Thank god for once huge positive

[fredherring 136]

The absolute weapons going on about three at the back can shut up now. 

In reality it's five defenders. 

Leaves no outlet, and under the obvious press, it goes sideways, back, sideways even more. 

It leaves no width, doesn't allow numbers on the opponents half. 

Its suicide, especially when farkes achilles heel is zonal marking that just isn't working. 

We are dying a slow death here and asking for even more defensive depth is insane. 

We need to utilise our attacking players, keep the ball higher up the pitch.

And they have to know where the hell the other players are. 

Three years of 4231 ditched for this shambles. 

Farke out. 

[damn that Ralph Coates! 74]

tend to agree that that 3 defenders looked absolutely no more effective with attacking tonight

[Uncle Fred 526]

We could play 10 at the back and coundnt  keep a clean sheet 

[KeiranShikari 1,524]

We were better with chance creation today, I though. Individual errors are killing us whatever system we play.

3 at the back with Kabak and Aarons for Everton is what I'd go with.

[Yellow Shirt 17]

Couldn’t disagree more. I thought the shape tonight allowed for more press in midfield, more width, fewer spaces for opponents to run into and more options when the ball went forward.

What the shape didn’t change was that our center backs are all prone to errors, our central midfielders are too alike and we only have one natural finisher in the squad.

What I struggle to see is how to play  a good first 11 to their strengths when there are so many shared weaknesses.

[fredherring 136]

5 minutes ago, Yellow Shirt said:

Couldn’t disagree more. I thought the shape tonight allowed for more press in midfield, more width, fewer spaces for opponents to run into and more options when the ball went forward.

What the shape didn’t change was that our center backs are all prone to errors, our central midfielders are too alike and we only have one natural finisher in the squad.

What I struggle to see is how to play  a good first 11 to their strengths when there are so many shared weaknesses.

And its clueless rubbish like this that populates this forum. 

Literally anyone with eyes tonight could see the pass across the back three left or right led to our wing backs getting instantly pressed, with no outlet, so they pass back down the line, and get pressed and make a mistake. 

To suggest it gave us more width, and fewer spaces to run into, when Liverpool literally ran into spaces at will, is so laughable I have to ask are you taking the p*ss.

[simmo_2 6]

2 minutes ago, fredherring said:

And its clueless rubbish like this that populates this forum. 

Literally anyone with eyes tonight could see the pass across the back three left or right led to our wing backs getting instantly pressed, with no outlet, so they pass back down the line, and get pressed and make a mistake. 

To suggest it gave us more width, and fewer spaces to run into, when Liverpool literally ran into spaces at will, is so laughable I have to ask are you taking the p*ss.

Totally agree, beware of happy Clappers though.

[Yellow Shirt 17]

1 hour ago, fredherring said:

And its clueless rubbish like this that populates this forum. 

Literally anyone with eyes tonight could see the pass across the back three left or right led to our wing backs getting instantly pressed, with no outlet, so they pass back down the line, and get pressed and make a mistake. 

To suggest it gave us more width, and fewer spaces to run into, when Liverpool literally ran into spaces at will, is so laughable I have to ask are you taking the p*ss.

What led to that press was OUR passes from the CBs and the woeful Gunn. The ball that has exposed gaping holes in our midfield and defense so far this season was not on tonight for Liverpool.

defensively we simply do not have players capable of covering the spaces created by playing attacking full backs in a four. Seeing as we only have attacking full backs (apart from Byram who isn’t fit) we need to stick with the 3 at CB.

[Jim Smith 2,610]

I do think 3 at the back could work but it doesn’t matter how many you play at the back if they are all just marking space and not reacting to the forwards at all.

it does feel like we are losing all cohesion and identity to primarily rectify a defence that a good coach should be able to sort in a week on the training ground. 

[Paul101 191]

8 hours ago, KeiranShikari said:

We were better with chance creation today, I though. Individual errors are killing us whatever system we play.

3 at the back with Kabak and Aarons for Everton is what I'd go with.

But Aarons has been awful all season one of the worst players on the pitch vs watford

but I do think your right 🙂

[Ken Hairy 4,272]

Morning Bill 😄👍

[Mackrel829 24]

I think if you play 5 at the back, it has to be in a 5-2-3 rather than a 5-3-2. When you're playing two narrower strikers rather than one striker and two wider players, there's no outlet up the field when the wingback receives the ball. This then inevitably leads to the sideways and backwards passes that the OP was referring to.

Theres no real reason for Rupp to be playing, and I agree 100% that the CMs are too similar. I didn't hate the 5 at the back but would like to see something more like this:

Krul

Aarons, Big Andy, Hanley, Gibson, Giannolous

Gilmour, Normann

Cantwell, Pukki, Milot

Obviously Kabak could play a CB role, PLM could play one of those CM spots, Tzolis could play either wing, and Sargent could play up top.

With wider wingers, there's an outlet up the field when the wing backs are getting pressed, but the five at the back maintains a little more defensive integrity when the wingbacks are pushing forward.

Edited September 22, 2021 by Mackrel829

[Google Bot 3,934]

Must admit, there were times when we were on top that I thought it worked well.

Early goal didn't help to fully judge the system, but that's just our typical luck (Of our own making may I add).

[Ian 1,211]

Why are we making so many critical individual errors at the moment? Luck of the draw, lack of confidence, or perhaps the players just aren't good enough at this level?

My personal feeling is that we are so weak in midfield it doesn't matter if we have 2/3/4/5 at the back - opposition teams can go from back to front against us in a few passes and the pressure is eventually going to tell.

[Jim Smith 2,610]

8 minutes ago, Ian said:

Why are we making so many critical individual errors at the moment? Luck of the draw, lack of confidence, or perhaps the players just aren't good enough at this level?

My personal feeling is that we are so weak in midfield it doesn't matter if we have 2/3/4/5 at the back - opposition teams can go from back to front against us in a few passes and the pressure is eventually going to tell.

In fairness, until later on in the game last night they weren;t able to do that and I thought we looked a lot less susceptible on the counter attack. That is all rendered irrelevant though if you concede soft goals of the sort we did through poor defending. If we can actually just bl**dy mark properly from crosses and cut out the errors playing out from the back then that system could be effective, especially away from home.