3 CBs - pre season experiment or long term change?

[Dusic]

With the obvious caveat that its only pre season, there has to be something in the fact that we have played with three CBs in all three games so far.

Whilst some other sides have used this well in the PL - Chelsea, Wolves, Tottenham etc - personally I don't think we have the players for it and hope Ralph doesn't become fixated with it.

It may provide a little more solidarity but the weakness of our best three centre backs (Salisu, Bednarek, ABK) is the same, none of them are composed or creative in their passing. Thats a massive issue in a back three. All of the above teams have at least one who can carry the ball out of defence and start an attack.

Also, we don't have the attackers to play a front three as none of our strikers suit playing centrally on their own and none of the supporting attackers or wide forwards have a goal threat. Clear that creativity has been a huge issue in pre season so far and I think a lot of that is the system. 

As far as I am aware none of our new signings played in a team that played primarily with a back 3 last season, so its an additional adjustment for them too.

Also, all of our best spells under Ralph have come with a front two working well in combination (Ings & Long, Ings & Adams, Adams & Broja) and when we have pressed aggressively. All of our best wins under him have come in the 4-2-2-2.

I think for Spurs we will stick with the 3 CBs, and Djenepo will play LWB as we have no fit full backs aside from KWP but hope in the long run its just used as an option occassionally rather than being a regular setup as we just aren't good at it and never have been under Ralph.

[AlexLaw76]

It is garbage for us (largely) and typical as you say, we sign these players and chuck them in like that.

I can see us going into game 1 with 3 at the back, it being a bit of a disaster before it is ditched for game 2.  Very Ralphy way of doing it.

[Baird of the land]

For the odd specific game(to combat opposition) i think its fine.

As the default formation i don't think it makes much sense. We end up looking very negative.

[HarvSFC]

The key is being versatile with the formation. Koeman knew which matches to play three centre-backs and which matches to play two centre-backs. Certain matches the three at the back formation will be more suited for, but I don't think against now Championship Watford is one of those matches. Similar to the home match against Watford last season when we all of a sudden played Adams upfront on his own and Will Smallbone randomly got thrown in.

Additionally, the two upfront formation suits both of our current strikers, being Adams and Armstrong. Broja could play upfront on his own, but we don't have him. Adams will always be a support striker, better at coming deep and playing others in. He'll never be the focal point of a team, scoring goals and being a good target man, like Pelle. While, Armstrong needs teammates in and around him and pretty much needs to be set up on a plate, as he's not going to create anything on his own.

Essentially, the three centre-back formation will probably be suited for the opening day against Tottenham with Kane and Son. But, against Leeds in the second match, I'd rather we went more attacking and took the game to them at home.

[verlaine1979]

I'm hoping it's just what we're playing right now to account for not having a first team left back able to play. There's no point having two strong mobile centrebacks and then putting them in a back three with a lead-footed donkey who can't possibly hold the same line as them without getting caught.

[Saint Garrett]

Think it’s partly because Perraud and Tino aren’t fit, we’ll go 3 atb for the start of the season. 

Edited 23 July, 2022 by Saint Garrett

[AlexLaw76]

7 hours ago, Saint Garrett said:

Think it’s partly because Perraud and Tino aren’t fit, we’ll go 3 atb for the start of the season. 

It will go wrong and be ditch by game 2.

I would say it will. be ditched by HT against Spurs, but Ralph is way too stubborn to do that

[The Cat]

55 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

It will go wrong and be ditch by game 2.

I would say it will. be ditched by HT against Spurs, but Ralph is way too stubborn to do that

What's your preferred option from those below, because this is essentially the choice that's being made:

1: 4 at the back and play Salisu LB with KWP at RB

2:. 4 at the back with KWP at LB and Ward Prowse at RB

3: 4 at the back with Djenepo at LB and KWP at RB

4: 4 at the back with KWP on one side and a youngster on the other side.

5: What we have been doing pre-season.

