| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? 14:26 - May 21 with 1657 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
After Newcastle at home he certainly had showed he wasn’t afraid of changing some things up
and had a degree of success doing it, if only for few games.
Not sure we had the personnel to pull it off and often had injury troubles as well but having 4 quite high up the pitch seemed to be downfall at home sometimes, in particular through the middle. Also think Cajuste/Taylor weren’t always best suited to the double pivot. Personally I don’t think Taylor isn’t any where really near the levels for the top division but I’d have liked to have seen us give it a shot. Especially when all, including Phillips were fit (might not have been that often tbf).
I know it’s not the way he plays but with how things were going this season and in particular this year surely anything was worth exploring? Was a tough watch seeing teams win the ball and break against us, with our less than athletic (at least compared to the opposition) CM pairing.
Flood the zone!
Excuse typos (iPhone) [Post edited 21 May 14:27]
|  | | |  |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 14:33 - May 21 with 1590 views | Herbivore |
As you've alluded to, not sure we had the personnel in midfield available often enough to have given it a go. I mentioned elsewhere but what we've done in previous seasons is see Chappers and Broadhead drop in to create what the kids call a box four in midfield to enable us to control that part of the pitch effectively, even when up against a midfield three. The likes of Hutch, Enciso, and Clarke haven't really got to grips with that part of their role quickly enough for us to use that tactic at a higher level. [Post edited 21 May 14:33]
|  |
| |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 14:41 - May 21 with 1547 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 14:33 - May 21 by Herbivore |
As you've alluded to, not sure we had the personnel in midfield available often enough to have given it a go. I mentioned elsewhere but what we've done in previous seasons is see Chappers and Broadhead drop in to create what the kids call a box four in midfield to enable us to control that part of the pitch effectively, even when up against a midfield three. The likes of Hutch, Enciso, and Clarke haven't really got to grips with that part of their role quickly enough for us to use that tactic at a higher level. [Post edited 21 May 14:33]
|
Seems at home we’d start in front foot, teams would see how many we were committing, they’d soak it up for a bit then completely take over in the middle of the park. | | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 14:51 - May 21 with 1508 views | cbower |
In my opinion, we have been overrun in midfield so many times this season that persisting with the double pivot has been a major problem. To my eye, it has been crying out for 3 in midfield from tbe Everton game onwards. With the way Davis was being expected to still bomb forward, at this level ther was too much athletcism, pace and power in the opposition for our two midfielders to cope with ( regardless of which two were playing). Add to that the three infront of them were usually to lightweight to retain possession when we got it and that midfield twosome were cruelly exposed. Even 442 might have been more effective for me as we rarely showed enough bite up top and were unable to keep possession often enough when Delap was so isolated on his own.
4231 will probably work for us again in the Championship but that will be more a case of the lower standard of opposition we'll be facing I suspect. |  |
| |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 15:04 - May 21 with 1438 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 14:51 - May 21 by cbower |
In my opinion, we have been overrun in midfield so many times this season that persisting with the double pivot has been a major problem. To my eye, it has been crying out for 3 in midfield from tbe Everton game onwards. With the way Davis was being expected to still bomb forward, at this level ther was too much athletcism, pace and power in the opposition for our two midfielders to cope with ( regardless of which two were playing). Add to that the three infront of them were usually to lightweight to retain possession when we got it and that midfield twosome were cruelly exposed. Even 442 might have been more effective for me as we rarely showed enough bite up top and were unable to keep possession often enough when Delap was so isolated on his own.
4231 will probably work for us again in the Championship but that will be more a case of the lower standard of opposition we'll be facing I suspect. |
Exactly how I’ve often seen it, whether we’ve had the personnel to make it work is another matter. | | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 15:09 - May 21 with 1402 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 14:33 - May 21 by Herbivore |
As you've alluded to, not sure we had the personnel in midfield available often enough to have given it a go. I mentioned elsewhere but what we've done in previous seasons is see Chappers and Broadhead drop in to create what the kids call a box four in midfield to enable us to control that part of the pitch effectively, even when up against a midfield three. The likes of Hutch, Enciso, and Clarke haven't really got to grips with that part of their role quickly enough for us to use that tactic at a higher level. [Post edited 21 May 14:33]
|
Valid about Chaplin etc a league down but I think the issue was more power, pace and physicality when we lost the ball going the other way, completely bypassed.
Also worst scorers in league second half which seems to suggest we had been nullified and opposition had us all worked out. | | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 15:31 - May 21 with 1301 views | BseaBlue |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 15:09 - May 21 by Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
Valid about Chaplin etc a league down but I think the issue was more power, pace and physicality when we lost the ball going the other way, completely bypassed.
Also worst scorers in league second half which seems to suggest we had been nullified and opposition had us all worked out. |
I think the plan will be to recruit midfielders that will be more effective should we go up again.
The biggest issue has been physicality as you point out (right accross the pitch in my opinion) It hasnt helped that Phillips hasnt been fit and then we lost both Burns and Ogbene that both added that for us.
