[Albion] 3-5-2 or 3-5-1-1 the answer away from home?

[BensGrandad]

I would play 4-4-1-1- but get ALL of the players to contribute for 90 mins not 30.

 

[um bongo molongo]

I’m convinced the key is pace on the break rather than formation. Izzy makes a big difference, as would Andone playing off Murray instead of Gross. Plus Knocky would give us three who can run at them

 

[Perkino]

At the Amex we are more adventurous and move the ball forward quickly. Once we started to do that against Southampton they backed off and we had much more possession. There are a handful of teams we should be hoping to beat both home and away. And if we can get 3 away wins we would have an improvement

 

[Cozzy]

I advocate 4-1-4-1 with a holding midfielder allowing the other two central midfielders more options of pressing and getting forward but also filling the middle areas when out of possession. Would take practise as Stephens and Propper have both been deep DM's and are used to it with an AM in Gross. The experiment of player Gross as DM maybe an option if he is given time to perfect the role but Stephens would be my first choice there with Propper and either Gross or Bissouma with the slight more forward roles.

All IMO of course so 99 out of 100 of you will disagree but isnt that half the fun of it

 

[The Large One]

Well would it do worse than 11 away points in a season? I doubt it.

I don't know how many others think this but I, for one, would be horrified if they went into a game changing the system with a view to 'giving it a go', with the follow-up phrase 'just to see what happens'. Just wondering that maybe the coaching staff have considered it themselves and decided, for whatever reasons, it doesn't work so well...?

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

I don't have an issue with a formation change, but I'd argue it's the mentality which is the bigger issue. We just drop much deeper than usual away from home, isolating Murray and allowing teams on to us. Consequently, you could change to a 3 at the back system, but with the same mentality that 3 would become a 5 and you'd probably end up with Murray even more isolated and you'd lose the midfield battle. You'd also struggle to get Knockaert and Izquierdo into the side and you'd make the wide areas even easier to attack.

So I don't see it happening, but I also don't see it as the main problem.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

I advocate 4-1-4-1 with a holding midfielder allowing the other two central midfielders more options of pressing and getting forward but also filling the middle areas when out of possession. Would take practise as Stephens and Propper have both been deep DM's and are used to it with an AM in Gross. The experiment of player Gross as DM maybe an option if he is given time to perfect the role but Stephens would be my first choice there with Propper and either Gross or Bissouma with the slight more forward roles.

All IMO of course so 99 out of 100 of you will disagree but isnt that half the fun of it

You mean how we set up away at Saints on Monday with Stephens holding and Bissouma and Propper further forward (and totally confused as to their role)?

I'm not actually against it, I just think with our defensive mentality away from home it leaves Murray so isolated as we end up with the wide men on top of their full backs, essentially leaving us without an outlet ball or connectivity with Murray.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Could work in theory, I'd have thought. Bernardo would be an ideal third centre back, very mobile.

But will it happen under Chris? No chance I'd say.

Why no chance, he tried it last season.

 

[Machiavelli]

Why no chance, he tried it last season.

For various reasons:
-- the once he tried it last season was the only time he's tried it in the 150/200 games he's been manager for us
-- I don't think he's played it at other clubs
-- the squad is set up for four at the back
-- he likes to play wingers, you can't/don't with three at the back

 

[Bold Seagull]

For various reasons:
-- the once he tried it last season was the only time he's tried it in the 150/200 games he's been manager for us
-- I don't think he's played it at other clubs
-- the squad is set up for four at the back
-- he likes to play wingers, you can't/don't with three at the back

It is unlikely, but there is a chance he may try it at some point, especially if availability forces his hand. I wasn't saying it was probable, but to say 'no chance' under CH is clearly wrong given he has tried it.

 

[Cozzy]

You mean how we set up away at Saints on Monday with Stephens holding and Bissouma and Propper further forward (and totally confused as to their role)?

I'm not actually against it, I just think with our defensive mentality away from home it leaves Murray so isolated as we end up with the wide men on top of their full backs, essentially leaving us without an outlet ball or connectivity with Murray.