All of those scenarios other than 2 mean we'll probably get brutally exposed down one flank. And option 2 significantly weakens our midfield.

3 at the back allows for cover behind Djenepo because a CB can pull across into any space he has vacated and keeps JWP in the middle of the pitch.

I don't think there's a perfect answer to the choice. Certainly it's very unlucky to have 2 of our FB's injured for the start of the season, and none of that is Hasenhuttl's fault unless you're one of the weirdos who blames him for Tino's injury. 

[Saint86]

11 hours ago, Dusic said:

With the obvious caveat that its only pre season, there has to be something in the fact that we have played with three CBs in all three games so far.

Whilst some other sides have used this well in the PL - Chelsea, Wolves, Tottenham etc - personally I don't think we have the players for it and hope Ralph doesn't become fixated with it.

It may provide a little more solidarity but the weakness of our best three centre backs (Salisu, Bednarek, ABK) is the same, none of them are composed or creative in their passing. Thats a massive issue in a back three. All of the above teams have at least one who can carry the ball out of defence and start an attack.

Also, we don't have the attackers to play a front three as none of our strikers suit playing centrally on their own and none of the supporting attackers or wide forwards have a goal threat. Clear that creativity has been a huge issue in pre season so far and I think a lot of that is the system. 

As far as I am aware none of our new signings played in a team that played primarily with a back 3 last season, so its an additional adjustment for them too.

Also, all of our best spells under Ralph have come with a front two working well in combination (Ings & Long, Ings & Adams, Adams & Broja) and when we have pressed aggressively. All of our best wins under him have come in the 4-2-2-2.

I think for Spurs we will stick with the 3 CBs, and Djenepo will play LWB as we have no fit full backs aside from KWP but hope in the long run its just used as an option occassionally rather than being a regular setup as we just aren't good at it and never have been under Ralph.

Wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if he has the opening few games in mind. We have tough fixtures and did well at times last year by keeping it tight at the back in those games. Longer term we'll go back to a 4 at the back, as you say we don't have the players for a 3-5-2, especially with our injuries at WB. 

[Turkish]

2 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

It will go wrong and be ditch by game 2.

I would say it will. be ditched by HT against Spurs, but Ralph is way too stubborn to do that

If he had his own squad to pick from things would probably be different 

[AlexLaw76]

1 hour ago, The Cat said:

What's your preferred option from those below, because this is essentially the choice that's being made:

1: 4 at the back and play Salisu LB with KWP at RB

2:. 4 at the back with KWP at LB and Ward Prowse at RB

3: 4 at the back with Djenepo at LB and KWP at RB

4: 4 at the back with KWP on one side and a youngster on the other side.

5: What we have been doing pre-season.

All of those scenarios other than 2 mean we'll probably get brutally exposed down one flank. And option 2 significantly weakens our midfield.

3 at the back allows for cover behind Djenepo because a CB can pull across into any space he has vacated and keeps JWP in the middle of the pitch.

I don't think there's a perfect answer to the choice. Certainly it's very unlucky to have 2 of our FB's injured for the start of the season, and none of that is Hasenhuttl's fault unless you're one of the weirdos who blames him for Tino's injury. 

Playing 3 at the back will mean we brutally exposed as an attacking threat, with our 'overload' being at CB.

 

[The Cat]

1 minute ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Playing 3 at the back will mean we brutally exposed as an attacking threat, with our 'overload' being at CB.

 

Which of the options would you pick from the ones listed above?

It's more than likely we will have a new striker soon and maybe another attacking midfielder which will increase our threat going forwards.

[for_heaven's_Saint]

Isn’t our new coach a defensive specialist? 

