An Introduction To 3-5-2

[Curr Avon]

Love it or hate it, it's looks like we're sticking with the 3-5-2 formation because Steve Cotterill has stated that he's not for turning.

So without further ado, here's a Youtube guide to the system that will give everyone the chance to understand the pros and cons of City's preferred style of play and maybe generate some ideas about how we can defend better.

Please note that the clip is 9 minutes and 34 seconds long.

Many thanks.

Mark

 

 

 

 

 

[HoldenBall]

Defending better means the wing backs actually tracking back, Joe Bryan is normally so high up the pitch when the opposition counter Williams is left 3 vs 1. If we're going to stick with this formation we should stick with 5 at the back, scrape out a few draws and go from there.

[Show Me The Money!]

Picking a formation is a lot like playing Paper, Rock, Scissors. 352 is paper but 433 is scissors.

Its having the squad of players to be able to be Paper, Rock or Scissors that is the biggest challenge. Midfield being the key area that allows that flexibility. I don't think we have the midfield players available to be able to play with just 3 or 4 hence how well 352 worked in league 1. Its not working in the Champ too well so far, in terms of defending especially, but I don't think we have the squad to change very much.

451 is probably the next best alternative that could make us more secure at the back but that would reduce our attacking threat potentially.

What I feel we need more than a formation change is an experienced midfield leader to control the middle of the park. The team is very young, bar Wilbs, and needs an older head to organize and make the formation work better. Even allowing us to change formation during the game should we need to.

[Major Isewater]

It does n't matter what the formation is if the players don't do the basics correctly.

[Turbored]

It does n't matter what the formation is if the players don't do the basics correctly.

Not so sure of that as we were fine last season , its just that we are in a stronger league with better players. So are the players not good enough ? Or has the bubble burst....

[spudski]

What is noticeable, is opposition managers are coming out and saying they have watched us...worked out our weaknesses....and exploited them.

It's obvious we have got massive weaknesses to be exploited.

Never have I read so many quotes, by opposition managers, about how they found another teams weaknesses so much.

It's not the players....the players are under instruction to play this way. This is purely down to SC...not the players.

Many goals chances come about after we have been on the offensive and have lost possession.

Wing backs are up...opposition look to get the ball in space between our wing back and wide defender....put two players their, and boom...job done....simples.

Sc is cutting off his nose to spite his face imho.

[Guest]

We play it differently to how that video says it is played. We have 2 holding midfielders. And I think that actually makes us weaker defensively because it means we lack an attacking midfielder and means we rely more on our wing backs and 2 of our centre backs to join in the attacks and then of course the other team go down the other end and score. I would just play 4-2-3-1 or something similar. We can still play that sexy football that cotts wants, just might keep clean sheets as well!

[Frenchay Red]

I don't think its just the formation. Several other significant factors have been against us so far this season.

Brentford, we were all over them and then lost Freeman and imploded trying to maintain a high tempo so not really the formation which let us down, as we were a man short, though we could have set up more defensively for a point perhaps.

Leeds, no Freeman and a still a less than confident fill-in GK, plus a player who for what ever reason didn't want to be here, an unimpressive Robinson and a French striker still not fully up to speed.

'Boro, we lined up at the back more or less as per our team from last season, apart from the GK. Got in front and hung on in the second half for an unexpected win.

Burnley, undone by two set pieces, not 3-5-2. We were by far the better team.

B'ham, two new defenders, Freeman back (and ran the show as a Brummie supporter said to me on the way out), but clearly undone by the opposition manager's tactics of pushing up on our wingbacks and getting at Moore and Baker as they were clearly short of match fitness and not integrated into the way we play. Nevertheless if things had gone our way (Pack's free kick in off the post and not back out, and the ridiculous penalty not given) we may have got a point or three.

PNE, good performance and unlucky not to win.

Reading, worst performance of the season and the only game where we were not much of a threat at all.

