Tactics Thread 2014-15

Status
Not open for further replies.

HuddersfieldToffee

Player Valuation: £8m
Thought I would start a little thread to discuss Everton tactics throughout the season and the general tactical trends of the Premier League and how we respond to them. Thought I'd start by discussing my views on the discussion point of the World Cup, at least from my point of view.

The Good Ole' Back Three and Tactical Flexibility


In RM's first year, at the end of the season, following numerous experiments inspired by Walter Mazzarri's Napoli and Francesco Guidolin's Udinese sides, started with a 3-5-1-1 to play against Champion-elect Chelsea, who were at this time switching between narrow 4-4-2, 4-3-3 and 4-3-1-2 formations. According to Zonal Marking's Michael Cox;

"Chelsea, who were relentless and powerful at that point – but actually lacking in shape and discipline – found it very difficult to cope with the fact Wigan were playing three players in very wide positions with the ball, and by stretching the play as wide as possible, Wigan dominated possession."

Although losing a man and a penalty, and collapsing defensive due to losing Gary Caudwell, RM saw a positivity in the width and the positive play that the formation allowed. The next year, he switched on the 11th February 2012 to a 3-4-3 formation and recorded victories against Manchester United and Arsenal, and eventually stayed up. All this has already been said.

It must also be said the Back Three was only defeated in the World Cup when it came up against another Back Three. But also, the key to those triumvirates of defence, De Vrij/Vlaar/Martins Indi, Moreno/Marquez/Rodriguez, Jara/Medel/Silva and Umana/Gonzalez/Duarte, were players who had ball-playing elements in the back line, and also flexible players such as Daley Blind and Bryan Ruiz who can accommodate themselves in different systems very effectively. Blind played at left-wing-back thrice, left back once, left half back (left holding mid) and left centre-back. Bryan Ruiz played upfront, on the left and behind the striker.

The old way of a player being a Left Winger, a Centre-Back, or even just a goalkeeper (as Goalkeeper come Centre-Back Manuel Neuer and Wallace from Corinthians) is over. Now players are left-sided, attacking, defensive or right sided. The lines are more blurred than ever. This supports the theory of Baines becoming a Central Midfielder during games, or later on in his career, and Oviedo playing Left Wing Back, Left Back and Left Wing (as well as CDM while playing Nordsjælland). Stones' cultured liberoish performances during the latter end of the season were typical of many defenders who have played all along the back four. A quick graph of his passes against Fulham '14 (while playing in a Back Four), compared to one of Jagielka against Arsenal the year before shows the difference in centre-backs from Moyes to Martinez;

Screen Shot 2014-07-21 at 15.18.42 1.png

STONES VS FULHAM

Screen Shot 2014-07-21 at 15.22.04.png

JAGIELKA VS ARSENAL

This change in style has preempted the change in formations, and allowed older style centre-backs, like Distin and Jagielka to be protected, like Vlaar in the centre of the Dutch defence. It also, concurrently, allows more adventurous centre back to receive protection from excellent concrete (or RONcrete) defensive players. This double effectiveness needs to be balanced with a good understanding between the back three, which at times, especially during the Manchester City game when the cohesiveness has obviously not quite got there.

Bobby has said that he favours flexibility, "At Anfield we played the two separate systems, and no-one would be able to see the difference" he commented talking about the switch between 4-3-3 and 3-4-3. With Stones and Bešić (who's arriving in 48 hours apparently ;)) modern style Centre-Backs, who can step into midfield or towards the right respectively - how often do you think the Back Three will be used and will it's key be the flexibility of the defenders who play it?


 
3-4-3 is a waste of Coleman and Baines imo. Both are fabulous players in attack and defense, placing two wingers wide in front of them limits the space they need to get forward. Also, a flat 3-4-3 infers that there will be a lot more wing play, something I don't think we're recruiting for.

To address space for the wings, you could go to a diamond midfield in a 3-4-3, but that means Coleman and Baines are either central, or they're on the bench. However, from how Martinez played at Wigan, I assume we're discussing a flat 4 midfield and not a diamond.

You can either give the fullbacks the space they need with a four man defense, or in a 3-5-2. The 3-5-2 opens up the space in front of the wingbacks by getting the two forwards more central. It also puts another central-type midfielder on the pitch in a era where most PL teams are playing five man midfields.

