Nathan Baker - Sold

[robbo1874]

Out of our current squad, my first choice pairing would be Clark and Okore

[N'ZMAV]

Clark and Okore in CB. Richards as RB and Amavi as LB. Job's a good 'un.

[RussellC]

The problem with Clark and Okore together is that neither of them seem to have the ability to organise, which is a crucial role for one of the centre-backs. I know they had a few decentish games together last season, but they were also the centre-back pairing that looked completely out of its depth away at Arsenal and Hull.

I think I'd be tempted to give the back 3 a go again tomorrow night, but trying Ilori as a sweeper behind Clark and Richards.

[cdbearsfan]

Noooooooooooooo! I hate back threes!

[Mortimer's Bear]

Clark and Okore in CB. Richards as RB and Amavi as LB. Job's a good 'un.

This. Nothing more to see here...

[hipkiss92]

I thought Clark looked like the only defender capable of organising a defence last season, the issue came when Vlaar turned up alongside him and would just do his own thing instead.

[andyaston]

Clark and Okore in CB. Richards as RB and Amavi as LB. Job's a good 'un.

This. Nothing more to see here...

Spot on. Okore and Clarke are left and right footed and played well together. Richards would be better out right and Amavi has potential and probably would not of got knackered like Richardson on Saturday. Actually barring Richards, our back four on Saturday looked like the over 35s league.

[PeterWithesShin]

Which is some achievement as the other 3 are 30, 31 and 33. I actually have no problem with Hutton at RB.

As for Baker, I like him but he does seem to be one of those players that will always be cursed with injury.

[Dave]

I think I'd be tempted to give the back 3 a go again tomorrow night, but trying Ilori as a sweeper behind Clark and Richards.

No offence Russell, but that is a really bad idea.

It's not an accident that nobody has really used a sweeper for around 25 years - it would be defensive suicide. Three at the back would be bad enough when playing against a 4-3-3 like Southampton tend to use, but a sweeper as well? It would make last years 6-1 look like a close match.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

I think I'd be tempted to give the back 3 a go again tomorrow night, but trying Ilori as a sweeper behind Clark and Richards.

No offence Russell, but that is a really bad idea.

It's not an accident that nobody has really used a sweeper for around 25 years - it would be defensive suicide. Three at the back would be bad enough when playing against a 4-3-3 like Southampton tend to use, but a sweeper as well? It would make last years 6-1 look like a close match.

I kind of see the logic. Not since Crocodile Dundee have I seen somebody go on a bigger walkabout than Richards. His positional sense in the centre of our defence is shocking. A sweeper to clear up his rubbish would make sense. I'm sure Alan Hutton would be delighted.

[RussellC]

I think I'd be tempted to give the back 3 a go again tomorrow night, but trying Ilori as a sweeper behind Clark and Richards.

No offence Russell, but that is a really bad idea.

It's not an accident that nobody has really used a sweeper for around 25 years - it would be defensive suicide. Three at the back would be bad enough when playing against a 4-3-3 like Southampton tend to use, but a sweeper as well? It would make last years 6-1 look like a close match.

I'm not offended that you have a different opinion Dave.

To my mind, whoever plays centrally within a back 3 is acting as a sweeper, with the 2 players either side of them picking-up the striker/s. Given the personnel that we have at our disposal, and the performances that we've seen from our chosen back 4s this season I think tonight would present a good opportunity to try this system again. I also think that it if we're going to persist with trying to play out from the back, having somebody like Ilori who would is decent in possession of the ball would be a big help.

[Dave]

I think I'd be tempted to give the back 3 a go again tomorrow night, but trying Ilori as a sweeper behind Clark and Richards.

No offence Russell, but that is a really bad idea.

It's not an accident that nobody has really used a sweeper for around 25 years - it would be defensive suicide. Three at the back would be bad enough when playing against a 4-3-3 like Southampton tend to use, but a sweeper as well? It would make last years 6-1 look like a close match.

I'm not offended that you have a different opinion Dave.

To my mind, whoever plays centrally within a back 3 is acting as a sweeper, with the 2 players either side of them picking-up the striker/s. Given the personnel that we have at our disposal, and the performances that we've seen from our chosen back 4s this season I think tonight would present a good opportunity to try this system again. I also think that it if we're going to persist with trying to play out from the back, having somebody like Ilori who would is decent in possession of the ball would be a big help.

There's nothing wrong with that - it just wouldn't work tonight.

Southampton play three fairly centrally with Pelle as a lone striker and two wider forwards - if we have three centre-backs, you end up with the two either side being dragged out of position to cover the wide forwards - they get drawn towards the ball meaning you then sacrifice the space that they should be occupying. You end up overloading areas of the pitch that you shouldn't be. Especially when our defence has looked shall we say, "positionally indisciplined" this season.

If we were playing a team who played with wingers and two strikers then great, give it a bash. But the way that Southampton play is the textbook way to make three at the back look very bad indeed.

[RussellC]

It’s not paper, scissors, stone though. 4-3-3 doesn’t exclusively beat 3-5-2, but lose to 4-4-2. We have to find a formation that best utilises the players we have and has as much of an emphasis of causing the opposition problems as it does containing them. We’ve looked poor defensively in a back 4 all season (albeit with 45 minutes of a back 3), so- to my mind – need to try something else. To me Richards lacks the positional play to excel in a back 4 and Lescott lacks the mobility to play in a back 3, hence my suggestion to switch formation and players.  A 3-5-2 would also mean playing with 2 holding midfielders, one of whom (ideally Sanchez) is able to drop back and help out the centre-backs. 

I’ve seen nothing so far this season to suggest that we’d be any less vulnerable (or effective going forward) by sticking to a 4-4-2.

[rougegorge]

Apologies if this appeared on another thread, but I took the chance earlier on to try and get myself used to Channel 5's football league show and the prospect of 30 second Villa highlights.

Anyway Baker came up with a couple of great rash 'bull in a china shop' challenges to get a well earned red card that helped contribute to Bristol City's defeat
Apparently the opposing manager was pleased: "I thought my team were excellent from start to finish."

[aj2k77]

Another defender who is a mistake waiting to happen. Get rid asap.