Is three at the back really dead?

[hamstrung_pigeon]

We haven't trialled it in the pre-season games, but I'm not so sure it's being shelved for good. Some guys like it, some don't - I happen to think it could be a useful setup for us especially with our string of tough away games. What I like is that, in the absence of a top class DM, it offers our less-than-individually-spectacular CBs safety in numbers. Given our current resources, I'm more comfortable with 3 CBs than 1 pseudo-DM + 2 CBs. Of course, we still leaked several goals towards the end last season, but I think most of that was due to our weakness at the wing back spots and losing Skrtel / Sakho at crucial moments.

I feel like the acquisitions in the summer, plus return of players on loan, could address the key weaknesses of the setup last season - wing backs, lack of form / quality resulting in us having to play guys out of position, and strikers. It will be interesting to see if we give it a go in the two remaining pre-season games with the full squad together at last.

In a 3-4-2-1 here, though we could easily use variants of it when Sturridge returns.

Mignolet
Can Skrtel Sakho // Lovren, Ilori, Wisdom,
Clyne Milner Henderson Gomez // [WB] Ibe, Moreno; [CM] Can, Lucas, Allen
Firmino Coutinho // Ibe, Lallana, Markovic
Benteke // Sturridge, Ings, Origi

I don't think it's the best setup in the world, but I think we should cut the coat according to the cloth - again, given our lack of superbness in our collection of CBs and DMs, I think this gives us the best balance.

Actually, all this seems familiar now, because before last season started, I suggested that we could perhaps consider using three at the back to try to address our defensive woes and was curtly snapped at with a "we should always play four at the back" response. I suppose now I've set myself up for a string of those replies... 😉

 

[Frogfish]

It's dead.

BR doesn't like it and it was only ever a stop-gap until he got the players he wanted for 4-3-3.

 

[Ryan]

I don't know if it's dead, in fact he may go with it for games or parts of the season. But two things concern me with it:

- Teams figured it out after half a dozen games last year, and exploited the shit out of us. Particularly the space in behind the wing-backs. United and Arsenal in the space of a week ripped us to shit with it.
- No team's ever won anything with a 3-5-2.

 

[i_rushie]

We won the League Cup in 95 with Scales, Ruddock and Babb. Rob Jones and Bjornebye as wingbacks. 3-5-2. It was all really exciting but our defence was shit even back then.

 

[hamstrung_pigeon]

I don't know if it's dead, in fact he may go with it for games or parts of the season. But two things concern me with it:

- Teams figured it out after half a dozen games last year, and exploited the shit out of us. Particularly the space in behind the wing-backs. United and Arsenal in the space of a week ripped us to shit with it.
- No team's ever won anything with a 3-5-2.

I suppose that part in bold is where I'm thinking the acquisitions should improve us. I suppose when we look at the failures you pointed out last season - was it because of the personnel, rather than the system? On the left, we had Moreno, whom we all agree would benefit from a return to a defending 101 class. On the right, we used Markovic, Ibe (lost 5 games to injury when we played with the three at the back - two of which were those games against the Mancs and Gunners), and I think maybe Lallana, Sterling and Henderson all might have had a game or two there as well.

With the arrival of Clyne and Gomez, who is looking very promising albeit in pre-season, plus whoever we salvage from the scrap heap of Flanagan, Enrique and Wisdom, we have better personnel now for the roles. I'm not convinced yet that it's mainly a flaw of the system I guess.

 

[Ryan]

I suppose that part in bold is where I'm thinking the acquisitions should improve us. I suppose when we look at the failures you pointed out last season - was it because of the personnel, rather than the system? On the left, we had Moreno, whom we all agree would benefit from a return to a defending 101 class. On the right, I we used Markovic, Ibe (lost 5 games to injury when we played with the three at the back - two of which were those games were against the Mancs and Gunners), and I think maybe Lallana, Sterling and Henderson all might have had a game or two there as well.

With the arrival of Clyne and Gomez, who is looking very promising albeit in pre-season, plus whoever we salvage from the scrap heap of Flanagan, Enrique and Wisdom, we have better personnel now for the roles. I'm not convinced yet that it's mainly a flaw of the system I guess.

It was both.

 

[rurikbird]

Every system has its flaws.

 

[RedStar]

As a system its almost entirely dependent on the quality of the wing backs who are required to do an awful lot. You cant just push a full back into a wing back role and hope for the best they neex to be very fit, able to take on opposing players as well as drop back into a 4 when the wing back on the other side goes rampaging. It can work really well with the right personnel but it can easily come unstuck against a mobile pacey front 3

 

[JohnnyRocket]

As a system it will always be flawed - due to the wingbacks. A regular 4-2-3-1 with decent wide players and a fairly tactically astute coach can really expose the weakness of the system.

