Team shape, tactics and personnel

[TRO]

3 minutes ago, Nicho said:

I don’t disagree but I think it would get more out of Watkins and Ings.

The only way both continue to play is with Watkins on the wing. Buendia caused another headache yesterday. A full 4231 is the only way to get our best players on the pitch at the same time.

A nice headache to have options but Smith needs to make the right decisions now, Arsenal and West Ham are going to be hard games. 

Dean has said, "Ollie won't play out wide"

[Stevo985]

27 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Whilst I agree that losing Jack was always going to have an impact I do not think we’ve struggled that much from an attacking perspective. We are still creating chances. 

We're amongst the worst in the league at creating chances attacking wise, and what we have created has come very recently.

Early on we were creating relatively nothing

[nick76]

Just now, DCJonah said:

It's why we need to get Traore and Bailey into this starting line up IMO. 

I'd be surprised if Dean persisted with this 3 at the back. 

I think it’s the one thing we actually all agree within this thread that we need to change from this 3 at the back.  We understand why he did it for various reasons but with hopefully the attacking players now becoming more available we can change.

[villabromsgrove]

When we were playing four at the back it was relatively simple for our 2 CB's to focus on their relative positions and specific responsibilities.

Changing to 3 or 5 at the back (depending on whether we are attacking or defending) seems to have introduced confusion on a regular basis.

Mings especially wanders out of position and seems to think that the extra CB gives him license to play a more laid back individual game. Tuanzebe doesn't seem to understand his role. Hause must get really frustrated when he can't get into a dysfunctional back three that is lacking a dominant aerial component.

When we're under pressure there's very little cohesion in our defending. Is this down to a lack of individual player intelligence, poor coaching, or do we simply not have the right combination of CB's?

Imo we need to get back to 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3.

[Davkaus]

3 hours ago, villalad21 said:

Didn't we just hire a set piece coach?

We conceded 3 goals from set pieces against Wolves. Not a good look for him.

I was wondering if the defence of set peices is his remit, or if it's just creating chances from our own set peices. Anyone know? 

[Risso]

5 minutes ago, villabromsgrove said:

When we were playing four at the back it was relatively simple for our 2 CB's to focus on their relative positions and specific responsibilities.

Changing to 3 or 5 at the back (depending on whether we are attacking or defending) seems to have introduced confusion on a regular basis.

Mings especially wanders out of position and seems to think that the extra CB gives him license to play a more laid back individual game. Tuanzebe doesn't seem to understand his role. Hause must get really frustrated when he can't get into a dysfunctional back three that is lacking a dominant aerial component.

When we're under pressure there's very little cohesion in our defending. Is this down to a lack of individual player intelligence, poor coaching, or do we simply not have the right combination of CB's?

Imo we need to get back to 4-2-3-1 or 4-3-3.

Definitely 4-3-3. Smith has fallen into the trap of picking a formation when it worked once (Man U) and then sticking with it come what may. Despite the extra central defender, it's made the defence worse, we have no proper width and Ings and Watkins are functioning as a pair. I don't want to return to 4-2-3-1 though as it really doesn't suit Luiz and McGinn, the latter especially who is the one bright spot in the team at the moment.

For Arsenal, I'd go:

Martinez

Cash Konsa Mings Targett

McGinn Ramsey Luiz

Bunedia Ings Bailey

 

[PussEKatt]

34 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

I was wondering if the defence of set peices is his remit, or if it's just creating chances from our own set peices. Anyone know? 

depending on which team is taking the set piece it involves attack and defence,so surley he should be accomplished in both.

[OutByEaster?]

I think one thing that's been noticeable is that while we've played with five at the back, it's allowed our central midfielders the security to play and contributed to their improved form - when we play with three at the back, we play one '6' and two '8's with licence to get forward - it's allowed us to play Buendia in midfield too. When we do return to a four at the back, we'll most likely be looking at two '6''s and a single '8' and we struggle a little more that way I think. Doug works best on his own where he makes brilliant decisions on space and positioning and McGinn is at his best as part of a pair - if we bring in Sanson/Nakamba as a second holding player - we're not as naturally balanced I think - and dragging McGinn back is just a bad idea.

Missing out on that extra midfielder in the August window has left us with difficult decisions in the middle. We have two thirds of a very good midfield in Luiz and McGinn, but we could do with a third one that's the right type and gives us better balance.

 

[Stevo985]

1 hour ago, nick76 said:

Not surprised though early on between the preseason and start of the season with injuries to our offensive creative area like Buendia, Bailey, Traore, Watkins…we were really hampered and only now can they start to get up to speed and some of the chances are coming.

Exactly, which was the point I was making. It was always going to take us time to adjust to not having Jack and we've seen that.

So comparing the start of this season to last season without that massive caveat is kinda pointless

[Stevo985]

2 hours ago, TrentVilla said:

Indeed, thankfully in the early games we had an abnormally high conversion rate of chances.

Exactly. And we're still overperforming statistically.

McGinn's goal vs Watford, Ings vs Newcastle as examples were goals out of relatively nowhere.

 

Which is obviously great, that's why you buy players like Ings. But it isn't sustainable.

