Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
Plymouth and Sheffield Wednesday last season were promoted playing with wing backs. Works fine at this level if you’ve got the right players and system
Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
totally agree with this .. it's OK for a Robertson or an Alexander-Arnold or a Trippier or the way Spurs or Cittee switch their defenders into midfield when attacking but for the likes of us L1 paupers it's more advisable to play a more simple game and ask defenders to defend as a priority .. I've never liked 3 5 2 or its fancy slight variations, I am a simple soul and 4 4 2 is my preference
From Sunday League to Premier League, any system (within reason, not 2-2-6 or something) is fine, it's about if you have the players to play it and coach it well.
The latter two have been our issue in several different systems under several different managers.
Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
totally agree with this .. it's OK for a Robertson or an Alexander-Arnold or a Trippier or the way Spurs or Cittee switch their defenders into midfield when attacking but for the likes of us L1 paupers it's more advisable to play a more simple game and ask defenders to defend as a priority .. I've never liked 3 5 2 or its fancy slight variations, I am a simple soul and 4 4 2 is my preference
You've just reeled off 3 players who aren't wing backs...
Wing backs are part of the modern game and if a player hasn’t got the ability and pace to play wingback their future career advancement will be very limited.
It’s all relative, they just need to be good enough to do the role at this level. For the formation overall as said it’s about having the right players, both quality and balance, along with good coaching.
Another angle to consider is what other clubs in this division are playing. Going with 4-4-2 for example is easier to exploit as many clubs will play 3 central midfielders.
Formations and tactical trends change over time, even as recently as our title win under Powell 4-4-2 and going direct would be more common. If you can be a step ahead of most clubs that can make a difference. Sheff Utd got promoted after 6(?) seasons at this level after Wilder and his staff came up with 3-5-2 using overlapping centre backs. They had the players to make it work and opponents didn’t know how to deal with something so different.
Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
totally agree with this .. it's OK for a Robertson or an Alexander-Arnold or a Trippier or the way Spurs or Cittee switch their defenders into midfield when attacking but for the likes of us L1 paupers it's more advisable to play a more simple game and ask defenders to defend as a priority .. I've never liked 3 5 2 or its fancy slight variations, I am a simple soul and 4 4 2 is my preference
You've just reeled off 3 players who aren't wing backs...
Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
totally agree with this .. it's OK for a Robertson or an Alexander-Arnold or a Trippier or the way Spurs or Cittee switch their defenders into midfield when attacking but for the likes of us L1 paupers it's more advisable to play a more simple game and ask defenders to defend as a priority .. I've never liked 3 5 2 or its fancy slight variations, I am a simple soul and 4 4 2 is my preference
You've just reeled off 3 players who aren't wing backs...
who, what ?
Robertson, TAA and Tripper are all fullbacks. TAA is the only one who inverts (which is what you're describing, not a WB trait by the way). Out of curiosity I had a look at the formations most regularly used by Premier league teams this season. Have to drop down to 11th and Wolves to find a team who use WB'sas their plan A
Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
Plymouth and Sheffield Wednesday last season were promoted playing with wing backs. Works fine at this level if you’ve got the right players and system
We don’t though , do we. Watson and Edun aren’t defensively strong and aren’t really any good going forward , although Edun has some technical ability . I think there’s an assumption that when we sign a “lump” to play with May, the goals will flow . 3-5-2 looked appalling at the start of the season- we don’t have the players for it . Admittedly we don’t have the players for 433 either .
Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
totally agree with this .. it's OK for a Robertson or an Alexander-Arnold or a Trippier or the way Spurs or Cittee switch their defenders into midfield when attacking but for the likes of us L1 paupers it's more advisable to play a more simple game and ask defenders to defend as a priority .. I've never liked 3 5 2 or its fancy slight variations, I am a simple soul and 4 4 2 is my preference
You've just reeled off 3 players who aren't wing backs...
who, what ?
