3 at the back

[Japhet]

does not really change much in our attacking options.

When we play 4, Rose and Walker still push up to provide width. If anything, it hurts our attack, because now we have 3 in the back, plus Wanyama who are not part of the attack.

It allows players like Vertonghen and Alderweireld to bring the ball out from the back which forces the opposition to challenge. In those cases it gives us another player moving into midfield and occasionally into attack without compromising the back line to any great extent. I don't see how it hurts our attack.

 

[knowlespurs]

suits what we have, means a lot of players can play in their natural positions

 

[mill]

I think we could see it more in the modern game, CB's tend to have to be better on the ball now as a requisite. In city's recent bad run pep was trying it with no wing backs and got a bit found out,imo, he could do it at Bayern but pl is more competitive,imo, but in future I could see it becoming more common place

 

[monkeynick]

I was thinking before today that we are suited for this system. It frees up Dembele, Lamela, and Dele. With the width that Walks and Danny gives us, will also bring goals and flexibility.

Is there a honours degree in hindsight rating?

 

[Hercules]

Is there a honours degree in hindsight rating?

Huh

 

[millsey]

Don't see why it's viewed as a negative formation. Simply the fullbacks have to work there ass off but gives you good options going fwrd and numbers back when we defend. Dier could play the centre and being the ball out like a sweeper of the old days.

 

[Tucker]

Wasn't about before the game, but was glad to see Poch try something new. Seemed to work too. Bet this place was in melt down wasn't it?

 

[onthetwo]

Do people actually believe this? We looked just as bad going forward.

Too reliant on our back line to build up play.

Playing it back constantly.

A middle pairing that never looks likely to click (Dembele/Wanyama).

We have completely lost the ability to utilize the middle of the pitch. Our build up is either long ball or through the FBs. People hating on Walker vs Bayer because he was our talisman in attack and today again, our build up was solely built up via Rose or Walker sans Dembele's trot forward.

Sorry, you don't think we passed the ball out better from the back today than on Wednesday?

 

[Cravenspurs]

Sorry, you don't think we passed the ball out better from the back today than on Wednesday?

No, I think we played out of the back far too often and the attack was either launched via a long ball and loose ball win or via the fullbacks.

 

[am_yisrael_chai]

I don't think formation is our problem, speed of forward passing, off the ball movement, precision in passing, dribbling and finishing are our issues and remain so whatever formation we play.

 

[michaelden]

read the title ad thought i'd see this as the 1st reply...

 

[nicdic]

I'm not sure I liked the system how we used it yesterday.

I feel our 4-2-3-1 from last year provides the same benefits we saw yesterday but gives us more everywhere else too.

Felt we got overrun in the middle at times, with two upfront we had less players in the middle to press. And realistically ended up with three not tracking back very often. Eriksen ran around a lot, but didn't do much to stop Arsenal coming through us.

The 4-2-3-1 with Dier/Wanyama dropping in to make a three at times gives all the flexibility we need in my opinion. Don't see the need to have three back when we don't need them. The benefit of Toby and Jan is they split like the outside CBs in a three when playing as a two.

Playing a 3 at the back doesn't free anyone up going forward, but it does put a more defensive onus on at least one player.

We had the best defensive record this year and last playing the 4-2-3-1, see no need for 3.

 

[Bulletspur]

Is there a honours degree in hindsight rating?

How is it hindsight when he said that "he was thinking before today"?

 

[Damian99]

Think we looked very solid over the whole 90 minutes, the commentators were sucking each other off when Arsenal had what was no more than 10 minutes in which they (we) scored from, towards the end of the second half. But at no time can i ever remember Lloris making any real notable saves.

I also though Wimmer looked very good throughout the game and no blame at all for the goal, not really fully sure of the offside law these days and in fact i am not sure the fucking officials do - The were offside and surely the flag would have been raised had Wimmer not go to it first? So surely it should have gone up anyway in that case??

We just need to up our attacking approach play 10/15% and hope Kane stays fit and finds some form - or we may have to win the league the hard way this season, like those bummers did in the days of George Graham and win 1-0 every week.

 

[For the love of Spurs]

I'm not sure I liked the system how we used it yesterday.

