Jump to content
cambridgeshire canary

Farke talks about playing 5 at the back

Recommended Posts

I would rather him tinker with the system this way rather than with his selections. He's beginning to remind me of Tinkerman Neil when he was under similar pressure; in-out, in-out, shake it all about  etc.

Changing to a back five might remove a few cobwebs, invigorate moral and may well benefit results ... can but try.

Re-start from a new base, so to speak.

Edited by BroadstairsR

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Short term it may help. I hope if it is seen in the league for a few games, we may see cantwell/dowell/tzolis tried as one in the centre '3'. I just dont want to see us go to defensive. And I think one of those three could make transition quickly so as to bring the wing backs and midfield out 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m not convinced this is some magic bullet personally. 

3 at the back doesn’t stop individual errors or our midfield being carved through like they are barely there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Kabak looks capable of driving out of defence more so than any CB we've had in the last few years, so so giving us that extra CB offers another option when playing out from the back.

I'd be very happy to see that as a formation. Definitely have the players to make it work with Giannoulis/Williams and Max given extra support too. Pace in Sargent/Rashica on counter, capable of tucking in and letting the wingbacks overlap. I think it naturally works looking at the balance of the squad when fit too.

Krul

Omo Kabak Hanley/Gibson

Max                                    Gia/Will

Normann/Gilmour McClean/Rupp/Lees Melou

Sargent/Cantwell/Dowell         Rashica/Cantwell/Tzolis

Pukki

Edited by Thumbbass

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

I’m not convinced this is some magic bullet personally. 

3 at the back doesn’t stop individual errors or our midfield being carved through like they are barely there.

Individual errors often derive from pressure ,if the defense is constantly exposed for example.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not convinced even with 10 at the back he has much idea about keeping a clean sheet in the premier league 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not as sold on this idea as many on here seem to be.

I tend to agree with Farke that the goals we have conceded are not due to 'overload' in the box so it's not the number of defenders that is the issue.

Rather than playing 3 centre backs, I'd be happier with two who really know their job and are capable of doing it to a premier league standard for the full 90 minutes!!! I'm not yet 100% sure we have 2 who can do that... let alone 3!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you read the article, it is clear he knows what he is doing and that he has a handle on what to do to tighten us up at the back - too many people getting too far forwards too soon.  In a 433 that is always a danger - and with the new players not quite in tune yet with the way we want to play, it is clear this needs to be addressed.  

Three CBs at the back is common sense as it can easily move to a four or five man defence when needed and one of the three CBs can step forwards when appropriate and play of a more defensive midfield role - as Omobamidele did in pre-season games quite a lot.

I wonder if we'll see that tonight......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MORDENCANARY said:

Individual errors often derive from pressure ,if the defense is constantly exposed for example.

Agree, just not sure 3 at the back is the answer. The pressure appears to be across the pitch not just at the back. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

Agree, just not sure 3 at the back is the answer. The pressure appears to be across the pitch not just at the back. 

I think 3 at the back is a must if you have attacking fullbacks. Sure Barcelona (under Pep), Pool, Man City can play a back 4 and 2 attacking fullbacks. But they much better at retaining the ball, with 2 world class centre backs and typical a holding midfielder who can drop in between the back 2 (i.e turns into a back 3).

I dont think we are good enough with the ball to play back 4 with 2 attacking fullbacks. you can still play a front 3 (343 with 2 defensive midfielders i.e Southgate's England or 352 with 2 holding midfielders and a number 10 and 2 strikers). 

Having a back 3, can also work well for ball retention having centre-backs as outlets when under pressure.

But we all see the game differently and will be interesting to try. Farke first season when we finished 14th, we played it alot and kept many clean sheets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gunn

Aarons kabak AO Hanley Dimi

Normann SORENSEN

Tzolis Cantwell

Pukki

Krul, Gibson, Williams, PLM, McLean, Gilmour, Rashica, Sargent, Idah

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

When we barely had a pre season I'm a bit surprised he's changed from the system that he stuck with for 4 years. 

Very good point..!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ward 3 said:

Gunn

Aarons kabak AO Hanley Dimi

Normann SORENSEN

Tzolis Cantwell

Pukki

Krul, Gibson, Williams, PLM, McLean, Gilmour, Rashica, Sargent, Idah

After that performance against Watford you have decided to drop Krul?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think half the problem at the moment is that it is far from obvious as to best team and we would all have a different view. I think I would start by trying to establish a bit of consistency and experience down our spine and the build from there.

I would therefore go with 

krul

Aaron’s, Kabak, Hanley, Gibson, Giannoulis

Normann, les Melou/McClean

Sargent, Pukki, Cantwell

 

that should make us more balanced, robust and industrious, then we can start to embed Rashica, Tzolis, Gilmour over time with the wider squad options of Williams, Dowell, Rupp, Idah. At least that lets us go 5-4-1 when under pressure but use the energy of Sargent and Cantwell to support Pukki. I know loads of different people will have views but we have to start by stop conceding so softly and I think having experience in the team helps. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Hairy Canary said:

After that performance against Watford you have decided to drop Krul?

I've said it for a few weeks now my friend 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ward 3 said:

I've said it for a few weeks now my friend 

Fair enough. Wondered what the reasoning was. I thought without him on Saturday we would have been looking at a worse defeat to be honest. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Hairy Canary said:

Fair enough. Wondered what the reasoning was. I thought without him on Saturday we would have been looking at a worse defeat to be honest. 

Don't know really.. just feel change is good. Keep him on his toes and keep him on top of his game 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dean Coneys boots said:

Shall we try 6

If none of them jump for the ball or mark their opponent then you could try 300 it'll still result in us conceding 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...