[Albion] Come on then geniuses what's The TinkerMan supposed to do?

[Weststander]

No, we changed to 4 at the back after 20 minutes.

I believe you. Other than Burn-Dunk-Webster-Montoya, who else was in the back 5?

 

[Weststander]

At Sheffield United I really felt we were a genuine threat from set pieces.

We just don’t turn into a stack of goals.

On the park n ride on Saturday I overheard 2 concerned CP fans say “they’re a really big side”. Our giants rarely head a goal.

 

[Bold Seagull]

No, we changed to 4 at the back after 20 minutes.

There might be a bit of asymmetry to how we operate, but that was a back 4. Of course, it might drop into a 5 at various points, but they were set up as a 4-2-3-1 from the outside, with the 3 rotating throughout the half.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

I believe you. Other than Burn-Dunk-Webster-Montoya, who else was in the back 5?

March played as quite an offensive wingback, but was definitely a wing back.

Trossard played behind Maupay with Mooy, with Propper and Bissouma in CM.

It didn’t really suit the players. As Potter realised I guess, the personnel suited a back 4 much more, and it gave them ownership over Benteke who’d been falling in between Dunk and his partners either side, with no one really aware who was picking him up.

The only issue with the switch was that he moved Mooy to the left for a period where he looked really uncomfortable, just so he could switch March. Obviously then Trossard and Mooy switched, at which point we had our best period of possession and domination in terms of chances.

 

[Weststander]

March played as quite an offensive wingback, but was definitely a wing back.

Trossard played behind Maupay with Mooy, with Propper and Bissouma in CM.

It didn’t really suit the players. As Potter realised I guess, the personnel suited a back 4 much more, and it gave them ownership over Benteke who’d been falling in between Dunk and his partners either side, with no one really aware who was picking him up.

The only issue with the switch was that he moved Mooy to the left for a period where he looked really uncomfortable, just so he could switch March. Obviously then Trossard and Mooy switched, at which point we had our best period of possession and domination in terms of chances.

Thanks.

I was seated the other side, and didn’t notice that initial left side formation.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

There might be a bit of asymmetry to how we operate, but that was a back 4. Of course, it might drop into a 5 at various points, but they were set up as a 4-2-3-1 from the outside, with the 3 rotating throughout the half.

We’ll agree to disagree

 

[Bold Seagull]

We’ll agree to disagree

I can see why you're saying it was a 5, but I thought the whole March - Trossard - Mooy changing was the success they were having against their respective fullbacks and helping Maupay. At no point would you have called Montoya's positioning as anything but a conventional right back, as was Burn as a left back even if March was giving him extra cover given who was positioned on their right. Once we realised he-who-shall-not-be-named was tasked with more defensive duties than you might have thought, Trossard switched to have a go at Ward who is the weaker of their full backs.

It's not a big deal to see it differently, but Burn was right in front of me first half, and from the off took up left back positioning.

 

[sussex_guy2k2]

I can see why you're saying it was a 5, but I thought the whole March - Trossard - Mooy changing was the success they were having against their respective fullbacks and helping Maupay. At no point would you have called Montoya's positioning as anything but a conventional right back, as was Burn as a left back even if March was giving him extra cover given who was positioned on their right. Once we realised he-who-shall-not-be-named was tasked with more defensive duties than you might have thought, Trossard switched to have a go at Ward who is the weaker of their full backs.

It's not a big deal to see it differently, but Burn was right in front of me first half, and from the off took up left back positioning.

I mean I stand right behind the defence. You could see them lined up as a 3. Montoya’s positioning is always naturally conservative - in that sense you’re right about the asymmetry, but that also allowed Webster to bring the ball out.

Anyway, it’s minor details. And they switched clearly to 4231

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Didn’t we start with a back 4 on Saturday?

Comprising 3 defenders and Montoya.

You really are anti-Montoya, yet when Stephens gets similar criticism (also underserved).......

Montoya did okay Saturday.

He’s not the answer, but with Lamptey apparently one for the future’, what are the choices?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

I believe you. Other than Burn-Dunk-Webster-Montoya, who else was in the back 5?

I don’t recall Solly tucked in as a wing-back, and it certainly wasn’t Trossard who rarely defends.....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk