Jump to content

is it 5 at the back for the rest of the season ?


Recommended Posts

serious question because bar an injury we have 3 centre backs 2 playing really well and dont deserve to be dropped and one who cant be dropped ( although he has been solid in the past couple of games )

bartley could be moved into the midfield but has been brilliant at centre back

bougherra despite his mazey runs has been solid defensively

and weir the majority realise he is past it and shouldnt be starting every game , he was dropped for 1 game because he had the shits

we played it against st.mirren and used the injuries as an excuse when we still had players who could have played in an attacking set up

so i think it could be 5-4-1 or 5-3-2, hope not though .....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its more of a 3-5-2 in the SPL tbh,you have whittaker & foster/papac bombing forward alot of the time.

People don't seem to grasp this. Our formation isn't a rigid 5 at the back look at our goal against St. Mirren Bougherra to Bartley!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bringonthebarca,it sounded like a 5-3-2 when i heard the team get announced on the tannoy.

Like supermac said,our goal came from bougey & bartley combo,its more like a 3-5-2 with 2 holding midfielders.

But if we do play 3-5-2 i would prefer to see this team & setup:

- Mc gregor

- Bartley weir bougey

Whittaker/foster Whittaker/papac

- Ness/edu Hutton

Weiss Fleck Naismith

- Jelavic Diouf

Link to post
Share on other sites

Normally playing a 5-3-2 or a 3-5-2 can be a great system to use IF you have the correct players to play it and the tactics are used properly.

Unfortunately, we have a stumbling block for both those systems.

Davie Weir's lack of pace and Sasa Papac's inability to be a genuine wing back ensure that our back five remain just that,ie five defenders.

Basically the same goes in the 3-5-2 system, because it would mean that Bartley would have to be used as a defensive holding player.

Our tactics of blootering the ball from defence, and our inability to control and pass the ball with any degree of effect on the deck, mean that more times than not we end up defending on our 18yard box, which well we know, ends up squeaky bum time and chewed knuckles for the supporters.

As we stand at the moment with the personel we know that will definitely play week-in week- out, I would never even consider playing a 5-3-2 or a 3-5-2 in the SPL.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5-3-2 would be fine with me in the SPL - never thought I'd say this but it would work all the better if we had Foster and Whittaker playing as both offer pace and directness (plus, with 3 CBs behind them, their flaws in defence are less problematic).

It's a pity for Papac as he doesn't fit into that system as well (he's still a legend though!)

Maybe something like this:

McGregor

Bougherra Weir Bartley

Foster ------------------ Whittaker

Davis Hutton Edu

Diouf

Jelavic

Even better when Ness is back and Naismith can slot in there instead of Diouf, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,just like Walters last season first time round; a supposed 3-5-2 which more or less fell into 5-3-2 as opponents lost their fear of attacking us.The 3-5-2 system was widely discredited years ago:like every system great on paper or whiteboard but flawed in operation and results.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot to add this before - my huge fear of playing 4 at the back is this... Weir will be too often caught out by a lack of pace, not helped by Bougherra playing wherever he chooses. This means that Papac inevitably doesn't press up to offer cover. In essence, it means we offer no means to attack or support an attack from the back. And I hate to draw the comparison, but if you watch Sellick play, their wing-backs add to the threat.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the ST mirren game was down to sheer no.s

We had 3 CB's fit and no strikers, I think his hand was forced but I suppose he couldve played Bartley in midfield in a 451

Anyway IMO we'll revert to 442 for Sunday with folk returning from injury

Link to post
Share on other sites

People don't seem to grasp this. Our formation isn't a rigid 5 at the back look at our goal against St. Mirren Bougherra to Bartley!

true but they are defenders and tht was against st mirren f.f.s

Link to post
Share on other sites

serious question because bar an injury we have 3 centre backs 2 playing really well and dont deserve to be dropped and one who cant be dropped ( although he has been solid in the past couple of games )

bartley could be moved into the midfield but has been brilliant at centre back

bougherra despite his mazey runs has been solid defensively

and weir the majority realise he is past it and shouldnt be starting every game , he was dropped for 1 game because he had the shits

we played it against st.mirren and used the injuries as an excuse when we still had players who could have played in an attacking set up

so i think it could be 5-4-1 or 5-3-2, hope not though .....

4-4-2 all the way in the spl, but 5 at the back seems to work for us in europe granted we have ridden our luck a fair few times but attack attack attack in the spl!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bringonthebarca,it sounded like a 5-3-2 when i heard the team get announced on the tannoy.

Like supermac said,our goal came from bougey & bartley combo,its more like a 3-5-2 with 2 holding midfielders.

But if we do play 3-5-2 i would prefer to see this team & setup:

- Mc gregor

- Bartley weir bougey

Whittaker/foster Whittaker/papac

- Ness/edu Hutton

Weiss Fleck Naismith

- Jelavic Diouf

no offence m8 but atink the boy wylde should get a run of games instead of fleck he looks more direct with more pace

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes,just like Walters last season first time round; a supposed 3-5-2 which more or less fell into 5-3-2 as opponents lost their fear of attacking us.The 3-5-2 system was widely discredited years ago:like every system great on paper or whiteboard but flawed in operation and results.

I think you meant to say the 3-5-2 system went out of fashion years ago. It was never discredited.

The big problem with any 3-at-the-back system though is playing against 1-up-front systems, which are fairly ubiquitous these days, because the wing-backs tend to get forced back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

no offence m8 but atink the boy wylde should get a run of games instead of fleck he looks more direct with more pace

No offence takin mate everyone has there own thoughts on our 11,would like to see fleck in the hole behind 2 strikers & maybe leave naisy on the bench due to his latest injury & start wylde on the wing

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...