Surely its time now to change formation at the back.

[Scottish Canary]

For me Neil is being to stubborn to change what is obviously not working. Even if we get a couple of results that could see us thro to trfr window. Would the board trust him to bring in a cb that actually wants to take ownership and attack crosses

 

[morty]

What changes are you suggesting?

 

[Scottish Canary]

Clearly given the limitations of this squad the system needs to change to try and protect more but also enable team to use its pace in key areas to try to create more goal scoring opps. Chelsea's 343 formation sounds great on paper. Our personnel would mean likely klose bennet/martin & bassong. Wing backs olsson/brady on left. Right pinto when fit if not options are available. Holding need sitting options we have 3/4 that je could use. Upfront 3 jerome with wes and various others from murphys, naismith pritchard to fill other slot.  Something different must be better than this?

 

[ZLF]

I do think 343 would work for this squad

But it doesnt get away from the fact that the players seem to lack the required concentration. The defensive midfielders lack the discipline to sit and provide a shield (see the winner on sat for the last example) and that the set of cbs have struggled before when as to play 3 at the back and bassong and bennett concentration is too often lacking and russ struggles to get his positioning right.

 

[GJP]

It's a good system if you can get it right but I don't know if we've got the players for it.

The player I'd feel most confident with is Pinto. He'll give you the running and the commitment to make it work. The others... hmm.

 

[Bill and ben]

Zlf isn't one advantage of 3 at the back that you don't need a disciplined dm?  If we play with wing backs to give us natural width  in attack we need the dm to sit back allowing the centre backs to cover the wider areas if needed. If the dm cannot or will not do this you replace him with a ball playing cb for whom this is second nature.