Could we get away with this?

Discussion in 'Team Formation' started by Irish Yid Pavlyuchenko, Apr 30, 2010.

  1. Irish Yid Pavlyuchenko Well-Known Member

    Irish Yid Pavlyuchenko
    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,504
    Location:
    Mid-Ulster
    Ratings:
    +542 / 0 / -0
    Anyone who watched Barca get minced by Jose saw Barca's very risky 3 - 4 - 3 Formation. Now I don't know as much as the likes of Bas, but i'm asking you all. Do you think we could get away with 3 at the back? I'm very interested to hear what you all say and if you think we could, could you give me an idea of the team you'd line out. Thank's lad's


    -IYP
  2. Heroes Well-Known Member

    Heroes
    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2009
    Messages:
    15,118
    Location:
    Dulwich, London
    Ratings:
    +3,456 / 0 / -0
    Attack is the best form of defence
  3. US_Spurs_Fan Well-Known Member

    US_Spurs_Fan
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,698
    Location:
    Cincinnati, U.S.A
    Ratings:
    +431 / 0 / -0
    I don't think you really gain that much in the attack by doing this. With 4 in the back the two on the outside can push forward to help out. So I think you lose more on the defensive side than you gain on the offensive by playing 3 in the back.
  4. Spurs4life93 New Member

    Spurs4life93
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2009
    Messages:
    2,950
    Location:
    Essex
    Ratings:
    +346 / 0 / -0
    4-5-1.

    Thatz the fomration we shuld b lookin at imo.
  5. weirddave hey you guys

    weirddave
    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2009
    Messages:
    5,673
    Location:
    Ilford, Essex, England
    Ratings:
    +2,312 / 2 / -0
    Ok, here's what I say - You are out of ya frickin mind lol.
    Fine Dawson in the centre, but unless BAE is up to scratch and Walker has a heap of pressure put on him, they'll flounder like fish out of water. Especially if opposition alter their formations so that they have around eight strikers, wingers and CMs all attacking just three lone defenders.

    4-3-3 is better imho. Four defenders and three forwards. Midfield have more passing options. Otherwise, just leave it lol. If it ain't broke, don't fix it :p
  6. Dustin Well-Known Member

    Dustin
    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2010
    Messages:
    4,006
    Location:
    Kenya
    Ratings:
    +2,778 / 16 / -0
    So it can be played different ways but this is my general impression of 3 in the back: I can't see us doing it with the players we have (not that we would want to even if we had the players), It can actually limit your offense by having 3 in the back because basically a central midfielder has to play so deep that he is really a CB, and it then pulls defenders away from the deep wing positions, crowding your midfield and leaving less space for your offense to move around the ball. It works if you want to shut down a passing team (like barca) but it doesn't do much for your offense and it is more vulnerable against teams that advance the ball up the wings and cross as their primary attack, which is most teams in the prem. And it is shit to watch. But I see how Jose's tactics have got people thinking. To me, this CL win against Barca was his greatest moment as a manager yet.
  7. Irish Yid Pavlyuchenko Well-Known Member

    Irish Yid Pavlyuchenko
    Joined:
    May 9, 2009
    Messages:
    2,504
    Location:
    Mid-Ulster
    Ratings:
    +542 / 0 / -0
    Thank's for the replys lad's :D
  8. Dancubus Well-Known Member

    Dancubus
    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    4,412
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +1,458 / 5 / -0
    I think the only way 3 at the back would work is like this:

    -----------------------------------
    ----------------Gomes-------------
    -----------------------------------
    -----Dawson-----King-----Bassong--
    ------------------------------------
    Corluka---------------------------Bale
    ------------------------------------
    -------Palacios-------Huddlestone----
    -------------------------------------
    ---------------Modric----------------
    --------------------------------------
    ---------Defoe------Gudjohnsen--------
    --------------------------------------

    Pretty much in the same style of the German team that won the 1990 World Cup.
    I've actually always liked that formation, but firsty charlie probably wont be so effective as the sole width option on the right...secondly, no Aaron Lennon.
    If we did this, or something:
    -----------------------------------------
    ------------------Gomes------------------
    ------------------------------------------
    --------Dawson----King----Bassong--------
    -----------------------------------------
    ------------Palacios---Huddlestone-------
    -----------------------------------------
    Lennon-----------Modric--------------Bale
    -----------------------------------------
    -------------Defoe-----Gudjohnsen-------
    -----------------------------------------

    ...we would get raped down the flanks and our defense would pulled across the pitch.

    I think we'd need to play with wing backs if we wanted to play 3 at the back, and that would leave Lennon out of the team, so I think I'd say no, we cant pull off a 3-4-3.
    I know that I didnt suggest how we could play 3 up-top, but this is because I simply dont think we could with the personel that we have.
    Last edited: May 2, 2010
  9. 0rkrist Banned !

    0rkrist
    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2010
    Messages:
    29
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0
    3 in the back is really 5 in the back, so it is a more defensive option. Those formations are outdated.

Share This Page