I feel our 4-2-3-1 from last year provides the same benefits we saw yesterday but gives us more everywhere else too.

Felt we got overrun in the middle at times, with two upfront we had less players in the middle to press. And realistically ended up with three not tracking back very often. Eriksen ran around a lot, but didn't do much to stop Arsenal coming through us.

The 4-2-3-1 with Dier/Wanyama dropping in to make a three at times gives all the flexibility we need in my opinion. Don't see the need to have three back when we don't need them. The benefit of Toby and Jan is they split like the outside CBs in a three when playing as a two.

Playing a 3 at the back doesn't free anyone up going forward, but it does put a more defensive onus on at least one player.

We had the best defensive record this year and last playing the 4-2-3-1, see no need for 3.

Yes but it does allow our full backs more room to go forward, allows us to play two up front even if one is a wide forward like Son, I felt in the second half yesterday we looked like scoring and I have not said that for a good few games.

Admittley it puts more pressure on our DM but we have Waynama and Dembele who ain't bad to say the least. Personally I just felt we looked balanced yesterday against a very good side, that's not to say it's a better formation just it really suited our players IMO.

 

[14/04/91]

Could use sissoko as a wing back in this formation why not try him out there!

I'd have serious concerns about his discipline as a wing back.
Plus we already have 2 Taylor made right wing backs in Walker & trippier.

 

[SEANSPURS1975]

Like the look of this team...

 

[DJS]

We could play 3-5-2 and actually play with a strike partnership... *dribbles slightly*

Lloris

Dier Alderweireld Vetonghen

Walker Wanyama Eriksen (or Lamela) Dembele Rose

Kane Son (or Janssen)


I've gone all Glen Hoddle!

Underrated formation, England used it to excellent effect under Hoddle and played so cracking football and it serves Italian national team and Juventus well...

 

[mattie g]

I don't think formation is our problem, speed of forward passing, off the ball movement, precision in passing, dribbling and finishing are our issues and remain so whatever formation we play.

One thing that pisses me off to no end is when we're moving forward - even if not on the break - and a pass doesn't get played into a player's stride. It can completely kill the momentum of the attack, and in a team like ours that relies heavily on quick transition to the attack, we too often get slowed up by mistiming/misfiring of passes.

This has nothing to do with three at the back, of course, so...I like the decision to go with that formation yesterday since it played to the strengths of the team we had available. I wouldn't want it every game - we've looked so solid with four at the back, so there's no need - but as a tactical change against certain opponents, I'm more than happy with it.

 

[Cravenspurs]

I don't think formation is our problem, speed of forward passing, off the ball movement, precision in passing, dribbling and finishing are our issues and remain so whatever formation we play.

I'm not sure I liked the system how we used it yesterday.

I feel our 4-2-3-1 from last year provides the same benefits we saw yesterday but gives us more everywhere else too.

Felt we got overrun in the middle at times, with two upfront we had less players in the middle to press. And realistically ended up with three not tracking back very often. Eriksen ran around a lot, but didn't do much to stop Arsenal coming through us.

The 4-2-3-1 with Dier/Wanyama dropping in to make a three at times gives all the flexibility we need in my opinion. Don't see the need to have three back when we don't need them. The benefit of Toby and Jan is they split like the outside CBs in a three when playing as a two.

Playing a 3 at the back doesn't free anyone up going forward, but it does put a more defensive onus on at least one player.

We had the best defensive record this year and last playing the 4-2-3-1, see no need for 3.

These guys get it.

First off formations are non sense as they change in offense and in defense.

Yesterday on offense we played with 3 at the back while when on defense it was damn near 5 at the back.


But offensively, where we are having problems, is nothing new.

Last year we played with a 3 at the back when going forward. Our FBs were WBs essentially. Dier dropped back helping form a back three. Dembele would drop deep to accept the ball and push it forward.

The only difference being we substituted an offensive minded person for a defensive minded person and thus we looked even more inept on the pitch. With Dele off and Wanyama on, the middle of the pitch was lost offensively. If Dele or Winks is on the pitch you see the damn near exact setup we played last year offensively.