[Rebel]

My preferred option would have been to have signed a second left-back by now - so we could play 4-2-2-2 (as we don’t seem to think Small or Vokins are up to it)

Josh Doig for £3-4M would have been worth a go surely?

or failing that a full back that can play on the left or the right - Aaron Hickey would have been ideal for £14M

or at least another right back to provide cover for Tino whilst he’s injured and allowed KWP to play on the left when needed (we don’t seem to think Ramsey or Valery are up to it either)

Kabore on loan would have been good to provide cover for Tino

if we are going to play 3 at the back I’d prefer we play 3-4-1-2 or 3-4-2-1 but with a left footed player on the left of the midfield 4 with the ability to give you some natural width and either one No 10 and two strikers or 2 AMs and one centre forward 

I hate 5 at the back - it always seems to me you are just playing to lose by not scoring - and on the back foot all the time

in the long run we need a second left back to provide cover for Perraud anyway as KWP will leave us at some point (probably next summer)

for this reason I’d like to see us buy a left back and a right back so we have a succession plan (or someone like Hickey)

 

[Piran]

14 hours ago, Baird of the land said:

For the odd specific game(to combat opposition) i think its fine.

As the default formation i don't think it makes much sense. We end up looking very negative.

I'm all for being a bit negative at times. I prefer to call it pragmatism.

[Dusic]

1 hour ago, Rebel said:

My preferred option would have been to have signed a second left-back by now - so we could play 4-2-2-2 (as we don’t seem to think Small or Vokins are up to it)

Josh Doig for £3-4M would have been worth a go surely?

or failing that a full back that can play on the left or the right - Aaron Hickey would have been ideal for £14M

or at least another right back to provide cover for Tino whilst he’s injured and allowed KWP to play on the left when needed (we don’t seem to think Ramsey or Valery are up to it either)

Kabore on loan would have been good to provide cover for Tino

if we are going to play 3 at the back I’d prefer we play 3-4-1-2 or 3-4-2-1 but with a left footed player on the left of the midfield 4 with the ability to give you some natural width and either one No 10 and two strikers or 2 AMs and one centre forward 

I hate 5 at the back - it always seems to me you are just playing to lose by not scoring - and on the back foot all the time

in the long run we need a second left back to provide cover for Perraud anyway as KWP will leave us at some point (probably next summer)

for this reason I’d like to see us buy a left back and a right back so we have a succession plan (or someone like Hickey)

 

IMO the strikers we currently have absolutely must play in a front two.  They aren't a threat by themselves and the attacking midfielders who suport them don't get good enough numbers to compensate.

Adams flanked by Zaha and Trossard? Fine

Adams flanked by Armstrong and Aribo/Elyounoussi? Won't score enough

[Saint Fan CaM]

For me the key issue is variety of formation and gameplan to keep oppo managers guessing. One of Ralph’s systems biggest flaws is he gets found out quickly and there’s little or no reaction to change. So 3 CB’s is fine on occasion providing there’s a plan in place to flex and a gameplan that does not inhibit our attacking ability.

[rallyboy]

I'm more concerned about the quality of all our centre backs rather than the quantity.

[Ldnsaint]

looks like the b team are playing a 3 at the back tonight. 

New playbook 

[Dusic]

We haven't got the players to play this system. 

Too many are in roles they aren't suited to and it totally takes away the threat we did have with a genuine front two.

Hope Ralph isnt too stubborn to change. If he is then it will probably be the final nail in his coffin.

[Saints foreva]

The CBs tried today are all Championship standard. It's been clear for months that we've needed 3 in the midfield to protect this fragile as fuck defence but clueless Ralph sets us to be open as fuck. 

[Baird of the land]

To be honest i thought he played our 5th & 6th best ones and then brought on the 4th best one.

[SuperSAINT]

I blame Eric Black.

[OttawaSaint]

What a mess.

If he tries to lose he'd probably win by mistake. Shite!

[saintant]

On 24/07/2022 at 11:32, for_heaven's_Saint said:

Isn’t our new coach a defensive specialist? 

Surely not!

[SuperSAINT]

I think the 3-at-the-back works in theory for us but not in practice.

For all of it’s sins, 4222 has seen us at our best. 

