The Diamond 4-4-2

[southcoastbear 1,639]

The rhats diamond was like the OP's thinking here, deeply flawed.

[Raligt 2,541]

Other teams in the league dont have good enough players to use that formation against us

We would rip them to shreds

[CoGerfficiency 137]

37 minutes ago, They Gnu said:

I thought with both Jack and Arfield out we’d struggle in this game, Hagi completely changed it when he came on, doing the job our front three didn’t do, pressing them and preventing them building from the back.

I think in future Hagi and Itten are the right types to be played v them. People are still clueless to what Itten offers for pressing as well and holding up play. I agree that Hagi changed the show for us and not just a red card. I think what Boydy said as well was spot on, he said that even though we were dominated in the first that everybody kept going on and on about, our defence still never let them get clear cut chances really.

[dazzareyes 220]

A team we faced a few weeks back played a literal 5-5-0 against us and we now believe that due to the tims playing a 4-4-2 diamond in a must win game means everyone will do similar, come on,  behave. 

We would absolutely annihilate the majority of the league if they set up like that. 

Plus like every other tactic we have faced in the league it didn't really work as we plough on notching up the wins.

[NitshillBear 1,431]

They had to run like fuck and do it in a coordinated way to make it work. First time they didn't, red card.

[ScottBF2 3,540]

When playing a team that tries to dictate as they did we need Ryan Jack in there to shield the fullbacks as they advance, he or Arfield are brilliant at that sort of lateral defensive positioning that gives Tav and Borna licence to roam.

 

Them putting out a DM and giving him an almost Makelele Role meant they could do that while he also picked up our advancing full back as their back 4 settled. What we did better in the second half was push both full backs up which pinned their back 4 and meant Soro had to sit central. If we had Arfield available yesterday he’d have played a lot of the second half sitting behind Soro which would’ve allowed Tav and Borna as much freedom as they wanted. 
 
im off to rewatch the game now anyway, always find the second viewing is better to pick things up, nervous as fuck at first showing.

[bornabear 6,201]

As was said earlier, this was a must win game for them, every man and his dug knew that.

Walter and Neil spoke about it pre kick off were spot on with their reasoning and they knew the filth would come with 2 up front because they had to win. I will even bet that they had some input during the week and no doubt SG thought the same.

Contain them for the first 20 or so minutes and they will get frustrated, and that's what happened. They never had a shot on target for the rest of the game.

The one thing in a game you can't account for is the bounce of a ball and we got it when Aribo's head flick bounced off Mcgregor for our goal. 

 

[Nk89 1,286]

We were also missing 2 guaranteed starters in this fixture, in the key area. Remember in October when they were missing Edouard n Christie it was such a shame for them..blah blah blah.. hardly a mention of Jack n Arfield being out for us

Griffiths and Edouard done there job for 45mins but couldn't substance that workrate for 90mins.

[SIRB_72 3,987]

It worked in the first half because we were playing right into their hands: We were playing with two strikers who like to come deep rather than wide and we couldn't get Kent into the game because he was just coming into bodies as well, he had one run in the first half and had to go by six celtic players before he found space.

They also had a pretty effective press which we played right into their hands as well because we couldn't play more direct. It also meant we couldn't get Tav or Barisic in the game or our central midfielders.

When we were defending we were pretty lost as well because as soon as their full backs came into our final third one of their midfielders came out to support. This left our full back with a decision on who to take and it left our central midfielder with a choice as well: leave the full back 2 v 1 or leave the centre of the park a man down. There were a few ocassions in that first half were all the celtic full back had to do was play it across our 18 yard line were they always had a spare man.

So yes it worked really well but because it suited playing against our tactics yesterday in the first half.

As soon as we made the change to bring on Hagi it evened up the game. It meant with two widemen plus Morelos we could be more direct which nulified the celtic press and could turn them which the sending off is a perfect example.

Going to the 5 in midfield also meant we could play out because it gave us an extra body to pass to. We could double up down the wings against their sole full backs which left celtic with the same dilemma it left us in the first half; do celtic's midfield stick or twist? If they come out to help the full back it moves the whole diamond and left space for us centrally and we could move the ball to the other wing. 

The Hagi shot is a great example of this and there were another couple examples of us moving the ball and moving celtic's diamond in the 15 minutes before the red card. 

celtic played their "best" 45 minutes of the season according to the pundits and it took us that amount of time to nulify lennon's masterplan and for me it could have been done after 20 if it wasn't for the manager's trust in the players.

Do I fear other teams using the diamond against us? No

Do I want us to use the diamond? No and only because our game is about creating triangles whether we play one up top or two up top and it has been pretty effective.

 

[Camshy 812]

They played the best they had all season against us and we couldn't find a pass in that first half......was our worst all season statistically and they still couldn't beat us.

No the formation has major flaws, dont forget they also set out to target our full backs and try cripple our play, that didn't happen......

We crippled our play with the amount of turnovers in possession.

[NitshillBear 1,431]

I'm sure we must be working on ways to defeat a high press because it won't be the last time we face it this season. With less organised teams we can often pass around it but we do need something else. Midfield need to be constantly on the move to receive the ball from the back. We were too slow yesterday in the first half.

[five stars 1,636]

30 minutes ago, SIRB_72 said:

It worked in the first half because we were playing right into their hands: We were playing with two strikers who like to come deep rather than wide and we couldn't get Kent into the game because he was just coming into bodies as well, he had one run in the first half and had to go by six celtic players before he found space.

They also had a pretty effective press which we played right into their hands as well because we couldn't play more direct. It also meant we couldn't get Tav or Barisic in the game or our central midfielders.

When we were defending we were pretty lost as well because as soon as their full backs came into our final third one of their midfielders came out to support. This left our full back with a decision on who to take and it left our central midfielder with a choice as well: leave the full back 2 v 1 or leave the centre of the park a man down. There were a few ocassions in that first half were all the celtic full back had to do was play it across our 18 yard line were they always had a spare man.

So yes it worked really well but because it suited playing against our tactics yesterday in the first half.

As soon as we made the change to bring on Hagi it evened up the game. It meant with two widemen plus Morelos we could be more direct which nulified the celtic press and could turn them which the sending off is a perfect example.

Going to the 5 in midfield also meant we could play out because it gave us an extra body to pass to. We could double up down the wings against their sole full backs which left celtic with the same dilemma it left us in the first half; do celtic's midfield stick or twist? If they come out to help the full back it moves the whole diamond and left space for us centrally and we could move the ball to the other wing. 

The Hagi shot is a great example of this and there were another couple examples of us moving the ball and moving celtic's diamond in the 15 minutes before the red card. 

celtic played their "best" 45 minutes of the season according to the pundits and it took us that amount of time to nulify lennon's masterplan and for me it could have been done after 20 if it wasn't for the manager's trust in the players.

Do I fear other teams using the diamond against us? No

Do I want us to use the diamond? No and only because our game is about creating triangles whether we play one up top or two up top and it has been pretty effective.

 

They also played at a higher intensity in the first half, which is why their high press worked. But they were never going to be able to keep that up for 90 minutes.

Your right to point out that although they dominated the 1st half, the second half was even before the sending off.

[RFCRobertson 11,771]

It worked decent for about 20 odd minutes, past the griffiths chance they didnt have another shot on target the whole game and at that their shots on target were efforts from ranger. So its not like it helped them cut through our defence for proper chances

[NitshillBear 1,431]

5 minutes ago, RFCRobertson said:

It worked decent for about 20 odd minutes, past the griffiths chance they didnt have another shot on target the whole game and at that their shots on target were efforts from ranger. So its not like it helped them cut through our defence for proper chances

It stopped us doing much which I was more concerned about. If we were a bit more lively first half we could have played around them and exposed them high up the park.

[Bad Robot 21,141]

2 hours ago, sassaaaa said:

Had fuck all to with a diamond or any other formation , they wanted it right from the start. We thought we just had to turn up.....

they were like a cornered animal who only had one direction to go and that was forward to try get a goal but we’re exterminated like the 🐀 🐀 🐀  that they are 👏🏻👏🏻🇬🇧🇬🇧💙💙😂😂

[five stars 1,636]

I think teams are finding better ways of playing against us as they get used to the tweaks in our system since last season.

St Mirren stopped our full back getting forward for the majority of the 2 games, other teams will follow suit.

