[Albion] 352 what did you think?

[Noah All]

I'm sorry but I just don't like this attitude 'we got hammered but at least we had a go'. That's a one way ticket to relegation. We need points, not kudos from 'having a go'. Any team can have a go at 2-0 down ......

In one sense I agree with you, but NSC have been crying out for 'having a go, and hang the consequences ' especially against the top 6 sides.

In our normal formation with more attacking, we would still have left space for Hazard & Willian to exploit. We would probably have lost anyway and everyone would be moaning 'too negative' 'why didn't we have a go'?

I was impressed with the 3-5-2. Worth preserving with but needs more work in training and tweaking e.g. Back 3 of Goldson Dunk BFG ( would love Tomori in the back 3!) and front 2 of Baldock (Locadia) Murray. And there is plenty of scope for rotating in the 5. I think 3-5-2 is our best hope for wins.

 

[amexer]

Thought defence was a shambles. Compared to Palace game Goldson looked terrible and out of place. I bet Haggard couldnt believe it when he recieved ball Goldson was next to him and seconds later no where to be seen. Once we are in relegation trouble is not time to change system. Our problem has been defending set plays and missing chances. Sort that out and we may have a chance.

 

[Seasidesage]

Thought we looked more balanced and saw more possession than almost any other game this season. Needs some work but it gives us a greater chance to score which is exactly what we need currently.

 

[Withdean11]

Needs some work but it gives us a greater chance to score which is exactly what we need currently.

We created more chances against Liverpool.

 

[Pavilionaire]

How can anyone say our 3-5-2 formation made for a more attacking shape when we were already 2-0 after 6 minutes and had to chase the game?

I would have expected us to create chances even if we had a 10-0-0 formation because teams that are 2-0 down have to score twice to get anything from the game.

Personally, I thought Schelotto was ideally suited to a 3-5-2 formation but Suttner was a fish out of water and didn't know whether he was coming or going.

I think 3-5-2 is also an insurance policy against conceding from corners, and think that to change your whole shape because of one small part of the game is strange. Duffy had his worst game in an Albion shirt in this formation, I thought in the first half Chelsea looked like scoring with every attack and having a flat line of 5 defenders just invites good teams to come at you and play through you.

I think our best formation is 4-4-1-1.

 

[Seasider78]

What I found most interesting about the 3-5-2 was both Schellotto and Suttner looked a much more productive outlet from wide positions than any of our established wingers have so far this season. That may say more about the form of our wide players than the future of us adopting 3-5-2 but it was certainly very noticeable on saturday

 

[BensGrandad]

I liked the system as I think it will work for us but think that Dunk is just as much as fault as Duffy but then he is a £30m player according to many so cannot be at fault ever. I would play Goldson on the right of the 3, Duffy or possibly Dunk in the centre and definitely Uwe on the left. As mentioned earlier it gives us 5 -3-2 when defending and 3-5-2 when attacking.

 

[Peteinblack]

Thought defence was a shambles. Compared to Palace game Goldson looked terrible and out of place. I bet Haggard couldnt believe it when he recieved ball Goldson was next to him and seconds later no where to be seen. Once we are in relegation trouble is not time to change system. Our problem has been defending set plays and missing chances. Sort that out and we may have a chance.

Or the fact that we are in relegation trouble suggests that the system is not working, and needs to be changed urgently.

Definition of madness: doing the same thing repeatedly, but expecting a different outcome.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Or the fact that we are in relegation trouble suggests that the system is not working, and needs to be changed urgently.

Definition of madness: doing the same thing repeatedly, but expecting a different outcome.

But we weren’t conceding many goals in normal match play, so it was working from that perspective.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SULLY COULDNT SHOOT]

The tactic worked because it released Schelotto.... not so much for Suttner surprisingly. I'd like to see it again against Boro to see if it gives us goals.

 

[Mo Gosfield]

How can anyone say our 3-5-2 formation made for a more attacking shape when we were already 2-0 after 6 minutes and had to chase the game?

I would have expected us to create chances even if we had a 10-0-0 formation because teams that are 2-0 down have to score twice to get anything from the game.

Personally, I thought Schelotto was ideally suited to a 3-5-2 formation but Suttner was a fish out of water and didn't know whether he was coming or going.

I think 3-5-2 is also an insurance policy against conceding from corners, and think that to change your whole shape because of one small part of the game is strange. Duffy had his worst game in an Albion shirt in this formation, I thought in the first half Chelsea looked like scoring with every attack and having a flat line of 5 defenders just invites good teams to come at you and play through you.

I think our best formation is 4-4-1-1.

If it hadn't been for Ryan, Chelsea would have been out of sight.

 

[BensGrandad]

If it hadn't been for Ryan, Chelsea would have been out of sight.

Weren't they from the 6th minute, when we showed anything they just upped their game a little and always looked like they would score again as and when they wanted.

 

[Seasidesage]

They scored one goal that should've been prevented and one worldy. Who's to say either goal wouldn't have happened with a back four? Yes we were chasing the game but we played with fluency, width and managed to retain possession long enough to sustain attacks. We have done that all to rarely this season and with a formation that we hadn't used before. Do people not think we might just might get better at it with game time?

Knocky has been poor this season, Izzy makes us narrow and Solly has been hit and miss too. In CM we struggle to sustain possession because we are outnumbered and at times outclassed. Changing to 3-5-2 is not a panacea for all our problems by any means but we looked better balanced and more progressive. A striker is a must (No pressure Jurgen) but we looked better and created chances against a good side.

 

[Birdie Boy]

They scored one goal that should've been prevented and one worldy. Who's to say either goal wouldn't have happened with a back four? Yes we were chasing the game but we played with fluency, width and managed to retain possession long enough to sustain attacks. We have done that all to rarely this season and with a formation that we hadn't used before. Do people not think we might just might get better at it with game time?

Knocky has been poor this season, Izzy makes us narrow and Solly has been hit and miss too. In CM we struggle to sustain possession because we are outnumbered and at times outclassed. Changing to 3-5-2 is not a panacea for all our problems by any means but we looked better balanced and more progressive. A striker is a must (No pressure Jurgen) but we looked better and created chances against a good side.

What he said.

Sent from my SM-A320FL using Tapatalk

 

[Easy 10]

I think the 3-5-2 is definitely worth another look. This was a very difficult game to judge, being as we were 2 down within the blink of an eye and neither of those goals you could put down to the formation. We were also playing against one of the best teams in the League, and one of the best players in the world who unfortunately brought his A-game, as well as Willian who I thought was excellent as well. We're not going to be facing quality anything like that in the next few games.

Despite the quality of the opposition, after that shocking opening we got foothold in the game, had plenty of good possession and caused them lots of problems. I would 100% stick with it for the Boro game, being as its effectively a free hit and doesn't really matter. Let the players have a practice with it up there, with a view to using it at Soton. We've got 4 very good centrebacks in our squad, so it makes sense to use 3 of them, particularly if it releases Schelotto to the extent we saw. With a bit of pace up front either from Baldock or Locadia, this could work for us.

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

The tactic worked because it released Schelotto.... not so much for Suttner surprisingly. I'd like to see it again against Boro to see if it gives us goals.

We lost 4-0 at home and 2-0 away, I really don’t think it worked.

There are other ways of releasing Schelotto without compromising defensive stability.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BensGrandad]

I am caught in the middle because although we have scored less goals than expected we have, in part addressed that issue, but we achieved mid-table earlier in the season because of our defending ability. I would not like to jeopardise that by going gung ho for goals. I would sooner look at staying as a solid defensive unit and nicking the odd goal to get a draw or 1 goal win.

 

[Triggaaar]

352 what did you think?

We did better than when Villa played the same against Chelsea and lost 8-0.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Yes Chelsea were excellent and on it from the start, but the general confusion, body language and the "where were you?" expressions as the defenders looked at each other for answers suggested to me that - as a unit - the defence didn't know what the f*ck it was doing.

Contrast that with 4-4-2 that usually functions particularly well, at least in open play.

 

[dazzer6666]

I liked the system as I think it will work for us but think that Dunk is just as much as fault as Duffy but then he is a £30m player according to many so cannot be at fault ever. I would play Goldson on the right of the 3, Duffy or possibly Dunk in the centre and definitely Uwe on the left. As mentioned earlier it gives us 5 -3-2 when defending and 3-5-2 when attacking.

He was at fault for the first goal on Saturday, Hazard had way too much space in the box in front of him.