where we finish.
 

Mucca Mad Boys

Well-Known Member
Key word has to be flexibility.

Under Lampard, we’ve played three different formations. We’ve played the 4/3/3, 5/3/2 and the 3/4/3.

The 4-3-3 and 3-4-3 have been more attacking with a view to keep possession but not an obsession as more then happy to use the width or target forward to go long if needs be. Not my picture but shows the point.

View attachment 42287

The Back five means we keep our direct but drop the lines and lose our control. Think both are good and we should be flexible between the two. Although not sure we should be wiling to lose control at home as I know the pressure is a lot to manage.

View attachment 42288

Not my pictures as taken from the total football analysis on Lampard here and agree with a lot of the points here


I’ll definitely give that a read, looks v interesting.

As for the case of 5-3-2x I don’t see how dropping Saka and EMC to play Binks/Lati and Simms is the answer for me. Neither MVE or Bidwell/JDS are good enough as creators and I don’t think the defence is that much stronger.

Against Burnley, I’d like to see us play Simms with Wright playing LW. EMC’s form has dipped a little bit and thought Simms was a handful when he came on. Given the volume of crosses we put in, having both Simms and Wright in the box makes sense.
 

Sky Blue Goblin

Well-Known Member
I’ll definitely give that a read, looks v interesting.

As for the case of 5-3-2x I don’t see how dropping Saka and EMC to play Binks/Lati and Simms is the answer for me. Neither MVE or Bidwell/JDS are good enough as creators and I don’t think the defence is that much stronger.

Against Burnley, I’d like to see us play Simms with Wright playing LW. EMC’s form has dipped a little bit and thought Simms was a handful when he came on. Given the volume of crosses we put in, having both Simms and Wright in the box makes sense.
I would agree that against Burnley, a 4-3-3 would be the way to go, it’s more so for me that we can change shape to clog teams out and frustrate them.

Wednesday is a great example as they struggled to create anything as they focus on the attacking in the transition. Burnley could be one where we start as a 4-3-3 and as the game goes on make the subs to move to a back three.

One of the things I’d love Lampard to do, is change shape while winning to a back three like how we did from a 5-3-2 to a 5-4-1 once the game gets to the 65-75 min mark and players get tired
 

stevefloyd

Well-Known Member
Key word has to be flexibility.

Under Lampard, we’ve played three different formations. We’ve played the 4/3/3, 5/3/2 and the 3/4/3.

The 4-3-3 and 3-4-3 have been more attacking with a view to keep possession but not an obsession as more then happy to use the width or target forward to go long if needs be. Not my picture but shows the point.

View attachment 42287

The Back five means we keep our direct but drop the lines and lose our control. Think both are good and we should be flexible between the two. Although not sure we should be wiling to lose control at home as I know the pressure is a lot to manage.

View attachment 42288

Not my pictures as taken from the total football analysis on Lampard here and agree with a lot of the points here

The biggest problem on the 1st picture is EMC don't know the offside rule
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top