Playing with 3 at the back

[rurikbird]

This was probably the high point of Rodgers' 3-4-3:

I think the front 5 (including the wing-backs) is quite decent, actually. The Achilles heel of this team was the soft middle with neither the CBs or the 2 CMs taking responsibility for dominating physical battles and protecting the space in front of the penalty area – Can did to some extent, but he could only do so much at RCB. It helped that Man City played into our hands with their lazy 4-4-2, where out of all midfielders only Fernandinho had any appetite for defending. I think when we play Man City this year, it's going to be a more high-level tactical battle between 2 better-balanced teams.

 

[Kay Age El]

Denmark is trying with the 3-5-2 formation and not without it's big flaws visible.

First off if you are up against an opponent with only one striker it's a bit excessive to occupy three spots in the back. Why at least one of your defenders also needs to be equally capable in midfield when in possession. A Can type of player perhaps.

Also with the wing-backs so obviously in need of bombing forward you become quite easy to read and shut down for opponents defense, so unless these wing-backs are extremely fast and skilled both in attack and defense you can be exposed. You will also struggle to find a way unless you've got extremely good 1-on-1 players in midfield and attack as well.

Finally what type of attackers should you pick? Two strong players that can hold up play and execute your crosses or a combo of small and big like in the old days?

3-5-2 defo has got it perks but it also raises a lot of questions and, as it is probably the case with all formations, you really need a special brand of players to pull it off in style. I don't think it would work particularly well for us at the moment.