Having said that, my two issues with a 3 man defense in general:

1. We don't need to take a midfielder off for a center back-type. Coleman and Baines have thrived in a four man defense by making runs from further back and exploiting the space that guys like Mirallas open up by drifting towards the middle, with Barry shielding the back four. With a three man defense, Barry is still shielding the back 3, but the back 3 don't have the freedom to get forward as Coleman and Baines do.

2. I don't think we yet have the 3 centerbacks to pull this off consistently. I think employing a 3 man defense means Alcaraz jumps over Distin in the pecking order, and I'm not really ok with that at the moment.

I think we'll see it about as much as we did last season, meaning not very much (or at lot less than people imagined when he was hired).
 
4-2-3-1, same as he played most games, short passing, slow build up with the odd counter attack for variation.
Relying largely on long shots or incisive runs from the likes of Coleman, or Mirallas to unlock their defence.
Use the pace of Coleman and Mirallas to get the ball into the corners on occasion, whip it in, but not that often, more frequently, pull it back, play around the area, seek the gap, try to exploit, if failing give it to Barkley to blast one and hope he's not off balance because he'll hit it anyway.

That's what happened last year anyway.
 

Isn't it kinda fluid anyway? I mean when we lose the ball, Barry usually becomes almost like a third centre back anyway, and especially so when the full-backs push on. He'll drop back into the middle, with the two centre backs fanning out to form a back three.

So imagine Barry playing in front of a three man defense. They still need someone in front of them to cover (meaning four players instead of three).
 
When we're attacking we're not symetrical at all we're like:

Howard​
Jagielka Barry Distin​
Coleman---- McCarthy -----Baines
Barkley Pienaar​
Mirallas --Kone​
 
3-4-3 is a waste of Coleman and Baines imo. Both are fabulous players in attack and defense, placing two wingers wide in front of them limits the space they need to get forward. Also, a flat 3-4-3 infers that there will be a lot more wing play, something I don't think we're recruiting for.

That's true, Martinez said, however, that 3-4-3 allows the Wingbacks to defend, but have cover if they are caught on the counter. Most teams play with a three man block when they attack anyway, see Barry and Busquets. Also, the two wingers could happily tuck in and combine to make space for the wingbacks.

To address space for the wings, you could go to a diamond midfield in a 3-4-3, but that means Coleman and Baines are either central, or they're on the bench. However, from how Martinez played at Wigan, I assume we're discussing a flat 4 midfield and not a diamond.

You can either give the fullbacks the space they need with a four man defense, or in a 3-5-2. The 3-5-2 opens up the space in front of the wingbacks by getting the two forwards more central. It also puts another central-type midfielder on the pitch in a era where most PL teams are playing five man midfields.

I agree, the 3-5-2 is better - but with our squad, a link-man like Barkley, we can play a system like Chile in the World Cup. They play with two 7 and a halves. Half winger, half forward. It allows you to stretch the play and make space in the channels.

1. We don't need to take a midfielder off for a center back-type. Coleman and Baines have thrived in a four man defense by making runs from further back and exploiting the space that guys like Mirallas open up by drifting towards the middle, with Barry shielding the back four. With a three man defense, Barry is still shielding the back 3, but the back 3 don't have the freedom to get forward as Coleman and Baines do.

A back three can also, as Napoli have found, allow you to recycle possession with a 3 to 1 at the back, hence why universality becoming more and more prominent.
 
So imagine Barry playing in front of a three man defense. They still need someone in front of them to cover (meaning four players instead of three).

Why would they need someone to cover? The holding player/auxiliary centre back usually comes into play to allow the full-backs to push on. They're covering them more than they are the centre backs as it seems to be a measure designed to provide a bit of protection against quick counter attacks.

That player will join the centre backs when they have the ball to help build from the back, as again that would allow the full-backs to provide width, thus creating more space to play balls into.

I'm not sure if there are three centre backs that there is a need for the holding midfielder to do that.
 


Problem is a soft centre if its Barkley + one other in there. Also a very different game for Coleman and Baines if they are receiving the ball under pressure. They will pass backwards a lot.

Prefer a 4-3-3 as seen against Arse home game. Ross/Mac/Barry as the 3 in midfield, Naismith central but dropping off plus 2 split strikers.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top