Line up and formation for 2021-22

[Abbeyfealeavfc]

The "return of Bailey"
The guy has barely featured!

[adrenachrome]

The "return of Bailey"
The guy has barely featured!

I take your point, he has been notable largely by his absence.

Let us fervently hope that all our new signings and injured star layers will feature soon.

[Abbeyfealeavfc]

The "return of Bailey"
The guy has barely featured!

I take your point, he has been notable largely by his absence.

Let us fervently hope that all our new signings and injured star layers will feature soon.

"Star layers" that sounds interesting!

[SoccerHQ]

So then 3-5-2.....

Someone go check on CDBW to see if he's still breathing. Thought there was huge potential with how we played first half and seems most logical way of getting the best out of what we have this season.

For instance you could drop Bailey in the front two alongside Ollie for some games, Buendia could also float around there and McGinn is also way better playing as advanced midfield than being some deep sitting one.

Mings could make that mistake if we played a 2-2-8 so formation dosen't matter when you make that sort of error and it killed the game for us.

We conceded three goals playing a back 4 just three weeks ago after all.

Would like to see us stick with it for a few weeks and see what happens as likes of Everton and Spurs could well play it v us.

[sickbeggar]

Agreed. I thought it worked well.

[chrisw1]

Whilst it worked ok in a tricky game it's not for me.  Our most creative players Bailey, Buendia and Traore are all wingers so picking a formation where our width comes from two decent but not exceptional fullbacks and marginalises these thress doesn't make any sense to me.

I just feel Smith has to bit ethe bullet and accept that one of Watkins or Ings will have to start on the bench.

The more I see Ramsey, the more he demands a place.  For me our best starting 11 has to be

             Martinez,
Cash, Konsa, Mings, Targett,
   McGinn Luiz, Ramsey
 Buendia, Watkins, Bailey

You've then got Ings, Traore, El Ghazi, Chuck, Bidace who can all add something as positve subs.  Tuanzebe Sanson & Nakamba to tighten things up / step in for injuries.

Whatever formation keeping Luiz fit and in form is absolutely vital.
   

[Footy-Vill]

I've liked the 3 at the back Vs Chelsea and it worked for a time Vs Everton but I feel Matt Targett isn't right for a left wing back role.
He's been lacking in both the athletics to get up and down the pitch as well as effective and impactful aggresive attacking play.  To be frank I've found him woeful.

I also feel the service in such reliance on wing backs is being ill judged as greatly reliance doesn't aid to the strengths of Watkins and in particular Dan Ings. Because the service has to be better.

Matty Cash has shown much improvement culminating in a goal Vs Everton in league and great provider of goal for Archers header . Targett struggles to delivery the same.
I think I rather Ashley Young as a wing back than target or even an up and coming player

Overall though with all players fit a system that suits Ings and Watkins and not this reliance on the wing backs to be are chief creators .
I don't think this was plan with our summer signings and Smith has seemed to stumble across it. A revert to a wide attack or general 4-1-3-2 or 4-2-3-1 fluid formation is perhaps long term though with an ability to start some matches with 3 central defenders

[Footy-Vill]

I just saw that our 2 strikers are isolated or have to go out wide in isolation without the support of a winger and in search of the ball. Vs Everton -Even saw Ings chasing all way back as one sort of defender. That's not on for me he's not needed there and only exhaust him. That was because Cash went flying up the field.

Vs Everton What we saw perfectly was villa improved the minutes Target came off the pitch it suited more to play with the style however he only came off as he was injured

I much enjoyed some of the football Dean is providing us these last 3 matches(2 Chelsea 1 Everton) and in many respects I feel all 3 could have been victories.
Some of that play because of the system but some of the reason we weren't scoring or creating because of the system

It's now where do Villa want to go with this does Smith keep this wing back because we won?

[Footy-Vill]

I like to think the 3 at the back and rest of formation is a little more flexible when moving forward for the sake of the front two and the services and opportunities.

Its not that Villa are simply functional in this 3-5-2 type system but it does lack the goals and creating chances rests a lot with the wing backs movement and service and then whatever the two strikers can do as the only real players who can get goals from open play.

No offence to McGinn, Ramsey and Douglas!

At the moment there is a reliance in some ways on the set plays and although I'm more than satisfied that we're playing on the front foot and in opponents half it's both the personnel and in some ways the formation  that not allowing Ings especially to get any decent service or sight of goal

I think that system could win or go close in tournaments like how Italy used it and England have and funny we didn't use it in the League Cup at Chelsea.

Yes we create chances and very good ones but i wonder  , Traore,  Bailey and AEG fit into that current system of playing vs Man Utd.

CC , Sanson and Buendia could play in the 3 in the middle but at the moment our attacking flair players are ultimately being left out

Ings in particular up front has now had to chase back covering matty cash sometimes and works him self so hard real tireless as does Watkins. I would just like to see more flexibility in coming matches to feature our strikers yet still have enjoyed the Dean Smith philosophy of front foot football despite lack of action for our strikers.

I hope that makes sense.

[chrisw1]

What is your thinking about formation now?

There's no denying 3/5 at the back has seen some good performances against strong teams, but it's still a formation I don't particulalrly like.  I feel we have almost stumbled accross it in an attempt to accommodate both Watkins and Ings up front.

I can't complain, it's delivered wins against against Everton and Man U.  But I hope we see it as a tool to be used when needed and not our go shape in the long term.  I want to see the likes of Traore, Bailey and Buendia starting regularly, not just as impact subs.

I'm sure we'll stick with it against Spurs, but for me the sweet spot would still be 4-3-3.

What do you think?

[Drummond]

It's horses for courses in my view.

We can play 3-5-2, 4-3-3, 3-4-3, 4-3-1-2 etc etc.

I think it's more difficult when Bailey becomes fit, because let's face it, from what we've seen so far, he has to start.

[cdbearsfan]

The central defenders have done so well that they've convinced me, in spite of my previous support for four at the back. We don't need to have two centre halves after all, we can get away with one.

Would go with a 1-3-3-3 formation.

Martinez (rush goalie)

Mings

McGinn
Luiz
J Ramsey

Bailey
Buendia
Traore

Ings
Archer
Watkins

[stevo_st]

I'd have Konsa as the back 1

[Monty]

The line up against Spurs will be interesting. Arsenal murdered them with 4-2-3-1, but their midfielders were Partey, proper physical and energetic, and Xhaka, who had his obligatory good game in five. I'd like to see us go 4-3-3 for it, but I don't see Deano changing much.

[tomd2103]

What is your thinking about formation now?

There's no denying 3/5 at the back has seen some good performances against strong teams, but it's still a formation I don't particulalrly like.  I feel we have almost stumbled accross it in an attempt to accommodate both Watkins and Ings up front.

I can't complain, it's delivered wins against against Everton and Man U.  But I hope we see it as a tool to be used when needed and not our go shape in the long term.  I want to see the likes of Traore, Bailey and Buendia starting regularly, not just as impact subs.

I'm sure we'll stick with it against Spurs, but for me the sweet spot would still be 4-3-3.

What do you think?

Agree that it was a formation that was probably put together as a way of getting Watkins and Ings up front together.  To be honest, I think it is a formation we have looked comfortable and it suits a lot of our players.