[Rightdm00]

Just did a rewatch. The amount of chances that fell to Cash was maddening. Just like in the previous games the gilt edge chances that fell to Targett. I love our fullbacks defensive qualities but neither of them is wingback and each game we play with the 3-5-2 it becomes more obvious. The sooner we get our wingers healthy and switch to a back 4 the better. 

[villalad21]

14 minutes ago, Rightdm00 said:

Just did a rewatch. The amount of chances that fell to Cash was maddening. Just like in the previous games the gilt edge chances that fell to Targett. I love our fullbacks defensive qualities but neither of them is wingback and each game we play with the 3-5-2 it becomes more obvious. The sooner we get our wingers healthy and switch to a back 4 the better. 

We can still play 4-3-3.

El Ghazi and Buendia can play there. Even Bidace is an option.

And for the people who says El Ghazi can't do the job there. Then why on earth is he even on the bench?

Edited October 18, 2021 by villalad21

[DCJonah]

6 hours ago, bobzy said:

FWIW, I thought we looked good against Wolves playing this formation up until about the 70th minute when it all went wrong.

There's nothing really "wrong" with it.

I agree to some extent. Spurs is the only game we've looked poor playing this way. 

I just think with Traore and Bailey, we have two very good wide players that need to be used in an attacking sense. 

I've got no major issues with the formation but I'd like to see us change it up when Bailey is back. 

[OutByEaster?]

20 minutes ago, Rightdm00 said:

Just did a rewatch. The amount of chances that fell to Cash was maddening. Just like in the previous games the gilt edge chances that fell to Targett. I love our fullbacks defensive qualities but neither of them is wingback and each game we play with the 3-5-2 it becomes more obvious. The sooner we get our wingers healthy and switch to a back 4 the better. 

I think wing back is probably Cash's natural position - he played in midfield a fair bit for Forest and he's got a natural attacking intent - he could do with improving his finishing though, as you say he had a bundle of chances on Saturday.

[danceoftheshamen]

For me that system relies quite heavily on the wingbacks (Cash & Targett) actually being productive in the final 3rd. They are frankly atrocious in that department. I was watching them closely on Saturday and not once did I see Targett make good use of the ball from the many very good chances he had to do so. Cash similar where 3 times he had the almost identical situation to when he scored against Everton but sadly he resorted to type and every one went way over the crossbar. 
defensively both were ok though. 

[Rightdm00]

2 minutes ago, OutByEaster? said:

I think wing back is probably Cash's natural position - he played in midfield a fair bit for Forest and he's got a natural attacking intent - he could do with improving his finishing though, as you say he had a bundle of chances on Saturday.

I probably shouldn't have tossed both our fullbacks together. Cash has the ability and athleticism.  He just needs more time at the position given his recent conversion.

Targett will never be it though. He's only a fullback, nothing more. If we want to continue with this formation then we have to bring in an actual wingback on the left. 

[sne]

1 minute ago, danceoftheshamen said:

For me that system relies quite heavily on the wingbacks (Cash & Targett) actually being productive in the final 3rd. They are frankly atrocious in that department. I was watching them closely on Saturday and not once did I see Targett make good use of the ball from the many very good chances he had to do so. Cash similar where 3 times he had the almost identical situation to when he scored against Everton but sadly he resorted to type and every one went way over the crossbar. 
defensively both were ok though. 

Cash had a poor game in that regard but I think he's OK at wingback. Targett's inability to get the cross past the first defender in absolutely a hindrance for us with this formation.

[OutByEaster?]

1 minute ago, Rightdm00 said:

I probably shouldn't have tossed both our fullbacks together. Cash has the ability and athleticism.  He just needs more time at the position given his recent conversion.

Targett will never be it though. He's only a fullback, nothing more. If we want to continue with this formation then we have to bring in an actual wingback on the left. 

I'd agree, I think Targett is capable of getting up and supporting a winger, he can be effective in the opposition half, but as the main threat down the side, he's not natural. I think he worked brilliantly with Grealish and I think he'll work well with Bailey, but he's an uncomfortable wing back at times - he's never going to bomb into the space behind a full back.

Depth is a big issue for me - I don't think Ashley Young has the legs to play as a wing back for 90 minutes and Tuanzebe and Hause are uncomfortable at full back, let alone if they're ask to push forward.

We need to keep Cash and Targett fit.

 

[Rightdm00]

4 minutes ago, sne said:

Cash had a poor game in that regard but I think he's OK at wingback. Targett's inability to get the cross past the first defender in absolutely a hindrance for us with this formation.

Couple of us are all saying the same thing. The 3-5-2 puts so much pressure on Cash to produce from an offensive standpoint. Probably why the reason he wasn't able to finish the Wolves game.  It's a nice formation for a short run of games but we don't have the personnel for much more than that. 

[Peter Griffin]

3 hours ago, villabromsgrove said:

When we're under pressure there's very little cohesion in our defending. Is this down to a lack of individual player intelligence, poor coaching, or do we simply not have the right combination of CB's?

 

Poor coaching or maybe not enough coaching of this system and the players don't understand it yet