[Albion] Three at the Back

[blue-shifted]

5). At times (particularly when GM is on the field) we must be prepared - occasionally - to launch the ball into the opposition half quickly, even if it means kicking the ball a long way!

Steady

 

[MattBackHome]

1), If we play 4 at the back, the CBs should be Dunk'n'Duffy, with 'proper' full backs (Montoya and Bernardo).
2). If we go 3 at the back (Webster, Dunk and Duffy) we can use wing backs (Montoya or Alzate on the right, Bernardo or Solly on the left).
3). If not deployed as a wing back, Alzate should be in CM.
4). At some point in the match (either at the start or the end) we must play two up top, one of them Murray, with Maupay or Connolly scurrying around him to pick up the knock downs.
5). At times (particularly when GM is on the field) we must be prepared - occasionally - to launch the ball into the opposition half quickly, even if it means kicking the ball a long way!

I agree with these sentiments.

 

[SollysLeftFoot]

Is this the appropriate thread to semi-hijack and discuss tactics?

I've pondered why we've abandoned something that at the beginning, worked well for us.
So below is how I'd set my Albion up (With Webster or Stephens) as CDM. Murray would be a target man, to hold up the ball and essentially be a focal point of attacks



Transition to attack

Wing backs tug the by line, Attacking/Creative mids push to the edge of the box but on the outside to provide an outlet for wing backs who are in position and possibility of overlap. Webster will come to the centre of the pitch to provide a safety pass to allow repositioning of players to open up new passing 'lanes' or 'channels', but also to maintain possession.

Attacking


Webster still maintains position in the centre, centre backs can play either a high line or a deeper line. Preferrably a bit deeper. They're not a pacey bunch.
But we'd overload the opposition's final third with players and maintain an aerial threat and poaching threat.

Transition to defence


Quite literally a vertical transition for everyone bar Maupay or Connolly. They'd maintain a higher attacking line, using pace to hit on a counter should be necessary. Murray drops deeper to be able to pick the ball up and distribute.


Defence

A solid back line, Webster drops into the CB role to effectively create a back line of 6. Ideally, the midfield drops to the centre edge of our penalty box to begin any counters.


All very theoretical, but I would have thought this is something we'd look to achieve with the players we have. I don't see any real reason why we couldn't play like this. But i'm just a lad in an office working in finance. So I suppose, I don't know a huge amount.

 

[BBassic]

The issues that we’re having currently are not defending we are still in the best side in the bottom half for goals conceded. Our trouble is and has always been decisive creativity and guile around the penalty area

Did you watch yesterday's match?

It's both at the moment isn't it?

I've just checked the stats and we had 21 shots to their 11, 8 on target to their 3

If their goalie hadn't played a blinder and our defence had retained any sense of how to defend I think we'd have nicked a 0-0

 

[Gritt23]

Burn is, imho, vital to our 3 at the back tactic.

Without him, it seems to struggle.

Duffy, alas, is nowhere near as cute on the ball whilst more dominant aerially.

I honestly don't give a 5h1t about whether he's "cute on the ball" I just want him to help stop the opposition scoring. Win the ball back Duffy, and then drop a short pass in to someone who can do more with it. Simples. Wanting everyone to be Beckenbauer is great in theory, but going with the better CB in possession is taking us down.

We also need a settled back 4 (or 3 or 5, whatever your poison) but chopping and changing the full-backs all the time, and during the game, EVERY game so it seems, is not helping them become a cohesive unit.

 

[theboybilly]

Three at the back until the end of the season please Graham (and not Alzate at RWB)