| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past 07:49 - Aug 28 with 3662 views | muccletonjoe |
Frankly I am astonished that Lambert wants to revisit this system, it is a round block he has been trying to hammer into a square hole for practically his entire tenure at Ipswich Town.
Firstly, the idea of having a central striker with two wide men, will only work, can only work with midfield backing up attacks, last season , the season before, whenever we have played this system, the striker has been isolated when we have managed to get crosses into the box and the stats speak for themselves, we have gone whole games with barely a shot at goal.
The central midfield have very often played attractive tippy tappy stuff in the middle third , but have rarely managed to connect with either the wide men or the central striker.
The main problem has been ( and still is ) playing the ball out of defence. Retaining pocession is one thing. But the nervousness this causes both among the players and the watching supporters is there for all to see. How many times did we lose points last season due to errors in front of our own penalty area ?
And now it seems the best Lambert can do is more of the same. There are a dozen different options available to him , without instigating too much thinking.
I don't have to predict this formation will not work. We all know already that it doesn't. |  | | |  |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 07:54 - Aug 28 with 3224 views | pointofblue |
What approach would you take instead? I wonder if a narrow 4-4-2 might be successful, though I am concerned whether Ward would be able to run the wing and it’d immediately fall apart if KVY picked up an injury. But otherwise we have a lot of talent through the middle of the park but fewer options out wide. The trouble is teams would counter us by flooding the middle and forcing width, which is our weakness.
Getting 4-3-3 to work would be the best solution, working around the weaknesses from last season. KVY, Woolfenden and seemingly Ward are comfortable on the ball; we’d need the likes of Downes or Dozzell to drop back to help recycle and look to push it forward with Dozzell in turn and Bishop to support the attacking trio. |  |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:06 - Aug 28 with 3181 views | muccletonjoe |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 07:54 - Aug 28 by pointofblue |
What approach would you take instead? I wonder if a narrow 4-4-2 might be successful, though I am concerned whether Ward would be able to run the wing and it’d immediately fall apart if KVY picked up an injury. But otherwise we have a lot of talent through the middle of the park but fewer options out wide. The trouble is teams would counter us by flooding the middle and forcing width, which is our weakness.
Getting 4-3-3 to work would be the best solution, working around the weaknesses from last season. KVY, Woolfenden and seemingly Ward are comfortable on the ball; we’d need the likes of Downes or Dozzell to drop back to help recycle and look to push it forward with Dozzell in turn and Bishop to support the attacking trio. |
I think 3 5 2 would be , by far our best option , but there needs to be pace in that back 3 , I would play both Wolfenden and Ndaba in there with one of chambers , Nsiala, Wilson .
We then have the option of flooding midfield and holding the ball much higher up the pitch , where any mistakes doesn't leave the opposition in front of our own goal.
Plus, of course, it also gives us two strikers operating in the opposing penalty area .
Has always seemed common sense to me , it plays to our strengths and is much more difficult for teams to break down, the high press, not being an option. | | | |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:17 - Aug 28 with 3149 views | Herbivore |
That's an interesting take. I think many fans, possibly most even, would favour a 4-3-3 or variation there of as it seems to be the system that most suits much of our squad. You need at least one genuine forward to play in wide in the front 3, ideally 2, otherwise it does run the risk of becoming a 4-5-1 with an isolated striker. However, we do also now have some midfielders capable of getting forward and joining attacks as well. Downes does it a bit. Bishop does it. Huws can do it. El Miz as well. Much as I don't rate him, Judge will join in too.
We know from last season and indeed some of the season before that 4-4-2 and 3-5-2 don't really work for us at all. Our best football - which still wasn't great but still - under Lambert came playing 4-3-3. |  |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:18 - Aug 28 with 3135 views | Simonds92 |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:06 - Aug 28 by muccletonjoe |
I think 3 5 2 would be , by far our best option , but there needs to be pace in that back 3 , I would play both Wolfenden and Ndaba in there with one of chambers , Nsiala, Wilson .
We then have the option of flooding midfield and holding the ball much higher up the pitch , where any mistakes doesn't leave the opposition in front of our own goal.
Plus, of course, it also gives us two strikers operating in the opposing penalty area .
