Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Register Log in

[Albion] Defensive system for Leicester & CPFC2010



H

Han Solo

Well-known member
May 25, 2024
2,942
The three man back line was interesting on paper... but it ended after 4 minutes when we went 1-0 down and Van Hecke virtually turned into right back as Adingra pushed further forward. If we had to build up from the goalkeeper more often, the difference would have been more noticeble. As it stands Van Hecke was playing a bit like Veltman usually does.

I don't mind it, Van Hecke did well, but I don't believe the Troglodyte Three with Dunk, Wieffer and Baleba are able to reliably carry out the ball from the centre without trouble, and if you then have Van Hecke (or Veltman) at right back, build up gets rather stale. Someone like Hinshelwood or Ayari or Ferdi needs to be in the mix. Yesterday we had little to no threat through the middle or on the RW - Estupinan/Mitoma one way or another built everything we created.
 




southstandandy

southstandandy

WEST STAND ANDY
Jul 9, 2003
6,107
Don't play a left winger at right wing for a start. With Gruda and Minteh available I was surprised he went with Adingra (who seems to have gone backwards since last season) on his non favoured side.

Round pegs in round holes please FH.
 




HeaviestTed

HeaviestTed

I’m eating
NSC Patron
Mar 23, 2023
2,218
I have a feeling they will ignore their first two goals, the first was just a stupid mistake not to be repeated until next time, the second MOR had no idea what he had even done.

The third was the only one that really counts in the world of tactics.

/this is a bit opinion, a bit guess - I’m an overweight bald fella on the internet, I’m not a premiership manager - thank you, goodnight.
 


pigmanovich

pigmanovich

Good Old Sausage by the Sea
Mar 16, 2024
1,781
London
HeaviestTed said:
I have a feeling they will ignore their first two goals, the first was just a stupid mistake not to be repeated until next time, the second MOR had no idea what he had even done.

The third was the only one that really counts in the world of tactics.

/this is a bit opinion, a bit guess - I’m an overweight bald fella on the internet, I’m not a premiership manager - thank you, goodnight.
Click to expand...
Don’t ignore the first, just hoof the ball upfield
 




Justice

Justice

Dangerous Idiot
Jun 21, 2012
21,140
Born In Shoreham
Kalimantan Gull said:
So we can add ' doesn't rate our captain' to ' doesn't rate our manager'?
Click to expand...
Where did I say that? You quoted the defence made a mess against Wolves the and yet forgot to mention the wins without Dunk.
Dunk’s ok didn’t really see any reason to play him last night tbh it upset the partnership with JPVH and Igor which and built up reasonably successfully , never seen JPVH have a shocker like that all season.
 


M

Machiavelli

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2013
17,928
Fiveways
Kalimantan Gull said:
The TV put that formation up, yes. But the reality was that Adingra stayed high and van Hecke stayed out right.

I bet Adingras heat map will be a mirror of Mitomas
Click to expand...
I'd be interested to see the heat maps of those two. From my impression at CC, Adingra stayed very wide and high up, Mitoma was much more tucked in with Pervis hugging the touchline when in possession.
 


M

Mancgull

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2011
5,636
Astley, Manchester
Three at the back is fine if you have the wing backs to complement it. Pervis can do the left sided role and I think the best suited player for the right in Jack H who unfortunately is injured at present. He gives us great energy down the right hand side when he plays there.
We are missing him at present.
 




JBizzle

JBizzle

Well-known member
Apr 18, 2010
6,283
Seaford
What frustrates me is that there was no tactical need to bring Dunk back in when the defence was functioning pretty well without him.

We've gone to a back three(ish) when our back 4 has been totally fine up until now and and much as I love JP, he ain't a right back, so when we switched from a back three to a back four we had a right winger who doesn't defend and a right back ho doesn't attack.

I have no idea what it is, but our managers seem to make a total tactical mess of our team every time we play Fulham away. Last night we brought it on ourselves, last season (0-3) RDZ rotated about 6 players, the season before (1-2) we went up there and didn't play a striker and went 3 at the back again.
 


hans kraay fan club

hans kraay fan club

The voice of reason.
Helpful Moderator
Mar 16, 2005
62,842
Chandlers Ford
I'd absolutely play a back four, regardless of available personnel. It is the system our players are practised in, and understand.

