| any value in going to a back 3 08:51 - Aug 11 with 540 views | positivity |
while we are so short in the wide areas and the 3 behind the striker?
we've got loads of centre-backs, but with burns, clarke(h) & townsend all out and ogbene not fully fit, as well as the issues with hutch/broady/jaden and szmodics coming back from an injury |  |
| |  |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 08:55 - Aug 11 with 488 views | Kieran_Knows |
Yes, we're going to throw almost 4 years work out the window to go to a back 3. |  |
| |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 08:57 - Aug 11 with 467 views | tractordownsouth |
I'd be very surprised. The Championship is moving away from 3atb systems and they don't really suit possession-heavy teams. Southampton looked pretty dreadful against Wrexham for example. |  |
| |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 09:00 - Aug 11 with 427 views | positivity |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 08:55 - Aug 11 by Kieran_Knows |
Yes, we're going to throw almost 4 years work out the window to go to a back 3. |
only temporarily, whilst we don't have the personnel available.
we've played versions of a back three in the past few years, both from the start and in-game [Post edited 11 Aug 9:02]
| |
| |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 09:19 - Aug 11 with 289 views | gsoly |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 09:00 - Aug 11 by positivity |
only temporarily, whilst we don't have the personnel available.
we've played versions of a back three in the past few years, both from the start and in-game [Post edited 11 Aug 9:02]
|
Not sure it would have helped us on Friday? Defensive solidity wasn't our problem, ball progression was. |  | | |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 09:22 - Aug 11 with 266 views | positivity |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 09:19 - Aug 11 by gsoly |
Not sure it would have helped us on Friday? Defensive solidity wasn't our problem, ball progression was. |
largely agree, but woolfy bringing it out and more progressive wing-backs may help that? our wingers didn't get in the game at all | |
| |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 09:25 - Aug 11 with 232 views | HighgateBlue |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 09:19 - Aug 11 by gsoly |
Not sure it would have helped us on Friday? Defensive solidity wasn't our problem, ball progression was. |
Indeed. Surely Cajuste in for Taylor is a clear upgrade on that front. Cajuste and Azor need to build that partnership, and let's see if they can plug the Morsy-shaped gap in midfield.
The way we (try to) play, those central midfield two are so so important. I am longing for the day when we almost forget Morsy. For me that day seems a long way off right now, but with transfers coming through the door, and a good away point on the board, I choose positivity! (Today, at least...) |  | | |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 10:08 - Aug 11 with 126 views | Wright1 |
I don't see how putting less attacking players on the pitch is a positive thing for us. It's a no for me.
Our back 4 limited Brum to 3 shots on target in what i'm told was a brilliant, dominant display. | | | |
| any value in going to a back 3 on 10:24 - Aug 11 with 95 views | bsw72 |
We can bring Chaplin in, although that leaves us short in the middle.
I'll be here all week, be sure to tip your waitresses. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