Has always seemed common sense to me , it plays to our strengths and is much more difficult for teams to break down, the high press, not being an option. |
I agree 3-5-2 would definitely be the way i would go. If we're looking to dictate play though with plenty of possession i don't think we should have nsiala anywhere near the team. My main issue with our 4-3-3 is that its actually a 4-5-1 and as you say our strikers end up so isolated we offer nothing going forward. | | | |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:19 - Aug 28 with 3130 views | Herbivore |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:06 - Aug 28 by muccletonjoe |
I think 3 5 2 would be , by far our best option , but there needs to be pace in that back 3 , I would play both Wolfenden and Ndaba in there with one of chambers , Nsiala, Wilson .
We then have the option of flooding midfield and holding the ball much higher up the pitch , where any mistakes doesn't leave the opposition in front of our own goal.
Plus, of course, it also gives us two strikers operating in the opposing penalty area .
Has always seemed common sense to me , it plays to our strengths and is much more difficult for teams to break down, the high press, not being an option. |
A few games in January aside we were dreadful playing 3-5-2 last season. I'm not seeing a strong case for it. As for playing Ndaba regularly, that's a massive call. He's played no senior football and we have no idea if he's up to it. Who are you playing left wing back in that system? I don't see an obvious left wing back in our current squad. Kenlock and Ward don't have the legs and probably don't offer enough pace going forward. | |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:21 - Aug 28 with 3122 views | Guthrum |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:06 - Aug 28 by muccletonjoe |
I think 3 5 2 would be , by far our best option , but there needs to be pace in that back 3 , I would play both Wolfenden and Ndaba in there with one of chambers , Nsiala, Wilson .
We then have the option of flooding midfield and holding the ball much higher up the pitch , where any mistakes doesn't leave the opposition in front of our own goal.
Plus, of course, it also gives us two strikers operating in the opposing penalty area .
Has always seemed common sense to me , it plays to our strengths and is much more difficult for teams to break down, the high press, not being an option. |
I think it has little to do with formation in our case. If you don't have the players (e.g. your pacey centre-backs, aggressively attacking midfielders), then you aren't going to get any system to work effectively.
Plus we seem to have almost nobody who can (or is willing = or trained - to) run with the ball. When Jackson does it, is mostly only with the aim of falling over a defender to win free-kicks and penalties. KVY and Sears can. Huws used to be able to. But we so rarely see it on the pitch. |  |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:21 - Aug 28 with 3120 views | Herbivore |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:18 - Aug 28 by Simonds92 |
I agree 3-5-2 would definitely be the way i would go. If we're looking to dictate play though with plenty of possession i don't think we should have nsiala anywhere near the team. My main issue with our 4-3-3 is that its actually a 4-5-1 and as you say our strikers end up so isolated we offer nothing going forward. |
That's an issue with how it's been used rather than the formation itself. We have the personnel to make it work, whether we have the manager is another issue. I don't get the obsession with 3-5-2. Is it nostalgia for the Burley days? We've been awful 90% of the time we've used that system under Lambert and it doesn't suit our squad at all. [Post edited 28 Aug 2020 8:30]
| |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:22 - Aug 28 with 3116 views | Herbivore |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:21 - Aug 28 by Guthrum |
I think it has little to do with formation in our case. If you don't have the players (e.g. your pacey centre-backs, aggressively attacking midfielders), then you aren't going to get any system to work effectively.
Plus we seem to have almost nobody who can (or is willing = or trained - to) run with the ball. When Jackson does it, is mostly only with the aim of falling over a defender to win free-kicks and penalties. KVY and Sears can. Huws used to be able to. But we so rarely see it on the pitch. |
This for me is why it's essential to give more game time to one or two of the youngsters. They will offer the pace and dynamism we need going forward. We don't have the defenders to play a 3-5-2 effectively though and arguably now Garbutt has gone we don't have a left wing back either. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:26 - Aug 28 with 3097 views | Mullet |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:22 - Aug 28 by Herbivore |
This for me is why it's essential to give more game time to one or two of the youngsters. They will offer the pace and dynamism we need going forward. We don't have the defenders to play a 3-5-2 effectively though and arguably now Garbutt has gone we don't have a left wing back either. |
I hate 352 and think a lot of people just assume Burley/promotion/done when they put it out there every time. But I think Kenlock is naturally a LWB rathe rthan an LB.