I didn't go to 'Boro, but B'ham and Reading look to very good sides to me.

I recall last season we played it out more from the back through midfield and were quite patient in possession. But this season for one reason or another the midfield has been disrupted and we do miss the craft and awareness of Elliot.

I think we need to avoid the wide CBs bombing forward so much and try to play it around more from the back and draw teams on to us. We hit a lot of teams on the counter attack last season. Just remember how we did against our friends from along the M4.

Too early for me to write off the system we are used to playing. But if needs must then the last half hour at 'Brum when we went to 4-4-2  and put them under pressure, albeit too late, proves to me that we do have a plan B if necessary.

 

 

 

 

[NOTBLUE]

You can play what ever formation you want,if you leave a massive gap between the defence and midfield your'e in the ****.

[NOTBLUE]

On a side note,the EP is running a poll about which formation we should play,I voted 443,that's right 443,as that gives us twelve players,you couldn't make it up.

[Vincent Vega]

On a side note,the EP is running a poll about which formation we should play,I voted 443,that's right 443,as that gives us twelve players,you couldn't make it up.

Ffs that paper gets better by the day....

[NOTBLUE]

Ffs that paper gets better by the day....

The worst thing is I thought it looked pretty solid at first.

[Show Me The Money!]

On a side note,the EP is running a poll about which formation we should play,I voted 443,that's right 443,as that gives us twelve players,you couldn't make it up.

Can't believe SC won't play this formation. 

[And Its Smith]

People obsess over the formation. Formation is fine. Style of play isn't 

[NOTBLUE]

Can't believe SC won't play this formation. 

And it's not even winning the poll.

[RedM]

So other managers have come and watched us and set themselves  to counteract us? I'd say that was quite a compliment really. 

Ok, it's not working for us as we seem a bit too predictable. How about we set ourselves up to counteract them, play them at their own game. Now there's a plan huh?

[GrahamC]

We play it differently to how that video says it is played. We have 2 holding midfielders. And I think that actually makes us weaker defensively because it means we lack an attacking midfielder and means we rely more on our wing backs and 2 of our centre backs to join in the attacks and then of course the other team go down the other end and score. I would just play 4-2-3-1 or something similar. We can still play that sexy football that cotts wants, just might keep clean sheets as well!

What is Freeman then?

[eardun]

Interesting video thanks. Reinforced my view that we should stick with 352 (not least as the squad was built with that system in mind, it served us well last year and I have enjoyed watching us play that way) but we need to protect/cover the flanks better so we are not caught on the counter attack so easily.

[Simon79]

Ive always been a fan of 3-5-2. I've not been able to get upto the Gate this season for various reasons, but am I not right in saying that we have dominated most games creating many chances? But not converting them and then conceding from individual mistakes or set plays. That has nothing to do with formations. It's the same formation that outplayed West Ham last season ( a decent premiere league team ). So I see no reason to change it now. Convert a higher percentage of chances, while winning our personal battles at set pieces and I'm sure the points will come. 

[Flagon]

I got a new phone recently and got this new app called KICK from Samsung. I don't know where they source their data but it has a hell of a lot of stats. I can only go back as far as the Boro game for some reason but as a snaphot of some of the stats they are as follows

