waltzer83 27 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 On sat during an interview, ally mentioned that he was tinkering with the idea of playing 3 at the back and me and a friend got talking about it. He mentioned that he thinks ally has this in his head because he may want to try it at the piggery and make it look like a 3 but really be a 5! A know we have 2 games to worry about before then but what's peoples thoughts on this happening? With the tarriers weakness at the back surely we have to attack them and not resort back to that horrible formation. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWalterSmithLegend 206 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Surely not ffs. Its not Barcelona we are playing. Would be disgusted if we goto the Piggery and play negatively. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluenose_72 198 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 A repeat of last seasons 5-4-1.McGregorWhittaker Bartley Goian Bocanegra WallaceAluko Davis Edu WyldeJelavic Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DamienM855 413 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 I think it would be more like a 3 man center defence, but with 2 wing backs, as we'd need Whittaker and Wallace to counter Celtic's wing threat.It's where the extra man would come from though, we'd have to drop Bendiksen altogether, or give him either Davis' or Edu's role in midfield. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Negri's Beard 1,423 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 I'd be happy with any formation if it means we avoid defeat there and remain 4 points clear Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Negri's Beard 1,423 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 A repeat of last seasons 5-4-1.McGregorWhittaker Bartley Goian Bocanegra WallaceAluko Davis Edu WyldeJelavicThink we'll play this but with Bartley sitting in front of Goianegra rather than beside them Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TerryHurlock 21 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 I'd be happy with any formation if it means we avoid defeat there and remain 4 points clearFuck that pish ! attack they cunts and they crumble ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWalterSmithLegend 206 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Fuck that pish ! attack they cunts and they crumble !Correct, fuck this happy with a draw pish, it puts doubts into players and fans minds right away. We could play a 10-0-0 and still not guarantee a result. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Negri's Beard 1,423 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Fuck that pish ! attack they cunts and they crumble !Maybe. We've hardly been playing scintilatingly brilliant attacking football over the last few weeks though. As shite as we've been, we've still been relatively solid at the back all season. Would be nice to see us give them a go though. As I say, couldn't care less how we do it, just don't want the gap to be cut by any more Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Negri's Beard 1,423 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Correct, fuck this happy with a draw pish, it puts doubts into players and fans minds right away. We could play a 10-0-0 and still not guarantee a result.True but that idea could be reveresed too. Could play attacking as we like and still not score. I agree, I always want to win. Still, think most wouldn't be gutted to get away from Parkhead still 4 points ahead Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWalterSmithLegend 206 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Maybe. We've hardly been playing scintilatingly brilliant attacking football over the last few weeks though. As shite as we've been, we've still been relatively solid at the back all season. Would be nice to see us give them a go though. As I say, couldn't care less how we do it, just don't want the gap to be cut by any moreThats true but it is our teams strength, we are outstanding when we attack, let our players play and go at teams. We dont do it enough, for whatever reason. Our back 4 has been brilliant all season, putting someone else ion next to them could upset the balance. We seen what happened when we put players in front of them, in the holding role, we are dreadful, yet when we attack teams freely, we are a joy to watch. Celtc have proved time and time again, they cannot handle any team attacking them. Given how uncertain our future is right now, a win is a must, we need as big a gap as possible going into the title run in. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWalterSmithLegend 206 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 True but that idea could be reveresed too. Could play attacking as we like and still not score. I agree, I always want to win. Still, think most wouldn't be gutted to get away from Parkhead still 4 points aheadBut it gives us a better chance to score, and win. Defending doesnt. It puts pressure on us to shut up shop for 95mins, and if we dont and lose a goal, we are stuck, that was proven last year, a few times. Wouldnt be gutted mate, but would rather get the win. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Negri's Beard 1,423 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Thats true but it is our teams strength, we are outstanding when we attack, let our players play and go at teams. We dont do it enough, for whatever reason. Our back 4 has been brilliant all season, putting someone else ion next to them could upset the balance. We seen what happened when we put players in front of them, in the holding role, we are dreadful, yet when we attack teams freely, we are a joy to watch. Celtc have proved time and time again, they cannot handle any team attacking them. Given how uncertain our future is right now, a win is a must, we need as big a gao as possible going into the title run in.You make a good point. Even when playing pish, our defence plays well. 8 goals conceded in 18 games is remarkable. We should show a bit of faith in them and not feel the need for defensive screening. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravelingWilBEARy 4,319 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 A 5-4-1 formation can turn into a 3-5-2 very quickly. Attacking wingbacks is the key.I don't understand why people claim this is negative. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWalterSmithLegend 206 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 You make a good point. Even when playing pish, our defence plays well. 8 goals conceded in 18 games is remarkable. We should show a bit of faith in them and not feel the need for defensive screening. Agreed. Our defence has been outstanding, and that is without support from midfield, they dont need any more players in there. Our problem is in midfield, we fix that, we walk this league. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Negri's Beard 1,423 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 But it gives us a better chance to score, and win. Defending doesnt. It puts pressure on us to shut up shop for 95mins, and if we dont and lose a goal, we are stuck, that was proven last year, a few times. Wouldnt be gutted mate, but would rather get the win.Worked in the UEFA cup run. It's probably as much of a gamble as attack attack attack. Just more dull. I agree that i'd rather push for a lead and if needs be, defend it. Still fully expect us to play defensively mind Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Negri's Beard 1,423 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 A 5-4-1 formation can turn into a 3-5-2 very quickly. Attacking wingbacks is the key.I don't understand why people claim this is negative.Agree. People get too caught up in formations. It's not as if we have to play the same formation for the whole 90 minutes. If a formation isn't working, it is changed. That's the theory anyway... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWalterSmithLegend 206 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Worked in the UEFA cup run. It's probably as much of a gamble as attack attack attack. Just more dull. I agree that i'd rather push for a lead and if needs be, defend it. Still fully expect us to play defensively mindWe had a huge squad then and some very good footballers in midfield during that run to take pressure of our defence and keep the ball better. We dont have the footballing ability or brains in the centre of midfield to do that again. HemdaniFergusonThomsonimo is stronger and better thanMcCullochEduDavisCousin and/or Darcheville were also excellent outballs and lone strikers allowing us to defend from the front too with Darchevilles energy and desire to chase anything and everything. Playing the lone striker role is not Jelas forte. He is a ball playing striker as opposed to a battering ram. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue corn flakes 1,282 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Tinkering is a thing that taigs do to their sisters. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Negri's Beard 1,423 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 We had a huge squad then and some very good footballers in midfield during that run to take pressure of our defence and keep the ball better. We dont have the footballing ability or brains in the centre of midfield to do that again. HemdaniFergusonThomsonimo is stronger and better thanMcCullochEduDavisCousin and/or Darcheville were also excellent outballs and lone strikers allowing us to defend from the front too with Darchevilles energy and desire to chase anything and everything. Playing the lone striker role is not Jelas forte. He is a ball playing striker as opposed to a battering ram.Can't argue with that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SirWalterSmithLegend 206 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Can't argue with that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Negri's Beard 1,423 Posted December 14, 2011 Share Posted December 14, 2011 Don't quite know What Ally will do with the left side. Papac and Wallace were his go to left side in tough games, wouldn't surprise me if he reverted to that in order to stifle Forrest. However, as frustratingly inconsistant as Wylde is, he's pretty much our main attacking outlet now. Pacey and can put in the odd killer delivery, would certainly put Celtic on the back-foot and his pace could be crucial in any counter-attacks we have. Would Ally sacrifice one of Wallace/Papac to fit in Wylde? Would he play Wylde on the right? Then, how would you fit in Aluko? Will Lafferty start? (I don't think he will) Will Bartley play in front of the back 4? (don't want this but think it will happen)Some interesting decisions to be made. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulRFC1 115 Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 A 5-4-1 formation can turn into a 3-5-2 very quickly. Attacking wingbacks is the key.I don't understand why people claim this is negative.Exactly.People just go by how many forwards are playing thats why everyone on this board creams themself over a 4-4-2 and despise the 4-5-1.Watch the fucking game and then tell me if we were negative or not. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IamRangers 12 Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 Am I the only one that thinks Ally had a 3-5-2 in mind from day one? (especially for the SPL) The clues for me where when we still pursued the Hungarian CB after securing Bartley and Goian. That was on top of already still having Weir, Perry and god forbid Broadfoot. The signing of Wallace was also an indicator for me as anyone watching him over the last 2/3 years could see that he was better going forward than defending. A bit like Whitty on the other side.Not sure how 3-5-2 would look but it might be something like this:----------McGregor---------------------Bartley--------------Goian-----------Boca----Whitty---------------Wallace------------Edu------------------Davis--------McKay-----------Jelavic----Naisy------Obviously in this system the full backs are the out ball for width. Bartley could bring the ball from defence and make up an extra man in midfield when needed in a sweeper like role. Bit bonkers but I just don't htink he signed Wallace as a traditional LB Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
waldo 7 Posted December 15, 2011 Share Posted December 15, 2011 McGregorWhittaker Bartley Goian Bocanegra WallaceAluko Davis Edu WyldeJelavicI wouldn't have too much of a problem with this formation, especially if Bartley has freedom to fill the gap in front of Goianegra.. And with the attacking threat of Aluko and Wylde linking up with Jela, I'd be quietly confident.However, my worry is Ally will think having wing-backs offers enough width so he'll likely end up playing Papac in place of Wylde and McCulloch in place of Aluko (with Davis or Edu shunted out right). That would be a disaster as it'd offer nothing going forward whatsoever. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.