That's your opinion, but I don't really feel like we have always played that way at all. For one Rose and Walker were both sat much higher than they normally would be and Wanyama pressed the play higher up than usual for me. It was clear to see that the formation was different and that the players had altered positions. Call it smoke and mirrors all you want, but players will play defined positions as set by the manager. This is why when a team works on a new formation in training, they actually have to work at it, to adapt to their new positions and those of the players around them.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
That's your opinion, but I don't really feel like we have always played that way at all. For one Rose and Walker were both sat much higher than they normally would be and Wanyama pressed the play higher up than usual for me. It was clear to see that the formation was different and that the players had altered positions. Call it smoke and mirrors all you want, but players will play defined positions as set by the manager. This is why when a team works on a new formation in training, they actually have to work at it, to adapt to their new positions and those of the players around them.
Its all about form with confidence. Alli
Some seem to feel 3 at the back is liberating, its not. Yes things were different- we were more defensive?
Effectively we played 5 with our FBs looking to sit further froward.
We put an extra man at the back and allowed our FBs to defend higher up which allowed them to go forward quicker as much as assist the MF. this was because we were a man down (3CBs) . Our 3 CBs have always been there just yesterday that sat differently. Dier/Wanyama sitting in front is a CB come a DM. Its all about priorities.
yesterday is was defensive.
Some seem to feel 3 at the back is liberating, its not. Yes things were different- we were more defensive?
Effectively we played 5 with our FBs looking to sit further froward.
We put an extra man at the back and allowed our FBs to defend higher up which allowed them to go forward quicker as much as assist the MF. this was because we were a man down (3CBs) . Our 3 CBs have always been there just yesterday that sat differently. Dier/Wanyama sitting in front is a CB come a DM. Its all about priorities.
yesterday is was defensive.
I really couldn't disagree more with you. Yesterday it was solid but we made plenty of good attacks. Our full backs played more like midfielders than they did defenders and that was plain for all to see. We nullified all of arsenals threats and still had all of our own threats.
Defensive Chelsea went 9-0 in last two against Everton and United.
3-4-1-2/3-4-3/3-4-2-1 (3-4-3 for short) are not defensive formations. 3 CBs does not have to be defensive. It can be very offensively liberating, as it offers more offensive freedom to the wing backs, to the CMs and to the AM/AMs. It is way more dynamic, potentially, than even the 4-2-3-1, and allows more variation in player types/roles in the different positions.
I thought three at the back worked quite well but Shearer on MOTD thought the Scum worked us out after 25-30 mins
Really??
I thought Danny had a good game going forward well and making some crunching tackles but did notice a few times not tracking back quickly enough
BAE used to do that too but early days yet
Jan looked very good in that system but he's having a good season
Really??
I thought Danny had a good game going forward well and making some crunching tackles but did notice a few times not tracking back quickly enough
BAE used to do that too but early days yet
Jan looked very good in that system but he's having a good season
The thing with us playing three at the back is that Jan, Dier and Toby are three of the best ball playing defenders in the league, if not in football which gets me very excited.
Plays more to our strengthens, we have Dier, Toby, Wimmer, Jan, Carter-Vickers and if needed Trippier or Davies who can play in the back three, that's 7 good players to choose from.
i did parp a few times when the ball was in the space between the advanced wing backs and CB's, more specifically Dier/Walker but there was a couple of times on the left hand side too (pass the doutchie)
:mong:
But overall it worked well, and is a great option for us to work even more on.
:mong:
But overall it worked well, and is a great option for us to work even more on.
Well, well I am now even more in awe of our boys........
I believe this is what you would call well drilled.
No way did they work on this in between Thurs and Sat.
Eric Dier says Tottenham Hotspur's players only found out they would be changing formation for Sunday's 1-1 draw at Woolwich the day before the game.
Mauricio Pochettino surprised Woolwich by switching to three centre-backs, with Dier and Kevin Wimmer deployed either side of Jan Vertonghen and Kyle Walker and Danny Rose as wing-backs.
The formation, which the Spurs manager used once last season in a 2-1 win at Watford, helped to unsettle Woolwich in the opening exchanges and provided the visitors with a platform to build from the back -- a feature of Spurs' game that Pochettino said he wanted to improve on before the match.
"The first time we knew about it was Saturday," Dier told Ham and High. "We worked on it in training and we went there and played it. It was probably a good thing because we didn't think too much about it and we just got on with it.
"The manager thought it was best to play this formation and I think it was a risk that shows our character and our attitude -- we're not afraid to do anything and try anything. We did that and I think it paid off.
"Sometimes it's nice to freshen it up, do something different and try something new. We enjoyed it and I think it worked well."
Last edited:
Obviously. I wrote the OP in this thread on Friday. Poch needed some time to work it out.
Is It all about where you place that extra player or is it just 11 against 11? Its defensive as only a few players can push forward. Its set up for counter attacking football, which in definition is defensive.
Yesterday the extra player was placed at CB (3 at the back). This is at a compromise else where. Thats why the FBs were set further up field to assist the Midfield. Woolwich wide players sit deep and run at you or onto passes form MF, our FBs sat comfortably with them and Wanyama and Dembele dealt with the rest. Woolwich did exploit this a times but didn't have the quality to really expose it. Our FBs probably didn't do as much going forward as they can normally do when we only have 2 CBs. There were changes and things seem different but you know when Poch says before a game he is playing 3 at the back, he's not -its really 5 with the FBs (wingbacks) pushing on?