His tendency to get caught in behind in a flat 4 is negated a bit when he can push forward and play to his strengths. That said it wouldn't benefit us much to switch to it just to accomodate him there and we lose out midfielders who are arguably stronger. |  |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:31 - Aug 28 with 3082 views | muccletonjoe |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:19 - Aug 28 by Herbivore |
A few games in January aside we were dreadful playing 3-5-2 last season. I'm not seeing a strong case for it. As for playing Ndaba regularly, that's a massive call. He's played no senior football and we have no idea if he's up to it. Who are you playing left wing back in that system? I don't see an obvious left wing back in our current squad. Kenlock and Ward don't have the legs and probably don't offer enough pace going forward. |
I know he is not fit at the minute, but Nydam is tailor made to play left midfield of a 5.
3 5 2 did not work before, because , like every system you have to pick the right players to support it. | | | |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:31 - Aug 28 with 3085 views | Dubtractor |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:17 - Aug 28 by Herbivore |
That's an interesting take. I think many fans, possibly most even, would favour a 4-3-3 or variation there of as it seems to be the system that most suits much of our squad. You need at least one genuine forward to play in wide in the front 3, ideally 2, otherwise it does run the risk of becoming a 4-5-1 with an isolated striker. However, we do also now have some midfielders capable of getting forward and joining attacks as well. Downes does it a bit. Bishop does it. Huws can do it. El Miz as well. Much as I don't rate him, Judge will join in too.
We know from last season and indeed some of the season before that 4-4-2 and 3-5-2 don't really work for us at all. Our best football - which still wasn't great but still - under Lambert came playing 4-3-3. |
I agree with one, pretty big, caveat.
Without a centre forward who can genuinely lead the line, hold up the ball, bring the midfielders into the game etc then we are p1ssing in the wind.
Hawkins may be the player to do that, though I'm doubtful tbh, and certainly none of our other strikers can do it. |  |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:33 - Aug 28 with 3073 views | Herbivore |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:26 - Aug 28 by Mullet |
I hate 352 and think a lot of people just assume Burley/promotion/done when they put it out there every time. But I think Kenlock is naturally a LWB rathe rthan an LB.
His tendency to get caught in behind in a flat 4 is negated a bit when he can push forward and play to his strengths. That said it wouldn't benefit us much to switch to it just to accomodate him there and we lose out midfielders who are arguably stronger. |
Do you think? I just don't see Kenlock having the legs or the pace to be a wing back and he doesn't offer much going forward. You're right about him getting caught out defensively but I think that's just more an indication of his level.
I think the obsession with 3-5-2 is very much down to the Burley years. That said, we were often better in the 5th place Prem finish season when we reverted to 4-4-2 in my opinion but I think people strongly associate that whole era with playing 3 at the back. We had the players to make it work then though. | |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:35 - Aug 28 with 3058 views | Herbivore |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:31 - Aug 28 by muccletonjoe |
I know he is not fit at the minute, but Nydam is tailor made to play left midfield of a 5.
3 5 2 did not work before, because , like every system you have to pick the right players to support it. |
Nydam has played almost all of his senior football as a central midfielder and he's been out for a year. So you're suggesting we go with a system that you think will work but it needs to accommodate a rookie CB with no senior experience who wasn't close to the first team last season and a midfielder cum wing back who is also a rookie and has been our injured for over a year. I'm seeing some issues here, mate. | |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:35 - Aug 28 with 3060 views | thebooks |
FWIW I think we look best playing 352, but in a way the formation doesn't matter that much. I guess if you want to accomodate Jackson and Lankester it will have to be 433.
The problem is as you point out – we’re really bad at moving the ball from the defenders to the midfield. Way too pedestrian and predictable – side to side and then either hoofed or possession conceded.
Personally see this as a coaching/tactical problem. I think PL sees this style as possession football, but it belongs in an age when the opposition just set itself up in front of you without much pressing or aggression. You need to either be more direct, carry the ball or move it more quickly and imaginatively these days.
Incidentally, this is why Skuse was so disappointing last season. He should be able to help get the ball between the lines, but offered very little. |  | | |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:38 - Aug 28 with 3047 views | Mullet |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:33 - Aug 28 by Herbivore |
Do you think? I just don't see Kenlock having the legs or the pace to be a wing back and he doesn't offer much going forward. You're right about him getting caught out defensively but I think that's just more an indication of his level.