I like the idea of our signings this summer - but ultimately - 5 of the defenders that started were here last season & the 4th (arguably 5th choice) striker started.  So work to do.

Edited 6 August, 2022 by SuperSAINT

[Nemi]

Our strikers are so bad every defender we have probably looks like Vidic and Ferdinand in training. 
 

Probably a big shock for them and the coaches when they actually come up against proper attackers.

[S-Clarke]

51 minutes ago, SuperSAINT said:

I think the 3-at-the-back works in theory for us but not in practice.

For all of it’s sins, 4222 has seen us at our best. 

I like the idea of our signings this summer - but ultimately - 5 of the defenders that started were here last season & the 4th (arguably 5th choice) striker started.  So work to do.

Yep, agreed. I don't think we have the right players for it anywhere on the pitch. You need all defenders to be mobile really, Bednarek let's that '5' at the back down every time. And then we're having to shoehorn players into their unnatural positions to make it fit as well. You need an outstanding attacker playing that way as well, arguably a couple - then you have a way to break out of that back 5 and make it a 3, but we don't really have that. We keep trying and toying with 3 at the back and I just don't think it will ever work against the best teams with the personal we have.

It probably looks good on paper, but like you said not with our players in the cold light of day.

[Turkish]

On 06/08/2022 at 20:20, S-Clarke said:

Yep, agreed. I don't think we have the right players for it anywhere on the pitch. You need all defenders to be mobile really, Bednarek let's that '5' at the back down every time. And then we're having to shoehorn players into their unnatural positions to make it fit as well. You need an outstanding attacker playing that way as well, arguably a couple - then you have a way to break out of that back 5 and make it a 3, but we don't really have that. We keep trying and toying with 3 at the back and I just don't think it will ever work against the best teams with the personal we have.

It probably looks good on paper, but like you said not with our players in the cold light of day.

Any back 5 with a crap right footed winger at left wing back and Valery at centre back is a recipe for disaster. 

Edited 8 August, 2022 by Turkish

[Give it to Ron]

35 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Any back 5 with a crap right footed winger at left wing back and Valery at centre back is a recipe for disaster. 

Yeah but they had a good pre-season….the fact they have been shite for years is irrelevant.

The 3 outcasts of last year were suddenly going to perform miracles in this new formation and prove him wrong….or right or something anyway Ralph is a tactical genius we are all wrong 5 points in 39 proves it.

[Saint_clark]

I maintain 3-4-3 would get the best out of our players, unfortunately that isn't what we are playing. We're playing some bizarre 3-5-1-1 formation. 

[Saint Garrett]

21 hours ago, Saint_clark said:

I maintain 3-4-3 would get the best out of our players, unfortunately that isn't what we are playing. We're playing some bizarre 3-5-1-1 formation. 

It seemed to be more of a weird 3-3-2-1-1.  Lavia was deeper than JWP and Romeu on Saturday, sitting in front of the back 3, and Aribo playing off the anonymous Armstrong. 

------------Armstrong-----------
--------------Aribo---------------
-------Romeu-------JWP-------
Djenepo------Lavia-----------KWP

------Salisu-Bednarek-Valery-----

--------------Bazunu-------------

Edited 9 August, 2022 by Saint Garrett

[Baird of the land]

Don't really feel we've got particularly natural wingbacks. Hopefully we revert to a 4.

 

[Dusic]

This just never works for us, does it?

None of the CBs aside from possibly Lyanco are good enough with the ball at their feet. 

Most of them prefer defending the box rather than being dragged out wide.

KWP and Perraud are better arriving from deep as full backs rather than starting high, and they don't have a wide player to combine with which is where most of our better play tends to come from.

We haven't got a no10 with enough quality to be relied upon to create chances in that role behind the striker and in a team with few goals it essentially adds one extra player who isnt likely to score (the 3rd CB) at the expense of another attacker (2nd 10/winger) who has a higher chance to.