Robertson, TAA and Tripper are all fullbacks. TAA is the only one who inverts (which is what you're describing, not a WB trait by the way). Out of curiosity I had a look at the formations most regularly used by Premier league teams this season. Have to drop down to 11th and Wolves to find a team who use WB'sas their plan A
I take your point about looking through published team formations. However my definition of a 'wing back' is a full back who spends as much time in attack as in defence and when he is 'upfield' another player covers the area he's left behind. All three I have mentioned, though Robertson is injured at present fill that criteria i m o
Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
totally agree with this .. it's OK for a Robertson or an Alexander-Arnold or a Trippier or the way Spurs or Cittee switch their defenders into midfield when attacking but for the likes of us L1 paupers it's more advisable to play a more simple game and ask defenders to defend as a priority .. I've never liked 3 5 2 or its fancy slight variations, I am a simple soul and 4 4 2 is my preference
You've just reeled off 3 players who aren't wing backs...
who, what ?
Robertson, TAA and Tripper are all fullbacks. TAA is the only one who inverts (which is what you're describing, not a WB trait by the way). Out of curiosity I had a look at the formations most regularly used by Premier league teams this season. Have to drop down to 11th and Wolves to find a team who use WB'sas their plan A
I take your point about looking through published team formations. However my definition of a 'wing back' is a full back who spends as much time in attack as in defence and when he is 'upfield' another player covers the area he's left behind. All three I have mentioned, though Robertson is injured at present fill that criteria i m o
It's fine to have your own definition but that just isn't the accepted definition. Full backs play in a back 4, wing backs in a 3/5. I'd describe all 3 as attacking full backs.
Separately, the issue being discussed on this thread isn't actually about whether your WB/FB is good enough. It's about whether your DM and CB's are switched on and able to cover the space. It's why Thomas looked decent at the weekend and Jones struggled.
Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
totally agree with this .. it's OK for a Robertson or an Alexander-Arnold or a Trippier or the way Spurs or Cittee switch their defenders into midfield when attacking but for the likes of us L1 paupers it's more advisable to play a more simple game and ask defenders to defend as a priority .. I've never liked 3 5 2 or its fancy slight variations, I am a simple soul and 4 4 2 is my preference
You've just reeled off 3 players who aren't wing backs...
who, what ?
Robertson, TAA and Tripper are all fullbacks. TAA is the only one who inverts (which is what you're describing, not a WB trait by the way). Out of curiosity I had a look at the formations most regularly used by Premier league teams this season. Have to drop down to 11th and Wolves to find a team who use WB'sas their plan A
I take your point about looking through published team formations. However my definition of a 'wing back' is a full back who spends as much time in attack as in defence and when he is 'upfield' another player covers the area he's left behind. All three I have mentioned, though Robertson is injured at present fill that criteria i m o
It's fine to have your own definition but that just isn't the accepted definition. Full backs play in a back 4, wing backs in a 3/5. I'd describe all 3 as attacking full backs.
Separately, the issue being discussed on this thread isn't actually about whether your WB/FB is good enough. It's about whether your DM and CB's are switched on and able to cover the space. It's why Thomas looked decent at the weekend and Jones struggled.
fair enough so 'wing backs' should really be rebranded as 'wing midfielders' in a 3 4 3 e.g. and 'wing backs' only in a 5 2 3 .. got to get your formations properly defined
It's fine to have your own definition but that just isn't the accepted definition. Full backs play in a back 4, wing backs in a 3/5. I'd describe all 3 as attacking full backs.
Separately, the issue being discussed on this thread isn't actually about whether your WB/FB is good enough. It's about whether your DM and CB's are switched on and able to cover the space. It's why Thomas looked decent at the weekend and Jones struggled.
I remember (correct me if I’m wrong) Nessie playing RCB at Peterborough away last season. Did a good job and got out to the wide man when shifting comfortably.
Also, Stevenage away this year, when chasing I think Nessie did the same, ended up putting the cross in that won the pen?
Maybe at elite level, with capable players and management. At our level just let the backs patrol the half way line and stop anything in-coming along the wings. One player doing two different skills? Nah.
Plymouth and Sheffield Wednesday last season were promoted playing with wing backs. Works fine at this level if you’ve got the right players and system
We don’t though , do we. Watson and Edun aren’t defensively strong and aren’t really any good going forward , although Edun has some technical ability . I think there’s an assumption that when we sign a “lump” to play with May, the goals will flow . 3-5-2 looked appalling at the start of the season- we don’t have the players for it . Admittedly we don’t have the players for 433 either .
