We have to get back to a four man defence

[Moderatelywarmwater]

5 at the back will be the death of Lampard as our manager.

It’s a terribly negative move which limits the side greatly

 

[Inchy226]

5 at the back will be the death of Lampard as our manager.

It’s a terribly negative move which limits the side greatly

Not necessarily. If you have good wing backs, then it can be a good system.

 

[Furey1878]

5 at the back is purely out of necessity. We've got 2 CMs incoming and I suspect we will return to 433.

 

[Paul Rideout]

Why wasn't this thread called 'DaveK only likes his Glaswegian Jesus to wear green and white hoops'?

I feel it would have removed all this subterfuge that's going on.

FWIW I prefer 4 at the back too... however I think Patterson is more than capable of being our right back in a 4, given his debut performance.

but everything points towards us playing 3-4-3 this year.

 

[Stevie Nicks Bootleg]

Why wasn't this thread called 'DaveK only likes his Glaswegian Jesus to wear green and white hoops'?

Aye. I only realised Andy Robertson was a catholic yesterday, based solely on the fact Dave said he was the RS best defender.

 

[Lobster Johnson]

The poll question would have been simply...

What do you prefer...

A/ A back four
B/ A back Three

Pretty sure A would have won it in a landslide.

Are there any other selection or tactical decisions you'd like to see put to a vote on GoT?

 

[gedefc]

5 at the back is purely out of necessity. We've got 2 CMs incoming and I suspect we will return to 433.

I did think this, until were signing Coady

I think our managers last few years have gone to 5 at the back out of necessity for a terrible midfield

 

[Mark Bisson]

5 at the back is purely out of necessity. We've got 2 CMs incoming and I suspect we will return to 433.

No chance of us reverting to 4 at the back.

 

[toffeeblue9]

Was it just me who thinks the sole of point of Dave's post here is that he believes it will get Patterson out of the team?

FWIW I prefer a back 4 too and you'd hope that Onana and Gueye give the defence enough protection that a back 4 becomes a viable prospect, but Coady is a back 3 signing. You'd hope we'll switch between the two depending on the system but, from where I sit, a 343 seems the most likely formation.

 

[davek]

Was it just me who thinks the sole of point of Dave's post here is that he believes it will get Patterson out of the team?

FWIW I prefer a back 4 too and you'd hope that Onana and Gueye give the defence enough protection that a back 4 becomes a viable prospect, but Coady is a back 3 signing. You'd hope we'll switch between the two depending on the system but, from where I sit, a 343 seems the most likely formation.

That could be, but as I mentioned elsewhere....

Lampard dispensed with the 3 at the back after his first 2 games in charge because CMs became available to him like Delph and Donny VDB. He then went to 4 at the back from then on until the Chelsea game at home, then he stuck to that for the last 5 games.

After starting at Newcastle with 3 at the back, he set up with 4 at the back against Leeds, Southampton, City. Then we played Spurs away and got mauled with 4 at the back and he dropped the system for 3 at the back against Wolves at home. Then he went back again to 4 for the win against Newcastle at home. Stayed with 4 at the back against WHU, Burnley, Man United, Leicester at home and Liverpool, then reverted to a 3 for the Chelsea game, Leicester away game, Watford, Brentford, Palace and Arsenal games.

This is not a manager wanting ideologically to play 3 at the back. He went there because of what was available to him in midfield...if he thought the 2/3 CMs could do a job in front of the defence, the system was 4 at the back.

This will be seen again to be the case once Gueye and Onana are in the team. Regardless of Coady - who in any case will play in a 4 and has done before.

Lampard pretty much played both 3 and 4 at the back in equal measure last season and it'll be dictated which he adopts this season by who we have available in CM.


PS: if you think my reason for posting the thread was to get Patterson out of the team, then that means you believe he's not a player who can play in a back four too... ?‍

 

[AussieToffee11]

Seldom do I agree with young David, but with the additions of Gana and Onana, then I do think Lampard finally has the option to play 4-3-3.

Gueye sitting with two of Iwobi, Onana, Doucoure and Dele would be able to cope defensively and offensively.

However, I don't think he will change as we have finally found a system that is somewhat structured defensively. We looked really solid at the weekend, and think we are going to be a tough team to score against (finally). I just hope we can nick enough goals.

 

[toffeeblue9]

That could be, but as I mentioned elsewhere....




Lampard pretty much played both 3 and 4 at the back in equal measure last season and it'll be dictated which he adopts this season by who we have available in CM.


PS: if you think my reason for posting the thread was to get Patterson out of the team, then that means you believe he's not a player who can play in a back four too... ?‍

Nope, but I think you believe that, hence the post

Aside from the Patterson point, I don't disagree with you - the midfield options have meant we've been really open with a back 4 and that was evident when we tried it in pre-season too. Onana and Gueye may rectify this and give us the ability to play a back 4 and I'd have seen that as the most likely way forward if it wasn't for the Coady signing. The Coady thing is a big curve ball and instead suggests a back 3 is what he wants. The way I look at it, we now have the personnel to play either a 343, 4231 or 433, but if I were a betting man, I'd guess 343 is most likely. My rationale for that is that Coady is leaving Wolves because he wants to play in the build up to the World Cup - Lampard will have told him he'll be playing for him to have agreed to come here and if he's playing, it's a back 3, no question.

 

[davek]

Nope, but I think you believe that, hence the post

Aside from the Patterson point, I don't disagree with you - the midfield options have meant we've been really open with a back 4 and that was evident when we tried it in pre-season too. Onana and Gueye may rectify this and give us the ability to play a back 4 and I'd have seen that as the most likely way forward if it wasn't for the Coady signing. The Coady thing is a big curve ball and instead suggests a back 3 is what he wants. The way I look at it, we now have the personnel to play either a 343, 4231 or 433, but if I were a betting man, I'd guess 343 is most likely. My rationale for that is that Coady is leaving Wolves because he wants to play in the build up to the World Cup - Lampard will have told him he'll be playing for him to have agreed to come here and if he's playing, it's a back 3, no question.

The Coady thing is just a fortuitous situation where a battle hardened PL player becomes available on the cheap for the season. Who would turn that down when you just conceded 66 goals last season?

My advice is to not obsess over what Coady has done at Wolves in recent seasons and just focus on that new midfield being set up. There's no way we'd need a back three with two midfielders like Gueye and Onana in CM.

 

[davek]

Seldom do I agree with young David, but with the additions of Gana and Onana, then I do think Lampard finally has the option to play 4-3-3.

Gueye sitting with two of Iwobi, Onana, Doucoure and Dele would be able to cope defensively and offensively.

However, I don't think he will change as we have finally found a system that is somewhat structured defensively. We looked really solid at the weekend, and think we are going to be a tough team to score against (finally). I just hope we can nick enough goals.

We lost a player to injury through that set up, and we saw Chelsea exploit a defence that struggled to execute the system when a CM had to track a runner into the box that either the RWB or one of the CBs should have easily dealt with.

It was NOT a success....just as it wasn't a success last season. We won 2 games out of 8 playing 3 at the back last season and lost our first one this season playing it.

Is that 'finding a system' for you? Winning 2 games out of 9?

 

[Furey1878]

No chance of us reverting to 4 at the back.

We're about to sign 2 new CMs mate, that would mean our CM options are:

-Gana
-Onana
-Dourcoure
-Allan
-Iwobi
-Davies
-Gomes

6 CMs to play exclusively with a midfield 2? No chance. Could even make the argument Dele would be considered in a midfield 3.

Don't get me wrong I think we will still see a back 5 a lot this season, but I think Lampard will prefer a back 4.