Dean Smith - Confirmed

[cdbearsfan]

Important to remember that football isn't netball. It's a dynamic game - you can have three 'centre backs', but there's a world of difference between sticking them on the 18 yard line and telling two of them to push up into midfield, releasing your midfielders to charge forward if, as the plan is meant to work, you win the ball. Won't work against everyone, but it was a very good idea. Shame about Lukaku.

It was a dreadful idea. Three centre halves playing against one forward and he still scores twice. Woeful. Let's never try that nonsense again.

[brontebilly]

I just think the decent performance was because we played with a proper midfield 3, and it suited all of Luiz, McGinn and Ramey in a way that 4-2-3-1 doesn't. Also, the 5-3-2 absolutely didn't bring out the best in Ings at all, he was really poor. Surely a proper 4-3-3 would be the best of both worlds?

Martinez
Cash Konsa Mings Targett
McGinn/Buendia Ramsey Luiz
Buendia/Watkins Watkins/Ings Bailey

Lots of nice options there.

Watkins/Ings won't work in a 433 and shoving Watkins to the wing takes away a lot of his best attributes. Is Buendia really a wide man or off the striker/10 ? The benefit of the three in midfield that it should give a bit more licence to the likes of Buendia/Traore/Bailey/AEG to stay further forward.

[Risso]

I just think the decent performance was because we played with a proper midfield 3, and it suited all of Luiz, McGinn and Ramey in a way that 4-2-3-1 doesn't. Also, the 5-3-2 absolutely didn't bring out the best in Ings at all, he was really poor. Surely a proper 4-3-3 would be the best of both worlds?

Martinez
Cash Konsa Mings Targett
McGinn/Buendia Ramsey Luiz
Buendia/Watkins Watkins/Ings Bailey

Lots of nice options there.

Watkins/Ings won't work in a 433 and shoving Watkins to the wing takes away a lot of his best attributes. Is Buendia really a wide man or off the striker/10 ? The benefit of the three in midfield that it should give a bit more licence to the likes of Buendia/Traore/Bailey/AEG to stay further forward.

4-3-3 doesn't really involve out and out wingers if played properly, like Liverpool do.

[Dante Lavelli]

I just think the decent performance was because we played with a proper midfield 3, and it suited all of Luiz, McGinn and Ramey in a way that 4-2-3-1 doesn't. Also, the 5-3-2 absolutely didn't bring out the best in Ings at all, he was really poor. Surely a proper 4-3-3 would be the best of both worlds?

Martinez
Cash Konsa Mings Targett
McGinn/Buendia Ramsey Luiz
Buendia/Watkins Watkins/Ings Bailey

Lots of nice options there.

I’m not against 3 at the back - generally - but agree with Risso that it doesn’t naturally suit us.  IMO the three in midfield were the catalyst for a decent performance.  The athleticism of the three often created overloads but too frequently Mings marauding forward was the beneficiary of the space whereas in a 433 you’d hope Bailey/Traore would be the guys to benefit.

[Flin5tone]

Everton looked frightening tonight and Rafa really has them playing well. We need to be on the ball Saturday and any stupid mistakes will be punished. If we lose this one it's a really bad start to the season so it's becoming a must win, already. let's hope we're up to the challenge .

[Monty]

Important to remember that football isn't netball. It's a dynamic game - you can have three 'centre backs', but there's a world of difference between sticking them on the 18 yard line and telling two of them to push up into midfield, releasing your midfielders to charge forward if, as the plan is meant to work, you win the ball. Won't work against everyone, but it was a very good idea. Shame about Lukaku.

It was a dreadful idea. Three centre halves playing against one forward and he still scores twice. Woeful. Let's never try that nonsense again.

Too simplistic. Not about man matchups, this isn't the pub leagues. Lukaku got away the first time because they beat our press and scored his second once we'd actually changed formation. It wasn't '5 at the back' like in the 80s and 90s with Matthias Sammer standing on the penalty spot, hacking the ball grimly into the stands. At times the 'formation' was more like 1-5-4. It's all about intent, what you make of the situation. You can argue a different system would've been better, but this anti 3 cbs thing gets just a little blindly ideological at times, and not really based on evidence.

[cdbearsfan]

You're somewhat condescending to anyone who opposes five at the back lately, mate. "Blindly ideological", indeed. I watched the game. I saw our three centre halves fail to deal with Lukaku, and us wasting a position on the pitch that could have been used by a player who might have created or scored a goal.

[Monty]

Ah, well, I'm sorry mate, don't mean to be (but who does I guess!). I suppose it's a reaction to something, probably the feeling that I try to make some point and I don't find it argued against, but just kind of ignored with something flippant like 'play a proper formation' or some such, and it can get a bit wearing.

It's not like I'm a fanatical partisan of the 3 CBs thing. Usually, like with England, it is either needlessly defensive or conceding inferiority. However, given that someone as madly attacking as Bielsa is committed to a version of it, it shows that the system isn't just a bus-parking exercise, right? And if our wide CBs average position 1st half was literally central midfield - an area we created all our chances from by dominating in numbers and winning the ball high up - it doesn't suggest to me that the system was entirely meritless.