If you don't have a recognised 'right back' available, then choose someone with the attributes to do a job. Ayari, perhaps.

Jack Hinshelwood wasn't 'a right back' until he er.. played at right back.
 


theonesmith

theonesmith

Well-known member
Oct 27, 2008
2,339
Kalimantan Gull said:
I know. Its weird (but clearly just to me :) )

If you play a back three with wingbacks you expect a change on the left side as well as the right, but Estupinan and Mitoma were just normal Estupinan and Mitoma.

Its OK if you don't care about this, we still lost regardless :p
Click to expand...
Isn't the answer here that we played a three at the back formation so badly it looked like a four at the back for you?

I thought it was quite clear. I agree Adingra's positioning was shocking. Mitoma and O'Reilly were both in more inside forward roles though, until they changed in the second half. (And I didn't think that worked either, we lacked any clear patterns in our build up play)
 












H

Han Solo

Well-known member
May 25, 2024
2,942
hans kraay fan club said:
I'd absolutely play a back four, regardless of available personnel. It is the system our players are practised in, and understand.

If you don't have a recognised 'right back' available, then choose someone with the attributes to do a job. Ayari, perhaps.

Jack Hinshelwood wasn't 'a right back' until he er.. played at right back.
Click to expand...
Van Hecke perhaps? Thought he was fine yesterday.
 


LamieRobertson

LamieRobertson

Not awoke
Feb 3, 2008
48,694
SHOREHAM BY SEA
Kalimantan Gull said:
We did play a back 4 tonight? In what way was van Hecke anything but a right back tonight, and adingra anything but a standard right winger?

I'm equally confused by the calls to drop Dunk. Maybe I just had the wrong match on
Click to expand...
It’s the latest fashionable thing to do 😉

I’m starting one for Matt O’R ….drop him for having an arse
 


M

Machiavelli

Well-known member
Oct 11, 2013
17,928
Fiveways
Kalimantan Gull said:
I know. Its weird (but clearly just to me :) )

If you play a back three with wingbacks you expect a change on the left side as well as the right, but Estupinan and Mitoma were just normal Estupinan and Mitoma.

Its OK if you don't care about this, we still lost regardless :p
Click to expand...
I've done this already but, in order to convince me, you'll need to show the Mitoma and Estipunan heat maps, ditto JPvH and Adingra.
 






dazzer6666

dazzer6666

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Mar 27, 2013
56,057
Burgess Hill
Han Solo said:
The three man back line was interesting on paper... but it ended after 4 minutes when we went 1-0 down and Van Hecke virtually turned into right back as Adingra pushed further forward. If we had to build up from the goalkeeper more often, the difference would have been more noticeble. As it stands Van Hecke was playing a bit like Veltman usually does.

I don't mind it, Van Hecke did well, but I don't believe the Troglodyte Three with Dunk, Wieffer and Baleba are able to reliably carry out the ball from the centre without trouble, and if you then have Van Hecke (or Veltman) at right back, build up gets rather stale. Someone like Hinshelwood or Ayari or Ferdi needs to be in the mix. Yesterday we had little to no threat through the middle or on the RW - Estupinan/Mitoma one way or another built everything we created.
Click to expand...
Thought we were essentially 3 at the back in possession and 4 out of possession on Thursday , with Pervis dropping back and JPVH across…….might have been kind of forced into it with no obvious RB fit. Adingra is absolutely hopeless defensively and has been since we signed him, and needs a RB to set him off and running

Agree completely with your second paragraph
 


GT49er

GT49er

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Feb 1, 2009
49,453
Gloucester
Kalimantan Gull said:
I know. Its weird (but clearly just to me :) )

If you play a back three with wingbacks you expect a change on the left side as well as the right, but Estupinan and Mitoma were just normal Estupinan and Mitoma.

Its OK if you don't care about this, we still lost regardless :p
Click to expand...
There's no rule that says teams have to be symmetrical - providing everybody knows their role within the set-up. Might even be an advantage if it manages to create uncertainty in the opposition.

Going back a few years, I remember teams often playing with one winger, who would swap wings through the match, to try and find which was the most vulnerable for him to attack.
 


You must log in or register to reply here.
Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports

Share this page


Top
Link Here