Did it? When we played 3-5-2 early this season we didn’t have a striker or Watson/Edun. And our first 2 league games were still probably up there with some of our better ones this season even without any of that
In this league it works but the players you have there are key. I would want an extra man in midfield and play two up front. Teams beat us by competing in the tackle and for the 2nd ball. It is too easy. We need to purge the team of softies and bite our way out of this league with more quality than the likes of Burton, Cambridge etc... Edun and Watson are massive question marks for me to play that role. Asiimwe looks like he will make a great wing back.
Wing backs are fine at this level, if used properly in possession against a side not playing wing backs they can create some beautiful overloads and also fulfill my own babylonia of maybe one day outnumbering a side in midfield. Out of possession Edun and Watson can get exposed one v one but with 3 centre halves at least one of whom seems mobile and a 3 man midfield with a base to drop over and provide cover
More petty Lols on someone just trying to start a conversation.
I see where you're coming from, but 3412/352 has been one of the most popular formations this season if you look at other teams, in the championship not as much where 4231 and 4321 seem to be in fashion atm.
It works if you can get proper ball playing centre backs and wingbacks who have a good engine and can have attacking influence, my concern is getting the wingbacks in. Going to take some serious scouting.
Last weekend for context, Barnsley vs Bristol Rovers, 3412 vs 3142
Blackpool vs Exeter, 352 vs 3421
Cambridge vs Fleetwood, 4231 vs 3421
Oxford vs Carlise, 352 vs 3421
Northampton vs Wigan 4231 vs 343
Portsmouth vs Orient 4231 vs 4231
Shrewsbury vs Stevenage 3421 vs 442
And finally Wycombe vs Lincoln, 4231 vs 3412
Evidently a back 3/5 is a very popular formation at present and if not, it's the safe 4231. Teams are playing a lot safer and more tight in their shape.
I'm happy for it, if we had a manager that could play it.
Wing backs are part of the modern game and if a player hasn’t got the ability and pace to play wingback their future career advancement will be very limited.
Not if they are a striker, or a centre back, of a centre mid, or a goalie!!
The concept is simple. 1. The 3 Central defenders gives a core central strength 2. It is operationally augmented by a designated defensive midfielder 3 Wide attacking players are invariably inconsistent in attack & defensively questionable 4. The system immediately gives you width.
Are there trade offs? Absolutely as with with every system. In effect you are trading the attacking threat of a central midfield player to provide attacking width.
The fundamental discipline of wing backs in a 3-5-2 formation requires the Central Defensive Midfielder to gauge any defensive exposure and act accordingly.
The success of any system at any level will depend on the natural abilities of the players to play at that level but crucially observe the team disciplines & structure to play it.
The basic for any defender will be to observe the sides defensive shape to defend both the space in front of you in closing down/ pressuring/ challenging opposing players and covering the space behind you.
If you as a system determine to use full backs as a key attacking threat then by design those around them have to adjust - notably in covering the increased opportunities to exploit the space behind them.
In real time where a wing back has moved into an advanced position it is the call of the central defensive midfielder (CDM), arguably operating across the pitch to gauge and snuff out the point of defensive threat by either; - personally dropping in to cover the defensive position or (remembering you have a « spare » Central Defender) - allowing either RCB/ LCB to cover the threat as he drops into Central Defensive Cover
If as a wing back you expect me to attack with confidence and make those runs to provide the team width/ overlaps in the attacking third I have every right to expect to team mates to cover. If they don’t. I stop making the runs and team has limited width in the attacking third.
You can’t expect any player to regularly put into 20-30yard attacking runs and immediately put in 20-30 yards to catch up with an opposing players 20 yards behind him.
I regularly played as a Central Defender in level 9 with and against wing backs. The Central Midfielder defensive lynchpins come in all shapes and sizes but crucially either had the speed & agility to cover and/ or the positional discipline and/ or ability to read the game defensively.
We do need to look at how shit League One teams beat or draw with us. It isn't often, if ever, done with pace. It is through doing the basics, being organised and being stronger and fitter. Having that extra midfielder and defender will help us in that respect, especially if they can bite a bit.
If we had a Beckenbauer then the CD concept would work. But we don't. Remind me of the last 'sweeper' we had. 4 in CM gives you width, while traditional backs give cover when the move inevitably breaks down. WBs require quality and organisation.