Middleborough 69% possession / 650 passes Bristol City 31% possession 313 passes

Bristol City 59% possession / 490 passes v Burnley 41% possession 345 passes

Birmingham 41% possession / 282 passes v Bristol City 59% possession 417 passes

Preston 45% possession / 355 passes v Bristol City 55% possession 427 passes

Bristol City 53% possession / 415 passes v Reading 47% possession 390 passes  

Apart from the Boro game where we were really under the cosh but could have been 2 or 3 up in opening 20 minutes we have regularly had more possession and out passed everyone. Wouldn't be surprised if it was the same against Sheff Wed, Brentford and Leeds. The formation certainly allows us to compete well and other than the Reading game and perhaps Boro we definitely have not been outplayed. We also couldn't say we haven't done enough with the possession as in many of those games we could have been out of sight before being on the back foot. We have just had the worst possible combination of failing to take chances whether that's to take the lead or get back in the game along with being badly caught napping at the back and punished immediately. The problem is going to be finding the right balance because we may start taking more chances but still concede, but we may also tighten up and not take the chances still. They really have to work on their focus as a team. That Birmingham game for example each goal crossed in from either side - where was Ayling and where was Bryan? We had Moore effectively defending as a right back on the first and then Flint and Baker doubling up as left backs for the second! Is that better opposition or just terrible lapse in concentration. Whatever it is they have to work consistently as a unit in whichever formation they turn out in.

[Red Skin]

Interesting video.  Thanks for sharing.

Highlights exactly where our shortcomings are with wingback playing more as wingers and gaps behind them being exploited.

Whenever a central midfielder goes out to cover we are then outnumbered in the middle.  Has happened again and again.  I like the England example where Ince dropped into the middle to cover.  Pack seems a logical choice to do this.

Can't see Cotts changing from 3-5-2, but I still favour 4-3-3/4-5-1.  

 

 

[GrahamC]

Ive always been a fan of 3-5-2. I've not been able to get upto the Gate this season for various reasons, but am I not right in saying that we have dominated most games creating many chances? 

No.

We haven't dominated any game, Reading completely outclassed us, Burnley scored from two corners and then coasted to victory. The Leeds game was very even, the Brentford one completely changed by a sending off.

We haven't dominated against anyone, in my opinion...

[Show Me The Money!]

Picking a formation is a lot like playing Paper, Rock, Scissors. 352 is paper but 433 is scissors.

Its having the squad of players to be able to be Paper, Rock or Scissors that is the biggest challenge. Midfield being the key area that allows that flexibility. I don't think we have the midfield players available to be able to play with just 3 or 4 hence how well 352 worked in league 1. Its not working in the Champ too well so far, in terms of defending especially, but I don't think we have the squad to change very much.

451 is probably the next best alternative that could make us more secure at the back but that would reduce our attacking threat potentially.

What I feel we need more than a formation change is an experienced midfield leader to control the middle of the park. The team is very young, bar Wilbs, and needs an older head to organize and make the formation work better. Even allowing us to change formation during the game should we need to.

Hello did anyone read my post? It's the players we have that matter most with regards to formation. Please will everyone stop just viewing things as it just being a formation change and everything will be rosy. You need the right players to play a formation. We don't have a strong enough midfield not to load it up with at least 5 players. Wish we did but we don't

[Donkeeebles]

For the formation to be successful it's crucial you have wing backs that are able to get up and back. In the games I've seen so far (Admittedly due to holiday commitments that's only been Brentford & Birmingham) Joe Bryan has been very very poor on the defensive side. He consistently failed to track back against Birmingham, something which Caddis took full advantage of and if anyone would like to take a look at Brentfords 3rd goal (Andre Grays) his attempt to block the cross was embarrassing. 

Like I say I couldn't get to any of the other games so he may well of been superb in those, in which case I will shut up 

P.S. I am only referring to his defensive duties, he still looked good going forward. 

[JamesBCFC]

You are right, though we don't have a strong enough formation for 5-3-2 either. There is no one else I can find playing 5-3-2 at out level and above in England, certainly not on a regular basis. Almost everyone has a back 4, and in front play permutations of 4-3-3, that can morph into 4-2-3-1 (which I think we can adapt to in time). We are missing players in any system, though, at the moment we do not have a right wing back (or cover for Joe either), and to move to something else requires better quality in central midfield. We also only have one forward who can play up front alone. It's a bit of a pickle we got ourselves in. Though we signed two defenders who can certainly help us play a back 4, both Williams and Allying Moore can play FB but are unable to play as wing backs. Looks to me like SC thought he could catch teams out with 5-3-2, what has happened is that they have found us out and some. If he continues playing 5-3-2 with the players we have (note many squads better than ours have tried and failed it) it will get him the sack in my view. I don't want him sacked, I actually like him, but he is barking up the wrong tree with this one. 