Like I say, not a partisan. I just think it's true that football is fast and chaotic, and the difference between defence and attack isn't one of position all the time. To attack with the ball you have to win it, and I liked our plan for winning it in dangerous areas. I don't think these points are daft, and I'd quite like it if someone replying to me actually replied to them, rather than asserting something off to the side without really addressing them.

[Flin5tone]

If we get beat by Everton and then head into the Man Utd game with only a single win in Five games I think it's going to be Dean's biggest challenge so far to overcome this dreadful start to the season.it really does feel like a Must Win with the tough fixtures we have coming up. Watford and Brentford are games we desperately needed to take maximum points from .

[Percy McCarthy]

I'd be willing to bet money that we'll go back to a 4-3-3 or 4-2-2-2 against Everton. The 3-5-2 was a specific plan for Chelsea, and from Dean's comments he seems to be especially happy about the variety of tactical options we have.

we might have a variety but when something works as well as your saying it did on Saturday,
you know all your heat maps and stuff proving it was an attacking imaginative formation only failing because they had Lakaku,
 then why on earth would you change it unless of coarse you've just talked a load of bollocks over the last two days

Do you know how to talk to people without coming across like a really strange and angry person? As I said, it's horses for courses, you change tactics to try and beat different teams. Not that hard.

Sorry i'm not really having a go at you Monty
for what its worth your one of my favourite posters on here i always find your contribution interesting and educating (not trying to be being funny here its the truth)

my hobby horse (as Horse is the word at the moment) is the 5 man defence and how people dress it up as something that its not
so apologies again, but in fairness you are right i am a bit strange

I haven’t read much criticism from you of Chelsea doing it.

[ozzjim]

3-4-3 and 3-5-2 have worked for several teams, and there were signs of promise in it the other night, but for me we are better suited to 4-3-3. The key will be giving Bert or Bailey free reign to drift in behind Ollie.

I do think though you look at how quickly, on a very small summer budget, Benitez has got Everton firing, and it shows you what the top managers can do. For me Smith is short of that level. Tuchel made changes at half time that contained us and we looked half as threatening. Benitez changed shape last night and changed the game from 1-0 down. The top managers have ways to change the course of games that in don't have confidence in Smith doing. Lose at the weekend, the Spurs game becomes a pretty big one very early in the season. Get to 9-10  games in on 5-6 points we are in a relegation battle.

[Sexual Ealing]

3-4-3 and 3-5-2 have worked for several teams, and there were signs of promise in it the other night, but for me we are better suited to 4-3-3. The key will be giving Bert or Bailey free reign to drift in behind Ollie.

I do think though you look at how quickly, on a very small summer budget, Benitez has got Everton firing, and it shows you what the top managers can do. For me Smith is short of that level. Tuchel made changes at half time that contained us and we looked half as threatening. Benitez changed shape last night and changed the game from 1-0 down. The top managers have ways to change the course of games that in don't have confidence in Smith doing. Lose at the weekend, the Spurs game becomes a pretty big one very early in the season. Get to 9-10  games in on 5-6 points we are in a relegation battle.

Benitez is a fair comparison, and I'd hate to have him here. Tuchel isn't, because the squad he has to choose from is nothing like we'll ever have.

[Sexual Ealing]

I haven't watched it yet, but there's an interview with him here. Graham Hunter is good normally.
https://grahamhunter.tv/

[ozzjim]

3-4-3 and 3-5-2 have worked for several teams, and there were signs of promise in it the other night, but for me we are better suited to 4-3-3. The key will be giving Bert or Bailey free reign to drift in behind Ollie.

I do think though you look at how quickly, on a very small summer budget, Benitez has got Everton firing, and it shows you what the top managers can do. For me Smith is short of that level. Tuchel made changes at half time that contained us and we looked half as threatening. Benitez changed shape last night and changed the game from 1-0 down. The top managers have ways to change the course of games that in don't have confidence in Smith doing. Lose at the weekend, the Spurs game becomes a pretty big one very early in the season. Get to 9-10  games in on 5-6 points we are in a relegation battle.

Benitez is a fair comparison, and I'd hate to have him here. Tuchel isn't, because the squad he has to choose from is nothing like we'll ever have.

It will be interesting to see where we finish in comparison to Everton this season. They scaled back the spending a lot this summer and bought in a very tactically astute manager.

Agreed on the squad with Chelsea, it was more the tactical awareness with Tuchel. A fair few times since promotion Smith has got the first half right, only to be out manoeuvred in game by his opposite number.

[sickbeggar]

I'm with Monty. The 1st half against Chelsea was the best we've played this season and a lot of last as well. I'm not expecting Smith to stick with it, though I did have a thought yesterday - Why would ManU let Axel come to us as basically cover? Surely you'd want him playing regularly at this stage of his career. Obviously the argument against that is we only have Hause to cover with 3 at the back.


Anyway, looking at Everton last night, they're not going to be a push over. I just hope he doesn't go back to 4-2-3-1 or any variant of the ratboy formation because he really needs a result against this lot or the table will start to look a bit worrying with ManU and Spurs coming up.