Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[oneedham]

I was not at the game today due to work but I was wondering if any thought the same as I do in regards to the 3-5-3 formation. Most know that I hate us sitting back and defending ( mainly away from home ) as we do not often get results playing that way. I feel we defend a lot better having the three centre halves and our two wing backs. We certainly concede last goals playing that way. With the likes of Young, McGregor, Smith or Lane playing the three centre backs then you get organisation and a sold central defence and then you have two fit lads as wing backs being Doughty and Densmore who cover the wings very well. I just feel when we set out as a defensive 4-4-2 like Torquay when we had around 8 really defensive players playing we are inviting pressure from full time teams who do often break us down and then we are left chasing games. With 3-5-3 we clearly defend better and we also worry teams on the attack and also us attacking means less pressure on the defence. People think we would get picked off more but I believe that we wouldn’t, near enough all our results have come from the 3-5-3 formation. I really believe it is our strongest formation in defending and in scoring the goals that get results. I say more faith in our ability.I do still believe 4-4-2 formation is the best in the business but not for how we play.

[Toff Apple]

pleased with todays result however playing 3 up front we seem to leave too much space between the forwards and the midfield so if johnson doesnt hold it up we are in trouble, i prefer 442, but we need the wingers, i would be tempted to play 3-4-1-2 with little playing behing the front two ahead of the midfield.

[Saughall Robin]

I was not at the game today due to work but I was wondering if any thought the same as I do in regards to the 3-5-3 formation.

Are you advocating us playing 'Goalie-and-out'? .... otherwise that's one too many isn't it?

PS: I'm all for it if we can get away with it though 

[altyf]

I think it's a bit risky playing 3-5-3, especially if the ref finds out

[Dougals Dad]

Is it fly goalie or rush goalie?

Ah, memories of many a football game on the field off Mayfield Road, jumpers for goalposts......

[Ballers]

3-5-3 is the way ahead 

[TheCultOfIanTunnacliffe]

Was it just me....or did anyone else detect echoes of the immortal Tunna in Michael Welch's cameo performance at centre forward?

[Ballers]

Welch showed some nice touches and managed to disguise his lack of fitness well.

When a gap appeared and there was no othe option but for him to track back down the flank however...well...

[seasonticket]

Cult are you sure that was not a reincarnation of the amazing Tunna, or maybe son of Tunna.

[Saughall Robin]

Was it just me....or did anyone else detect echoes of the immortal Tunna in Michael Welch's cameo performance at centre forward?

I think it was just you 

[Lew Needham]

pleased with todays result however playing 3 up front we seem to leave too much space between the forwards and the midfield so if johnson doesnt hold it up we are in trouble, i prefer 442, but we need the wingers, i would be tempted to play 3-4-1-2 with little playing behing the front two ahead of the midfield.

We seem to be able to play poorly with 3 4 3 and stills crape victories, which is never a bad thing.

However, I agree with the above post that for this formation ton work more effectively we need one of the forwards to drop a little deeper and link the play up and I agree that Little is the man to do this!

[hsmith1]

63 points at the end of the season,keep the formation that we play best to