Our front 3 need to be more effective at finding space and making intelligence runs in behind and down the wings. It may be our full backs also have to start from a deep position as we build our attacks.

[RFCRobertson 11,771]

20 minutes ago, NitshillBear said:

It stopped us doing much which I was more concerned about. If we were a bit more lively first half we could have played around them and exposed them high up the park.

Same time we adjusted to it 2nd half and even before the sending off we were stsrting to get a foothold while still holding them off. Football can be a game of two halfs however i wasn't optimistic at the time but looking back I think we still wouldve snuck a 1-0 win. 

[hammer93 15,056]

This myth that the tarriers are peddling that they battered us for an hour....the last save McGregor made in that hour battering came in the 21st minute from the thumb....McGregor had a decent effort other that that all their other attempts were woefully high and wide of the target.....I know we didn't create too many chances but if you look at the ones we did carve out....Morelos in the first and second half, you could argue both were well on target but got blocked....with barkas in goals those are the kind of efforts that end up in the back of the net....Goldson should have scored when he failed to connect 4 yards out, Hagi and Itten both had decent efforts and Borna had a good free kick deflected over(the corner led to the goal) that is supposedly them dominating the game and we were shite!!!

[SIRB_72 3,987]

49 minutes ago, five stars said:

They also played at a higher intensity in the first half, which is why their high press worked. But they were never going to be able to keep that up for 90 minutes.

Your right to point out that although they dominated the 1st half, the second half was even before the sending off.

That's another issue with the diamond, in general, you're really asking 6 players (the full backs and the diamond) to do a shit ton of work!

[BlueKnight87 17,281]

I thought with them playing the diamond we would run over them in the wide areas but they kept us from playing. They were all over us when we tried to play out short from the back. We got more joy once we went longer.

They'll peddle the narrative they were on top until the red card. But after that Griffiths chance they didn't make mcgregor work. Once we scored it was only going one way and they knew it. 

[Bigdave30 8,698]

It broke my heart when I seen how effective their formation was against ours.

It broke their heart when their captain chucked the baw in their net 😂

[Bigdave30 8,698]

3 minutes ago, BlueKnight87 said:

I thought with them playing the diamond we would run over them in the wide areas but they kept us from playing. They were all over us when we tried to play out short from the back. We got more joy once we went longer.

They'll peddle the narrative they were on top until the red card. But after that Griffiths chance they didn't make mcgregor work. Once we scored it was only going one way and they knew it. 

The press and intensity they played with stifled us, on the bright side  they played at their best and got absolutely fuck all 😁

[RangersMedia 35,961]

2 hours ago, ScottBF2 said:

When playing a team that tries to dictate as they did we need Ryan Jack in there to shield the fullbacks as they advance, he or Arfield are brilliant at that sort of lateral defensive positioning that gives Tav and Borna licence to roam.

 

Them putting out a DM and giving him an almost Makelele Role meant they could do that while he also picked up our advancing full back as their back 4 settled. What we did better in the second half was push both full backs up which pinned their back 4 and meant Soro had to sit central. If we had Arfield available yesterday he’d have played a lot of the second half sitting behind Soro which would’ve allowed Tav and Borna as much freedom as they wanted. 
 
im off to rewatch the game now anyway, always find the second viewing is better to pick things up, nervous as fuck at first showing.

What we also failed to do, with the front 3, was offer any sort of movement down wide areas to try and pin their full backs back then resorted to our playing out of the keeper versus their high press and very little options. 

They squeezed the space well. Listening to Gerrard's post-match interview, he clearly wasn't happy with the front 3 in that 1st half, when Hagi came on it was much, much better and tbf when Itten came on for the last 15 mins he also looked so much more 'on it' than Alfredo. 

[They Gnu 11,553]

2 minutes ago, psb07158 said:

What we also failed to do, with the front 3, was offer any sort of movement down wide areas to try and pin their full backs back then resorted to our playing out of the keeper versus their high press and very little options. 

They squeezed the space well. Listening to Gerrard's post-match interview, he clearly wasn't happy with the front 3 in that 1st half, when Hagi came on it was much, much better and tbf when Itten came on for the last 15 mins he also looked so much more 'on it' than Alfredo. 

I think Itten’s show enough to merit a start. 

[Smile 26,600]

Can we change the thread heading to The Cubic zirconia no worky