Comments
I've never liked 3 5 2 or its fancy slight variations, I am a simple soul and 4 4 2 is my preference
The latter two have been our issue in several different systems under several different managers.
Another angle to consider is what other clubs in this division are playing. Going with 4-4-2 for example is easier to exploit as many clubs will play 3 central midfielders.
Formations and tactical trends change over time, even as recently as our title win under Powell 4-4-2 and going direct would be more common. If you can be a step ahead of most clubs that can make a difference. Sheff Utd got promoted after 6(?) seasons at this level after Wilder and his staff came up with 3-5-2 using overlapping centre backs. They had the players to make it work and opponents didn’t know how to deal with something so different.
It demands a degree of athleticism and stamina to get constantly up and down the line.
You are defender, midfielder and winger.
Separately, the issue being discussed on this thread isn't actually about whether your WB/FB is good enough. It's about whether your DM and CB's are switched on and able to cover the space. It's why Thomas looked decent at the weekend and Jones struggled.
I remember (correct me if I’m wrong) Nessie playing RCB at Peterborough away last season. Did a good job and got out to the wide man when shifting comfortably.
I see where you're coming from, but 3412/352 has been one of the most popular formations this season if you look at other teams, in the championship not as much where 4231 and 4321 seem to be in fashion atm.
It works if you can get proper ball playing centre backs and wingbacks who have a good engine and can have attacking influence, my concern is getting the wingbacks in. Going to take some serious scouting.
Last weekend for context, Barnsley vs Bristol Rovers, 3412 vs 3142
Blackpool vs Exeter, 352 vs 3421
Cambridge vs Fleetwood, 4231 vs 3421
Oxford vs Carlise, 352 vs 3421
Northampton vs Wigan 4231 vs 343
Portsmouth vs Orient 4231 vs 4231
Shrewsbury vs Stevenage 3421 vs 442
And finally Wycombe vs Lincoln, 4231 vs 3412
Evidently a back 3/5 is a very popular formation at present and if not, it's the safe 4231. Teams are playing a lot safer and more tight in their shape.
I'm happy for it, if we had a manager that could play it.
Not if they are a striker, or a centre back, of a centre mid, or a goalie!!
The concept is simple.
1. The 3 Central defenders gives a core central strength
2. It is operationally augmented by a designated defensive midfielder
3 Wide attacking players are invariably inconsistent in attack & defensively questionable
4. The system immediately gives you width.
Are there trade offs? Absolutely as with with every system. In effect you are trading the attacking threat of a central midfield player to provide attacking width.
The fundamental discipline of wing backs in a 3-5-2 formation requires the Central Defensive Midfielder to gauge any defensive exposure and act accordingly.
The success of any system at any level will depend on the natural abilities of the players to play at that level but crucially observe the team disciplines & structure to play it.
The basic for any defender will be to observe the sides defensive shape to defend both the space in front of you in closing down/ pressuring/ challenging opposing players and covering the space behind you.
If you as a system determine to use full backs as a key attacking threat then by design those around them have to adjust - notably in covering the increased opportunities to exploit the space behind them.
In real time where a wing back has moved into an advanced position it is the call of the central defensive midfielder (CDM), arguably operating across the pitch to gauge and snuff out the point of defensive threat by either;
- personally dropping in to cover the defensive position
or (remembering you have a « spare » Central Defender)
- allowing either RCB/ LCB to cover the threat as he drops into Central Defensive Cover
If as a wing back you expect me to attack with confidence and make those runs to provide the team width/ overlaps in the attacking third I have every right to expect to team mates to cover. If they don’t. I stop making the runs and team has limited width in the attacking third.
You can’t expect any player to regularly put into 20-30yard attacking runs and immediately put in 20-30 yards to catch up with an opposing players 20 yards behind him.
I regularly played as a Central Defender in level 9 with and against wing backs. The Central Midfielder defensive lynchpins come in all shapes and sizes but crucially either had the speed & agility to cover and/ or the positional discipline and/ or ability to read the game defensively.
1 When you get the ball make a quick decision as to what you’re going to do.
2 When a team mate has the ball make sure they can see you.
3 When the other team have the ball get between the ball and the goal.
Additionally the 1-2 remains a very effective ploy.
Then get good fit strong fast players to do the above.
Edun and Watson are though