It was all in an effort to suffocate their build-up play and passing rhythm (one of their biggest strengths). Got caught up on the counter a few times (to be expected) but all in all, I thought we executed well tactically
Good response after the Wembley shit-storm
Yes I agree but its a defensive set up- It promotes counter attacking football. I feel Woolwich did exploit us at times but lacked the quality to finish. All the good work was done by Wanyama and Dembel who stopped any football coming through the middle. We attacked and kept it simple. We did play the longish cross ball at times which suggests we were defensive. I enjoyed yesterday and at no point felt threatend by them but the way we set up, teams need to come at us. Its horses for courses.
never use red again on our team pleaseDo we have a formation code for 3 at the back?
I would say it was like this
But Eriksen and Son were moving everywhere and interchanging a lot, so much movement Woolwich couldn't handle it at times, this is how we should play particularly at home against teams who park the bus.
Call it what it is, a 5-2-3, or a 5-2-1-2. As much as Rose and Walker offer going forward, they're not goal threats. They're transitional wide-midfielders in attack, but that doesn't change them from being wing-backs in truth.
It's good to shake things up and switch the style of play when we're struggling for form and hurt by injuries, but it's not really suggestive of a team that wants to go out there and fucking destroy.
It worked out because Wenger was totally caught off guard. We've never really broken from 4-2-3-1 so radically before, and none of them were coached or prepared for how to deal with such a radical change in shape. In practice though it's defensive football that would have put us on the back-foot the entire game if Woolwich had seen it coming.
It stops the rot, and unlike the last international break which came at such a terrible time for us, this time around it gives us time to pull ourselves back together and get our players fit again. It's Liverpool that will be cursing the international break this time, but Pochettino should be breathing a sigh of relief and working on analyzing how our form evaporated over the last month. That Gareth Southgate needs to fuck off and I wish that Kane could magically come down with the "flu" so he could spend the next week running laps behind closed doors. He's so critical to the way we play. There's absolutely no replacement. It annoys me that before he's even fit again he's rushed off to international duty just to risk injury.
We have enough quality in our squad that we should reject the idea that we need to play counter-attacking football. We should be imposing ourselves on the game, not soaking up pressure Chelsea-style, and trying to copy Leicester's attack that has them 14th in the league this season. I'm fine with it being one tool in our toolbox so to speak, because it will keep opposing teams and managers guessing, but sexy football is what we all want to see.
It's good to shake things up and switch the style of play when we're struggling for form and hurt by injuries, but it's not really suggestive of a team that wants to go out there and fucking destroy.
It worked out because Wenger was totally caught off guard. We've never really broken from 4-2-3-1 so radically before, and none of them were coached or prepared for how to deal with such a radical change in shape. In practice though it's defensive football that would have put us on the back-foot the entire game if Woolwich had seen it coming.
It stops the rot, and unlike the last international break which came at such a terrible time for us, this time around it gives us time to pull ourselves back together and get our players fit again. It's Liverpool that will be cursing the international break this time, but Pochettino should be breathing a sigh of relief and working on analyzing how our form evaporated over the last month. That Gareth Southgate needs to fuck off and I wish that Kane could magically come down with the "flu" so he could spend the next week running laps behind closed doors. He's so critical to the way we play. There's absolutely no replacement. It annoys me that before he's even fit again he's rushed off to international duty just to risk injury.
We have enough quality in our squad that we should reject the idea that we need to play counter-attacking football. We should be imposing ourselves on the game, not soaking up pressure Chelsea-style, and trying to copy Leicester's attack that has them 14th in the league this season. I'm fine with it being one tool in our toolbox so to speak, because it will keep opposing teams and managers guessing, but sexy football is what we all want to see.
The 352/532/3412/whatever you want to call it, isn't necessarily a defensive formation, depending on personnel it can actually be an offensive one. Against Woolwich we used a somewhat defensive-minded variant of the formation, but that is not the only option. The wingbacks who started against Woolwich were pretty offensive-minded players, Rose and perhaps Walker as well even used to be wingers. We could have gone more defensive though, playing Trippier and especially Davies in there, but you can also go more offensive by playing actual wingers as wingbacks. Would you really call it defensive if the latter option is used? Also, most of our centre-backs are good footballers on the ball, some even used to be midfielders and Dier still is, Davies plays as a LCB for Wales in a back 3. Those guys can play out from the back, so the extra CB doesn't necessarily hurt our offensive capabilities. What made the formation for the Woolwich match relatively defensive was the midfield partnership of Dembele and Wanyama. Dembele is already a physical player who helps out in defence, having an out and out DM next to him in Wanyama was helpful against Woolwich, but against most opponents that would be a bit unnecessary when you already play with 3 centre-backs.
I'd like us to play the Bin dippers using this formation.
Yeah - I echo a lot of the sentiments in this thread. The formation worked against Woolwich but it doesn't mean we should use it all the time. It's great to have different options and already this season we've played three different formations from 4-2-3-1 to 4-1-4-1 to the 3-4-1-2.
Certain teams will require a different tactic and that's what makes us a great team (especially considering how young we are) and what makes Poch a great coach. I wouldn't want to see us play this formation against West Ham at home for example. Think we should just obliterate them with the 4-2-3-1 now Kane is back.
Certain teams will require a different tactic and that's what makes us a great team (especially considering how young we are) and what makes Poch a great coach. I wouldn't want to see us play this formation against West Ham at home for example. Think we should just obliterate them with the 4-2-3-1 now Kane is back.
Walker and Rose have both scored screamers for us. They don't offer a goal threat in a back 4, with a back 3 they do though.