Someone in the know has suggested on here that the biggest goal of the summer is to recruit with that in mind though so fingers crossed we will be more prepared next time. |  | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 15:31 - May 21 with 1306 views | Guthrum |
For me the biggest problem has been the gap which developed between the packed defence and attacker (occasionally plural). Any ball forward or opposition clearance would fall to one of their players not ours.
Not sure the formation would have made a lot of difference to that, rather than needing to have every hand to the pump in defending, so there was no-one in "midfield" at all. |  |
| |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 15:41 - May 21 with 1261 views | Marshalls_Mullet |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 15:31 - May 21 by BseaBlue |
I think the plan will be to recruit midfielders that will be more effective should we go up again.
The biggest issue has been physicality as you point out (right accross the pitch in my opinion) It hasnt helped that Phillips hasnt been fit and then we lost both Burns and Ogbene that both added that for us.
Someone in the know has suggested on here that the biggest goal of the summer is to recruit with that in mind though so fingers crossed we will be more prepared next time. |
Would have been good to have done that last summer. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 16:26 - May 21 with 1152 views | Scuzzer |
Definitely. It's been very obvious.
Should have been 3-5-2 with wing backs. Plug the gaps. |  |
| |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 16:33 - May 21 with 1135 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 15:31 - May 21 by BseaBlue |
I think the plan will be to recruit midfielders that will be more effective should we go up again.
The biggest issue has been physicality as you point out (right accross the pitch in my opinion) It hasnt helped that Phillips hasnt been fit and then we lost both Burns and Ogbene that both added that for us.
Someone in the know has suggested on here that the biggest goal of the summer is to recruit with that in mind though so fingers crossed we will be more prepared next time. |
Seemed to double down in January on it though. | | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 16:39 - May 21 with 1119 views | bsw72 |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 15:31 - May 21 by Guthrum |
For me the biggest problem has been the gap which developed between the packed defence and attacker (occasionally plural). Any ball forward or opposition clearance would fall to one of their players not ours.
Not sure the formation would have made a lot of difference to that, rather than needing to have every hand to the pump in defending, so there was no-one in "midfield" at all. |
Yup, the transition phase - it's killed us in a number of games. Either our inability to do it, or the opposition doing it better against us. |  | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 16:51 - May 21 with 1071 views | Horsham |
I think there’s an argument to say a lot of the time our double pivot has only been a single pivot because Cajuste isn’t doing the dirty stuff Mass did before. Love Cajuste but is he perfect for our system.
Funny reading the comments like the double pivot doesn’t work and just having listened to Bellamy say about Burnley moving from a single pivot (classic 4–3-3) to a double to handle the transition in the premier league.
My thinking it’s a more a personnel issue than a system issue…. |  | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 17:00 - May 21 with 1041 views | cbower |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 16:51 - May 21 by Horsham |
I think there’s an argument to say a lot of the time our double pivot has only been a single pivot because Cajuste isn’t doing the dirty stuff Mass did before. Love Cajuste but is he perfect for our system.
Funny reading the comments like the double pivot doesn’t work and just having listened to Bellamy say about Burnley moving from a single pivot (classic 4–3-3) to a double to handle the transition in the premier league.
My thinking it’s a more a personnel issue than a system issue…. |
Yep, I agree with your last comment entirely. Plenty of sides in rhe Premier League play 4231 but their personnel can cope with it at that level. They have the physicality and pace across the side. We had enough to do it at L1 and then Championship level but with the squad we had and then the injuries sustained, we needed a different set up for lots of games this season. | |
| |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 17:02 - May 21 with 1038 views | Radlett_blue |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 16:26 - May 21 by Scuzzer |
Definitely. It's been very obvious.
Should have been 3-5-2 with wing backs. Plug the gaps. |
We did that occasionally & it did make us more solid. It's hard to argue that we would have picked up fewer points playing like this, especially at home. Part of the problem was that the gamble on Phillips didn't pay off, although if he had recovered his Leeds form by playing more, it might have worked. Morsy isn't good enough at this level, Cajuste has ability but maybe wasn't robust enough & neither Taylor nor Luongo were remotely up to scratch. So we became under endless pressure & unable to transition the ball to the front 4, so the result was endless pressure on our defence & inevitably something would give, often followed by a second goal. |  |
| |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 19:15 - May 21 with 880 views | Scuzzer |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 16:39 - May 21 by bsw72 |
Yup, the transition phase - it's killed us in a number of games. Either our inability to do it, or the opposition doing it better against us. |
This is where Chappers comes into his own. Pity we've seen so little of him due to injuries. | |
| |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 19:23 - May 21 with 867 views | redrickstuhaart |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 14:51 - May 21 by cbower |
In my opinion, we have been overrun in midfield so many times this season that persisting with the double pivot has been a major problem. To my eye, it has been crying out for 3 in midfield from tbe Everton game onwards. With the way Davis was being expected to still bomb forward, at this level ther was too much athletcism, pace and power in the opposition for our two midfielders to cope with ( regardless of which two were playing). Add to that the three infront of them were usually to lightweight to retain possession when we got it and that midfield twosome were cruelly exposed. Even 442 might have been more effective for me as we rarely showed enough bite up top and were unable to keep possession often enough when Delap was so isolated on his own.