The combination of winger and full back in the 4-2-3-1 has the ability to force the wing back back and essentially nullify them - leading to your only creative outlet being your attacking midfielder. If you're brave with your 3-5-2 and leave the wingback further forward, your back 3 gets murdered, as the wingers in the 4-2-3-1 then stretch the back 3 across the width of the pitch.

A back 3 system will always eventually be exposed and exploited - United and us are clear examples last season. As soon as Van Gaal went with a regular 4-2-3-1 (or whatever it was), suddenly their football and results improved.

 

[JohnnyRocket]

Every system has its flaws.

True, but the 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 are the most 'flawless' in my opinion. There's a reason 4-2-3-1 has been so popular everywhere for the last 10 - 15 years - it provides the most balance throughout the pitch, and in general makes the most sense.

 

[rurikbird]

True, but the 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 are the most 'flawless' in my opinion. There's a reason 4-2-3-1 has been so popular everywhere for the last 10 - 15 years - it provides the most balance throughout the pitch, and in general makes the most sense.

Yes, but it never worked for us under Rodgers.

 

[RedStar]

True, but the 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 are the most 'flawless' in my opinion. There's a reason 4-2-3-1 has been so popular everywhere for the last 10 - 15 years - it provides the most balance throughout the pitch, and in general makes the most sense.

Every system looks like the best ever while its in vogue and then looks old hat once everybody moves on. Alot of teams now are really playing 4-5-1 instead of 4-3-3 because they wont leave 3 attackers upfield. Most sides will copy the most successful team of their era, for the last 10 years thats been Barca playing 4-3-3. The flaw in the 4-3-3 system is that its very narrow and leaves the full back exposed and its very easy for the midfield 3 to be overrun by a team playing 4-4-2 or 4-5-1. In a few years it will be something else and anybody playing 4-3-3 will be laughed at

 

[Mors]

I don't know if it's dead, in fact he may go with it for games or parts of the season. But two things concern me with it:

- Teams figured it out after half a dozen games last year, and exploited the shit out of us. Particularly the space in behind the wing-backs. United and Arsenal in the space of a week ripped us to shit with it.
- No team's ever won anything with a 3-5-2.

We won the League Cup in 95 with Scales, Ruddock and Babb. Rob Jones and Bjornebye as wingbacks. 3-5-2. It was all really exciting but our defence was shit even back then.

Lolz

 

[Silver Sean]

The main flaw is buying defenders who aren't good enough playing under a manager who has no idea how to set up a defence. Apart from that it's all good.

 

[JohnnyRocket]

What people tend to forget for some reason, is that many of those hammerings we dished out in 13/14 was actually with a 4-3-3. When you look closely at the Everton 4-1, the Arsenal 5-1 and Spurs 5-0 - all were actually 4-3-3. Suarez was a right forward when we didn't have the ball - sometimes it was Sturridge. In the spurs game Suarez was alone upfront because Sturridge was out. People were deceived because his/our incredible movement making it look like he was upfront.

Against City at home and away at United that year was a diamond 4-3-1-2, I'll give you that.

 

[Wiberg]

I don't know if it's dead, in fact he may go with it for games or parts of the season. But two things concern me with it:

- Teams figured it out after half a dozen games last year, and exploited the shit out of us. Particularly the space in behind the wing-backs. United and Arsenal in the space of a week ripped us to shit with it.
- No team's ever won anything with a 3-5-2.

The coach Bilardo used a 3-5-2 for the Argentina World Cup champions 1986:
Pumpido;
Cucciufo,Brown,Ruggeri;
Giusti,Enrique,Batista,Burruchaga,Olarticoechea;
Maradona,Valdano

Maradona went on to win with Napoli in 87 and maybe 89/90 in the same formation.

Scollari won the worldcup in 02 with a 3-5-2.

It doesn't really matter though because you are still right in the sense that a winning 3-5-2 demands exceptional talent. Something we only had with Suarez.

 

[hamstrung_pigeon]

Good points raised, though I'd suggest that in describing how the 4-1-3-2 triumphs over the 3-4-1-2 or 3-4-2-1, you've mentioned the combination of the wide forward and full back pushing forward and exposing the wing back, but left out the contribution of the AMs / WFs / second striker in tracking back. The full back in a back four gets into the same trouble (i.e. get double-teamed by the opponents) if he doesn't get help from his winger / wide forward ahead. Besides, playing with two wing backs doesn't necessarily require both to push far up at the same time too?

I suppose the three at the back system requires a lot more commitment, discipline and energy from the players in the WB, AM and WF spots, but what you get in return is more solidity in the centre because you keep the shape of your central CB and the two CMs.