Watford used 3-5-2 last season, although I haven't checked this year, Man U used 3-5-2 for a while last year too, Wigan also used 3-5-2 for a while before they were relegated from the Prem. Holland also used 3-5-2 when they comfortably beat Spain last year.

[Guest]

What is Freeman then?

an attacking midfielder. I mean we only have one of them instead of that video that shows 2 with 1 holding.

[JamesBCFC]

Well Man Utd had to give it up, Wigan were relegated and Watford play 4-3-3 or 4-2-3-1 now , and if memory serves me well, Holland did not win the World cup. It can work on occasions, but there is a reason almost nobody uses it, and you have to search high and low to find an example of sustained success. If Holland and Man td with their quality cannot win anything with it, then what hope have we ? It worked at L1, because we had the better players and the opposition were not good enough to exploit the gaps. Different story now and we have to adapt to a different type of football. Watch any Prem side of note and see how they attack rapidly on the counter, with 3 to 5 players joining attacks at speed. 

Wigan also won the FA cup, and Holland have failed to qualify for the euros, so were quite a bit more successful using 3-5-2 than since. 3rd in the World Cup is hardly something to be sniffed at either, especially if you consider we couldn't get through the groups and Holland beat Spain 5-1, Spain who at the time were entering the tournament as world champions and double European champions and that they only failed to reach the final because they couldn't take penalties well.

3-5-2 being used doesn't have to mean being ridiculously attacking, the video at the top of this thread shows that, and our performances against Swindon at home last season and Middlesbrough away this season is the proof we can do it. For me the problem is that we didn't have to worry about the defensive duties enough last year, now it's become almost habitual to be so attacking. We can stick with 3-5-2, still play attacking football and do well in the championship we just need to not be gung ho about it.

[Middlesbrough Robin]

Maybe with Reid potentially playing instead of the injured Smith on Saturday, for once perhaps the defenders will be told that their main priority is to defend and not to attack. They did show that they can defend well with this formation against Middlesbrough, IF we get in the lead. We have been a little unlucky conceding the first goal a lot this season, putting the onus on us to attack and subsequently leave more gaps at the back.

[Major Isewater]

Not so sure of that as we were fine last season , its just that we are in a stronger league with better players. So are the players not good enough ? Or has the bubble burst....

So why are n't they doing it this season ? That is the question.

[The Bard]

 Notice the Post didn't give 3 4 3 (or even 3 4 5) as an option.  3 4 3  is a tweak whereby we keep our basic shape, but make it more compact, play to the strengths of our main striker, and allow a bit more creativity on the pitch. Spudski mentioned it as an option earlier and with the right coaching, we have the ingredients to make it work.

It's clear to me that Kodjia is a lone striker. He needs to have the space around him to work. With Wilbs next to him, they are getting in each other's way. Either SC goes back to Agard and Wilbs or he drops Wilbs and plays to Kodjia's strengths. This would require players either side of him. We've lots of options here - Robinson, Burns, Agard, Freeman, Reid. The manager has the option of gile, pace, directness to suit whichever scenario. Defensively, the 3 of them have the responsibility of the opposition back four. An important change as their full backs would no longer have the time and space they've had up to now. This would also mean our wing backs will be less inclined to get dragged forward to close down, leaving them closer to the wide defenders behind them.  

In terms of attacking, the main difference is that the path through the middle is less cluttered.  At the moment Wilbs and Freeman are in between the central midfield and Kodjia, making it harder to thread balls through. The wide attackers can be free to drift in but initially when the midfield get the ball, it should be a lot easier for them to get their heads up and see Kodjia's runs. This simply isn't happening at the moment.