I think the obsession with 3-5-2 is very much down to the Burley years. That said, we were often better in the 5th place Prem finish season when we reverted to 4-4-2 in my opinion but I think people strongly associate that whole era with playing 3 at the back. We had the players to make it work then though. |
Yeah I've said it from almost day one and remember a long discussion with HfB about it one away game where he looked more comfortable there as he had the space to make his runs and pick his passes better.
He's not that slow but he does have that Garvan knack of looking like he's running into the wind whilst needing a sh1t. He can also play, but if he's got to do the one on one stuff with a winger already having a start towards him he struggles.
As for Burley's team it had so much time coming together he could play players in 2 to 3 positions or roles a game and it not matter too much. People also forget how often we conceded needlessly in the Jimmy White years or collapsed at vital moments because of the eventual outcome. | |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:38 - Aug 28 with 3048 views | Herbivore |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:31 - Aug 28 by Dubtractor |
I agree with one, pretty big, caveat.
Without a centre forward who can genuinely lead the line, hold up the ball, bring the midfielders into the game etc then we are p1ssing in the wind.
Hawkins may be the player to do that, though I'm doubtful tbh, and certainly none of our other strikers can do it. |
I actually think Norwood can do it well enough. He's tidy enough with the ball, he was actually a better footballer than I thought he might be but a worse finisher than I'd expected. He won't be up to it if we're solely launching it long but he can compete for the odd direct ball and he knows how to operate with his back to goal as well as in behind. That said, we don't really know what's going on with him at the minute and you're right that it's really not a role Jackson or Sears can play and that only leaves Hawkins. | |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:41 - Aug 28 with 3026 views | Guthrum |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:31 - Aug 28 by Dubtractor |
I agree with one, pretty big, caveat.
Without a centre forward who can genuinely lead the line, hold up the ball, bring the midfielders into the game etc then we are p1ssing in the wind.
Hawkins may be the player to do that, though I'm doubtful tbh, and certainly none of our other strikers can do it. |
Unfotunately, such beasts are quite rare finds - especially at lower levels. Not sure where, as L1 not-challengers-for-the-Prem, we'd be able to find another Murphy or Waghorn.
There doesn't seem to be anyone of that level on the horizon from the Academy direction (that I know of, Joe and others might correct me), plus they will take years to mature. Otherwise it would require incisive (and very lucky) scouting, or lots and lots of money combined with the prestige to beat off competitors for their signature. | |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:46 - Aug 28 with 2999 views | muccletonjoe |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:35 - Aug 28 by Herbivore |
Nydam has played almost all of his senior football as a central midfielder and he's been out for a year. So you're suggesting we go with a system that you think will work but it needs to accommodate a rookie CB with no senior experience who wasn't close to the first team last season and a midfielder cum wing back who is also a rookie and has been our injured for over a year. I'm seeing some issues here, mate. |
If you don't try something different, you're basically going to wheel out more of the same. We have to try things out, yes take a chance , we have to try things. Nydam played left side for the youth team , and looked to be the one with most potential in those days. | | | |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:59 - Aug 28 with 2961 views | Herbivore |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:46 - Aug 28 by muccletonjoe |
If you don't try something different, you're basically going to wheel out more of the same. We have to try things out, yes take a chance , we have to try things. Nydam played left side for the youth team , and looked to be the one with most potential in those days. |
3-5-2 isn't really taking a chance, it's a formation we used a lot last season and we were abject. I don't see how keeping that system and brining in Ndaba and Nydam is suddenly going to make it work. Nydam isn't an upgrade on Garbutt in that position so you're basically banking on Ndaba being not only capable enough a defender at this level but also being good enough to play and carry the ball out from the back. You're also banking on that one change significantly improving us from last season. I'm just not seeing it, mate. | |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 09:08 - Aug 28 with 2924 views | muccletonjoe |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:59 - Aug 28 by Herbivore |
3-5-2 isn't really taking a chance, it's a formation we used a lot last season and we were abject. I don't see how keeping that system and brining in Ndaba and Nydam is suddenly going to make it work. Nydam isn't an upgrade on Garbutt in that position so you're basically banking on Ndaba being not only capable enough a defender at this level but also being good enough to play and carry the ball out from the back. You're also banking on that one change significantly improving us from last season. I'm just not seeing it, mate. |
We have no other option but to start from scratch with youth. I am not saying it will be better to start with. These kids have to learn. Chambers, Skuse time is over. Getting in run of the mill makeshift will never work, our only chance is to develop what we have. Until we get a manager with that mindset, this club will go nowhere. I have been saying it for years and have been proved right. | | | |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 09:08 - Aug 28 with 2926 views | Dubtractor |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 08:41 - Aug 28 by Guthrum |
Unfotunately, such beasts are quite rare finds - especially at lower levels. Not sure where, as L1 not-challengers-for-the-Prem, we'd be able to find another Murphy or Waghorn.
