It suits players we've got with having Chio injured. Also can give us the option to play 2 up front.

Ian, this is my take on it. Football is a fluid game. Good teams have good movement. Maybe when teams have time to get into their preferred shape defensively you could take a snapshot and see how they have set up. In possession though it would be very rare to be able to take a snapshot and see anything resembling the diagram as it appears on the team sheet. And it doesnt matter one bit at set pieces, where a lot of goals come from. I have seen examples where they have shown the average position of the ten outfield players of Man City and others and there was no discernible shape to it. I think on the back of that, my own conclusion is that shape and formation is important defensively but in possession I am not sure it matters as much as people think - certainly not as much as having good players with good movement.

I think I tend to agree with the points raised and particularly think Smiler, et al have hit the nail on the head.

I took time out to watch all of the recent 352 games on replay and here is what I noted.

In all the games the wing backs not only continually altered position with the player of the (5) on their side, but both the wing backs and the midfield switched sides. On a number of occasions for example olusundae and Harding coverd behind on their opposite sides and also slotted deep to produce a back 5. Why or whether the wing backs are meant to do this I do not know.

Midfield players also dropped wide and deep and were sometimes the deepest players in the team defensively. This wasn't just when tracking a player but also when under sustained pressure.

The forwards also were often taking up quite deep defensive positions, but less so in the recent first half when ladapo and Hirst started.

When it came to attacking play most attacks do now seem to be coming from wide , but the wing back and the (5) often interchange despite there clearly being a preference for the more attacking player.

Regardless of personnel the system when combined with intense and high pressing seems to produce a lot of mistakes in the opposition and this is where most attacks are started.

When it comes to individual there is a noticeable difference. This however seems to have nothing to do with the system. The 2 halves on Saturday did not appear to produce any more or less effectiveness.

It is after that analysis I agree with the other comments. Looking at our goals and the oppositions it is difficult to not notice that there was little one could do about most-im thinking of the excellent goals from Stoke and Swansea. Other goals seen largely to be generated from pressure and resulting mistakes. Interestingly, this seems to go with the ebb and flow of a game and its difficult to make a case fir formation other than to say that it does appear that the interchange and the intensity makes sustained pressure more difficult for the opposition to build , but conversely the system and how we play it depends on breaking up play and very quickly moving the ball in the final third.

Long posts lose me. In the championship we are always going to need 3 in centre of midfield. So formations we can play are 4-5-1. 3-5-2. 3-5-1-1. We haven't got a fit left back, Giles he's more like a winger than a full back so the latter 2 formations I've said are our best two options. That's simple enough to understand I hope.

-- Edited by gwru on Tuesday 9th of February 2021 05:19:28 PM