We have to get back to a four man defence

[MikeH72]

We’re not buying a right back Dave, get used to this idea.

 

[KaiserEFC]

I’d much prefer 4 men with an extra midfielder in there if I’m being honest. Unfortunately we might have about 1 good CM in the squad

 

[Noisy noise annoys]

It was a cheap pen off a midfielder, nothing to do with a back three

 

[Chegsy]

The back 5 has its pros and cons. I’m not big on the 2 man midfield. Our play is too predictable. Unless we get an overload down the wing we don’t seem to create much at all.

 

[ramacca]

A back 4 works better with a proper holding midfielder, without one we've had to revert to a back 5 so as to have numbers there. But we are then exposed in the middle of the park and get overrun. Tarkowski is a very good defender and very vocal but who to partner him with in a back 4 - Keane has gone downhill so much he's a liability, Mina is always crocked, Godfrey's out so that leaves Holgate or a youngster. We need a new CB to partner Tarkowski.

 

[Tel001]

It was a clear pen. And it exposed the confusion of defenders not knowing who they should be picking up in those situations.

I’m not a fan of 5 at the back either tbh , but yesterday was down to doucs being an idiot. Mina was coming across to cover and if that pen wasn’t given then we would be looking at a clean sheet and with chelsea hardly creating a chance

 

[Bebeto]

If we do sign Cody it tells us that we will be going with three since he can’t play in a four which is why he’s apparently available.

Going for a cb that can't play in a 4 is for me a concern....surely a good cb should be able to perform in any system...Tarkowski has played well in a 5 and a 4, same for mina.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

Think yesterday was encouragement for a back 5.

 

[Eggsyblueskin]

Going for a cb that can't play in a 4 is for me a concern....surely a good cb should be able to perform in any system...Tarkowski has played well in a 5 and a 4, same for mina.

Coady isn’t an outstanding CB he’s a converted midfielder ultimately.
But he is very good in a three and an exceptional organiser who can read the game well.

 

[ProZ]

I disagree, whilst the system can seem slow, its a very different system to 4 at the back, and switching now the season has started would kill us.

Leave it how it is for now.

 

[jerseytoffee]

Thought we were much better with the back 5 yesterday, always helps when you practice using it in preseason then trying on the odd occasion through the season.

We look to have the players that will suit the system more, so I think we should continue with it. Would be nice to try it this season with a proper striker!

 

[allen]

Think yesterday was encouragement for a back 5.

Yes, the defensive unit was really sound. It’s the first time I’ve properly thought it’s a good idea.

One mistake by a midfielder worried about his place in the team (given the new guy watching from the Main Stand) is a baffling justification to say we need to change from a back five.

 

[Cool_Blue]

as soft a penalty as you will see all season. same old tried and tested dive from Chilwell throwing himself forward after minimal contact from Doucoure. lets see if we get the same decisions going our way, ha - don`t hold your breath

it was a stupid attempt at a tackle and a clear pen.

And on the formation/tactics front, I’ve noticed how much of the pitch we concede when we lose possession, almost as if it’s an away game. Chelsea defenders were strolling into our half with the ball before having to consider what to do with it. Our closing down needs addressing urgently.

 

[tadpole]

Three at the back is the way forward, I know it's not worked for us the last couple of years, but we have the personnel now to make it succeed. Myko and Patterson are our attacking wing backs, with Vinagre brought in as an extra option. Tarkowski will marshall our defence, who already looked much more comfortable yesterday defending set pieces. Our midfield will become far less porous with the addition of Onana and Gueye.

 

[ToffeeTim]

Nothing to do with systems. We don't have a capable forward whether we play 343, 352, 442, 433, or 451. The problem remains.

Changing system is rearranging the deck chairs and makes no difference. Our system was fine yesterday, but we had embarrassing levels of quality at centre forward.