There doesn't seem to be anyone of that level on the horizon from the Academy direction (that I know of, Joe and others might correct me), plus they will take years to mature. Otherwise it would require incisive (and very lucky) scouting, or lots and lots of money combined with the prestige to beat off competitors for their signature. |
We don't need a Murphy standard player, we need the L1 equivalent.
Put simply, if we play with a lone CF who is unable to play the role as required the whole system fails.
As Herbivore says, Norwood might be able to do it, though I'm not convinced he has the composure personally. Sears and Jackson are completely unsuited to it. Hawkins has a lot of the attributes, but none of us have seen him play yet so can't really judge him. | |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 09:16 - Aug 28 with 2912 views | Herbivore |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 09:08 - Aug 28 by muccletonjoe |
We have no other option but to start from scratch with youth. I am not saying it will be better to start with. These kids have to learn. Chambers, Skuse time is over. Getting in run of the mill makeshift will never work, our only chance is to develop what we have. Until we get a manager with that mindset, this club will go nowhere. I have been saying it for years and have been proved right. |
Bringing through youngsters is one thing, expecting Corrie Ndaba to transform a failing 3-5-2 into a system that works for us is something quite different. Ndaba is behind the likes of Dobra and Lankester in his development and readiness for first team football. They can both be accommodated in a 4-3-3 and potentially improve us. They can't really be accommodated in your favoured 3-5-2. | |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 09:23 - Aug 28 with 2896 views | Guthrum |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 09:08 - Aug 28 by Dubtractor |
We don't need a Murphy standard player, we need the L1 equivalent.
Put simply, if we play with a lone CF who is unable to play the role as required the whole system fails.
As Herbivore says, Norwood might be able to do it, though I'm not convinced he has the composure personally. Sears and Jackson are completely unsuited to it. Hawkins has a lot of the attributes, but none of us have seen him play yet so can't really judge him. |
2nd and 3rd paragraphs spot on.
I just think it's not going to be easy to find a Murphy/Waghorn equivalent (style, even at L1 standard) in our current situation. | |
| |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 09:52 - Aug 28 with 2858 views | muccletonjoe |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 09:16 - Aug 28 by Herbivore |
Bringing through youngsters is one thing, expecting Corrie Ndaba to transform a failing 3-5-2 into a system that works for us is something quite different. Ndaba is behind the likes of Dobra and Lankester in his development and readiness for first team football. They can both be accommodated in a 4-3-3 and potentially improve us. They can't really be accommodated in your favoured 3-5-2. |
The system is not as important as the players. Obviously if you picked a team able to play 433 , then happy days. That line up against West ham wasn't it and will never be, in my opinion. Players like Beattie, Wark, Butcher, Osman, all made mistakes when they were put into first team. Difference was we had a manager then who had an arm around their shoulders saying , you made a mistake there son, remember that next time. Not throw them in the reserves for the next 6 months. | | | |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 09:57 - Aug 28 with 2843 views | Herbivore |
| 433 and why it hasn't worked in the past on 09:52 - Aug 28 by muccletonjoe |
The system is not as important as the players. Obviously if you picked a team able to play 433 , then happy days. That line up against West ham wasn't it and will never be, in my opinion. Players like Beattie, Wark, Butcher, Osman, all made mistakes when they were put into first team. Difference was we had a manager then who had an arm around their shoulders saying , you made a mistake there son, remember that next time. Not throw them in the reserves for the next 6 months. |
You literally started a thread about systems and now you're saying the system doesn't matter. If we use the right players it's pretty evident that 4-3-3 or a variation three of looks our best bet. If you're issue is not picking the right players then I'd agree, but you were raising an issue about the system and suggesting we play 3-5-2 instead when we know from last season that it's not a system that we play well and it's not one that obviously suits our players either. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
