What was the formation today?

[WD40 726]

Sorry couldn’t watch or listen and don’t believe for a second BBC sport have got the formation right. Was it 4-3-3 with Nunez on the left? Looked like he was central for the goals. 

[littleyellowbirdie 3,138]

4-3-3, Nunez on the left. 

Krul

Aarons; Omobamidele; Hanley; McLean

Dowell; Gibbs; Nunez

Sinani; Sargeant; Cantwell

Edited August 16, 2022 by littleyellowbirdie

[WD40 726]

Thanks. This is what the club put out - so well off?

[Nexus_Canary 1,206]

It was deffo a 

3-Kenny -2-3-1

really depended on what position McLean fancied at that given moment

 

Edited August 16, 2022 by Nexus_Canary

[Mason 47 1,923]

4-6 until we got tired then 11 in a vague circle 

[littleyellowbirdie 3,138]

5 minutes ago, WD40 said:

Thanks. This is what the club put out - so well off?

That's interesting, because the BBC have basically inverted the middle 3. 

Sometimes I wonder whether people make too much of the difference between 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 anyway. Have the left and right of the front 3 drop back a bit, centre of the middle 3 goes forwards a bit and the other 2 middle players get a bit narrower and your 4-3-3 is a 4-2-3-1. It seems to me that arguably it's just slight variations that can come about as a result of whether you're attacking or defending. 

[All the Germans 1,239]

I think there wasn't really one formation. It varied between 4-1-4-1, 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1. The front six were relatively fluid. Sargent played the central striker role, Gibbs tended to hold but the other 4 had licence to move about.

[WD40 726]

4 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

That's interesting, because the BBC have basically inverted the middle 3. 

Sometimes I wonder whether people make too much of the difference between 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3 anyway. Have the left and right of the front 3 drop back a bit, centre of the middle 3 goes forwards a bit and the other 2 middle players get a bit narrower and your 4-3-3 is a 4-2-3-1. It seems to me that arguably it's just slight variations that can come about as a result of whether you're attacking or defending. 

I saw that on BBC but didn’t believe it tbh.

[WD40 726]

2 minutes ago, All the Germans said:

I think there wasn't really one formation. It varied between 4-1-4-1, 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1. The front six were relatively fluid. Sargent played the central striker role, Gibbs tended to hold but the other 4 had licence to move about.

Farke had it like that with his 3 behind Pukki tbf. But was Nunez popping up all over the place running the show?

[WD40 726]

14 minutes ago, Nexus_Canary said:

It was deffo a 

3-Kenny -2-3-1

really depended on what position McLean fancied at that given moment

 

So he can’t switch his midfield mindset? Hope they’re looking at a permanent LB

[littleyellowbirdie 3,138]

Just now, WD40 said:

So he can’t switch his midfield mindset? Hope they’re looking at a permanent LB

Hell, it got a win against a fairly decent side. If it ain't broke don't fix it!

[The Raptor 1,573]

16 minutes ago, Nexus_Canary said:

It was deffo a 

3-Kenny -2-3-1

really depended on what position McLean fancied at that given moment

 

He's not the left back answer even temperarily. Was out of position so much. I sat right in line with where he should've been second half. He tried but we need a specialised full back on loan till January 

[All the Germans 1,239]

5 minutes ago, WD40 said:

Farke had it like that with his 3 behind Pukki tbf. But was Nunez popping up all over the place running the show?

Not exactly running the show, had drive, good skill and an eye for a pass; he didn't run it as such but really has something special about him. The standouts were Sinani, Nunez and Dowell for controlling the game and central to all of our good moves. (A little harsh on Cantwell and Gibbs who were both good too).

[Branston Pickle 4,149]

Formation? =  A winning one. That’s the main thing, it worked pretty well and with many players out.