Well I did say it would take practice ... they obviously didn't get it right on Monday but as with all things it takes time to adjust and master. They were confused and looked like they had no idea on Monday but I think thats mainly down to the fact its normally 2 in Stephens & Propper as DM's and they have played it for a whole season so are used to that and Bissouma just wasn't sure were he should be to fit in. It did improve a lot after the break presumably as they got better directions as to what to do.

 

[Grombleton]

You mean how we set up away at Saints on Monday with Stephens holding and Bissouma and Propper further forward (and totally confused as to their role)?

I'm not actually against it, I just think with our defensive mentality away from home it leaves Murray so isolated as we end up with the wide men on top of their full backs, essentially leaving us without an outlet ball or connectivity with Murray.

I think we set up as 4-3-3 in the first half, which caused the problems because none of the three were sure as to what their specific role was - we switched more to 4-2-3-1 in the second half with Bissouma pushing into the AM giving him more freedom to attack.

I like the 4-1-4-1 idea, sit Stephens back, much like Bridcutt used to and let 2 of Bissouma/Stephens/Gross command the middle, plus means the wingers have licence to push up and join the attacker if required.

 

[Lifelong Supporter]

We looked awful in the first half against S'pton but they only scored the once and that from an excellent strike. Much is to do with mentality and a critical influence is Knocky. If he starts playing the whole team is lifted and we are a different proposition. I am happy with the formation, just need a bit of a change of mindset and belief.

 

[brightn'ove]

I don't know how many others think this but I, for one, would be horrified if they went into a game changing the system with a view to 'giving it a go', with the follow-up phrase 'just to see what happens'. Just wondering that maybe the coaching staff have considered it themselves and decided, for whatever reasons, it doesn't work so well...?

Brexit mindset.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

I think we set up as 4-3-3 in the first half, which caused the problems because none of the three were sure as to what their specific role was - we switched more to 4-2-3-1 in the second half with Bissouma pushing into the AM giving him more freedom to attack.

I like the 4-1-4-1 idea, sit Stephens back, much like Bridcutt used to and let 2 of Bissouma/Stephens/Gross command the middle, plus means the wingers have licence to push up and join the attacker if required.

We absolutely didn't play in a 433 first half. Knockaert and March spent large portions of it on top of their full backs again, and often deeper than Bissouma and Propper. But a large part of the issue is that it's all down to semantics and attitude. Because we were so negative first half, what could've been a 433 with the wide men pushed high, quickly became a 4-1-4-1 because the wide men were so defensive and the central midfield two weren't sure whether to go or stay.

It all comes back to mindset and how much license the players are given.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

Well I did say it would take practice ... they obviously didn't get it right on Monday but as with all things it takes time to adjust and master. They were confused and looked like they had no idea on Monday but I think thats mainly down to the fact its normally 2 in Stephens & Propper as DM's and they have played it for a whole season so are used to that and Bissouma just wasn't sure were he should be to fit in. It did improve a lot after the break presumably as they got better directions as to what to do.

I totally agree although we changed the midfield shape second half, and the mentality with it. I think the biggest issue first half was that Propper changed position and this meant we had a shape change as well as two personnel positional changes, all in the centre of our side. It just threw off the balance.

 

[Lewes Punk]

Why no chance, he tried it last season.

Well the OP was talking specifically about playing this system away from home. I know CH tried it once at home but I just don't see him attempting it away where he puts such emphasis on being solid and keeping our normal defensive shape to try and nick points.

But hey - what do I know?

 

[perseus]

Three at the back is simply suicide, four players is optimum for covering the width of the pitch. If both the wing-backs go forward the opposition can hoof one into the gap.

Likewise with 4-1-4-1 the defensive midfielder can only cover half the pitch, and this can be exploited by a long pass switching the play to the other side.

Ten minutes to go and needing a goal or two, all bets are off.

PS: Defence from open play is almost OK away. The drawback of deep defence is it is vulnerable to brilliancies, bad luck, bad rub of the green under pressure, and conceding too many set pieces.