Seems Jones like this formation, but surely he will have realised that a back four is the way to go with this lot?

[FarehamSaintJames]

Some account on Twitter has begun the conspiracy theory of: This is how SR demand we play! 🤦🏻‍♂️

[disconnect]

37 minutes ago, Dusic said:

This just never works for us, does it?

None of the CBs aside from possibly Lyanco are good enough with the ball at their feet. 

Most of them prefer defending the box rather than being dragged out wide.

KWP and Perraud are better arriving from deep as full backs rather than starting high, and they don't have a wide player to combine with which is where most of our better play tends to come from.

We haven't got a no10 with enough quality to be relied upon to create chances in that role behind the striker and in a team with few goals it essentially adds one extra player who isnt likely to score (the 3rd CB) at the expense of another attacker (2nd 10/winger) who has a higher chance to.

Seems Jones like this formation, but surely he will have realised that a back four is the way to go with this lot?

This is 100% true with KWP - his link up play with Armstrong or Aribo down the right is often very impressive and always looks like our most dangerous attacking outlet with the little 1-2's, running round the back and getting a cross in or driving into the box. Not sure if there was much of that last night, but was his first game back for a while so may not have been going all out.

[Chez]

On 21/12/2022 at 09:08, Dusic said:

This just never works for us, does it?

None of the CBs aside from possibly Lyanco are good enough with the ball at their feet. 

Most of them prefer defending the box rather than being dragged out wide.

KWP and Perraud are better arriving from deep as full backs rather than starting high, and they don't have a wide player to combine with which is where most of our better play tends to come from.

We haven't got a no10 with enough quality to be relied upon to create chances in that role behind the striker and in a team with few goals it essentially adds one extra player who isnt likely to score (the 3rd CB) at the expense of another attacker (2nd 10/winger) who has a higher chance to.

Seems Jones like this formation, but surely he will have realised that a back four is the way to go with this lot?

nicely put.

If we are playing someone like City, where our midfielders end up playing almost as defenders, I can understand it, but even then, I'd prefer to see us play 4-4-2/4-3-3 etc and have that extra player in midfield. OK, so you may lose at City, but if you play five defenders and get into a mindset of sitting deep, you can't just flip a switch and start creating chances right left and centre against lessor sides.

Chelsea won the league with 5-3-2, so it can work, but I can't recall a performance to be proud of when we have played five at the back. 

[Paulwantsapint81]

Koeman used his hybrid 3 cb with Bertrand step inside or outside to suit the way play was going although he did have Fonte & VVD

[Suhari]

On 21/12/2022 at 09:39, FarehamSaintJames said:

Some account on Twitter has begun the conspiracy theory of: This is how SR demand we play! 🤦🏻‍♂️

I wonder if there's been some sophisticated analysis done by the SR thought-wizards that says playing 3CBs leads to more xG?

[Dusic]

This obsession with a formation we don't have the players for will be a substantial factor in our relegation.

Ralph wasted a whole pre season on it and Jones was probably recruited because of it and wasted the WC break trying to implement it.

I would imagine its Ankersen's favourite...

[Saint Garrett]

We don’t have the players to play it. None of the CBs want to play left or right, and they all get horribly exposed, the full backs get stuck with nowhere to go, and leave huge gaps in behind them. The midfield 3 look completely lost and no idea where to go, and the forwards are nowhere to be seen. We’re not good enough attacking, to take a forward player out for a CB. 

If Jones is to stay, and I 100% hope he doesn’t, then he needs to bin this 5 atb now. He’s tried it multiple times and it’s failed miserably, and only looked decent when we’ve switched back to a 4. We threw Fulham result away by changing back to a 5 when we were on top, and it cost us a result tonight IMO. 

[Whitey Grandad]

If we have an extra defender at the back then we have one player fewer somewhere else on the pitch. In every game that I’ve seen us try to play this system there is a big hole in midfield where our players should be.