4231 will probably work for us again in the Championship but that will be more a case of the lower standard of opposition we'll be facing I suspect. |
The issue is not the system, but that three lightweight dribblers as the next 3 up simply cant compete as midfielders (as they must do at times).
The ten(s) need to link and feed off the midfield as well as being flexible and dropping in when needed.The wide men need to be wide midfielders much of the time. |  | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 19:32 - May 21 with 856 views | ArnieM |
100% Mckenna should have gone with 3 in MF. We were constantly overrun, .... |  |
| |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 19:49 - May 21 with 803 views | StNeotsBlue |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 17:02 - May 21 by Radlett_blue |
We did that occasionally & it did make us more solid. It's hard to argue that we would have picked up fewer points playing like this, especially at home. Part of the problem was that the gamble on Phillips didn't pay off, although if he had recovered his Leeds form by playing more, it might have worked. Morsy isn't good enough at this level, Cajuste has ability but maybe wasn't robust enough & neither Taylor nor Luongo were remotely up to scratch. So we became under endless pressure & unable to transition the ball to the front 4, so the result was endless pressure on our defence & inevitably something would give, often followed by a second goal. |
The last point you make is bang on the money, so many games we'd concede having being competitive and then concede again almost immediately meaning the game was suddenly beyond us in a matter of minutes. |  | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 20:00 - May 21 with 774 views | Joey_Joe_Joe_Junior |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 17:02 - May 21 by Radlett_blue |
We did that occasionally & it did make us more solid. It's hard to argue that we would have picked up fewer points playing like this, especially at home. Part of the problem was that the gamble on Phillips didn't pay off, although if he had recovered his Leeds form by playing more, it might have worked. Morsy isn't good enough at this level, Cajuste has ability but maybe wasn't robust enough & neither Taylor nor Luongo were remotely up to scratch. So we became under endless pressure & unable to transition the ball to the front 4, so the result was endless pressure on our defence & inevitably something would give, often followed by a second goal. |
I said to my mate in the summer I hope they let Morsy at least lead the team out for a few games. I could not believe that was the actual plan for the season with the level he would be coming up against. To be fair he done quite well for a lot of the start of the year but it was never going to work out for 10 months. It was a tough balance between going nuclear and keeping some continuity but to be honest we needed an entire new squad to have a chance didn't we.
Hopefully we will organically have that make up this time next year, with some of the youngsters that have a bit of experience already making that step up along some we bring in this summer.
Thing is if we go up again, we would need a lot of new players still. [Post edited 21 May 20:03]
| | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 20:01 - May 21 with 764 views | Horsham |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 19:32 - May 21 by ArnieM |
100% Mckenna should have gone with 3 in MF. We were constantly overrun, .... |
So what roles are you giving the 3 in midfield? Are they all screening the back 4? How are we pressing the opposition? Who’s getting forward to put pressure on the opposition?
I mean I’m not saying you’re wrong but football is much more that 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 or 4-4-2
I honestly think with the personnel and the personnel changes there wasn’t a hell of a lot more that could have been done. | | | |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 06:26 - May 22 with 480 views | PioneerBlue |
This is certainly worth discussion but I don’t think we had the personnel fit and available for long enough periods certainly not second half of season. I’m not sure we recruited for this either. Eitherway, the defense has not been good enough when the ball comes near the box and forwards have not been good enough at getting the ball in from the final third to the goal. It’s fine to search for all the answers and a 433 structure might be worth exploring in future, it wouldn’t have solved our actual players being generally out of their depth technically or at times not fit and able to handle the rigours of the PL 2025. It might have helped build more of a response to the goals conceded on transition as others have said. [Post edited 22 May 6:28]
| |
| |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 06:54 - May 22 with 427 views | Churchman |
| Random commute thoughts. Should McKenna have tried 3 in midfield this year? on 15:31 - May 21 by Guthrum |
For me the biggest problem has been the gap which developed between the packed defence and attacker (occasionally plural). Any ball forward or opposition clearance would fall to one of their players not ours.
Not sure the formation would have made a lot of difference to that, rather than needing to have every hand to the pump in defending, so there was no-one in "midfield" at all. |
The team would collapse on itself between minute one and twenty most games. The actual support given to the defence apart from Morsy at times negligible and the gap to any forwards, usually Delap, enormous.
We didn’t control games and in the Premier League which means home and away we played like the away team. You won’t win very often doing that. It can work as Crystal P proved in the Cup Final against a superior side, but only because they had better players than us and don’t play that way every week.
When it comes down to it, the players in the middle especially were not good enough. The quality of just about every PL team shocked me. We were taken apart most weeks, even if we did stay in games for periods. He could have played any formation but the result would have been the same.
McKenna did change it here and there and they all tried, but essentially if your players are not good enough there’s a limit to what you can do. I like the way KM sets a team up. It’s exciting and the right way. You just need better players that know each other inside out to do it and with the way recruitment went, we had neither.
If (and it’s a big if) we can get promotion next season we will be better placed to attack the Premier League, now we know what it is, with this bruising experience. [Post edited 22 May 6:59]
|  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
