Denmark Vs England

[TonyTonyTony]

Far too negative im afraid. 3 at the back and two defensive MF's in the middle - no where near creative enough. Mount or Grealish should have started

Also Declan Rice is overrated

[Mr Popodopolous]

2 hours ago, wendyredredrobin said:

It's hard playing 433 against 352 though unless you play route 1 football and bypass the MF.

I think 4-3-3 can be a good setup to combat 3-5-2 IMO- unless that's what you meant a bit?

2 hours ago, TonyTonyTony said:

Far too negative im afraid. 3 at the back and two defensive MF's in the middle - no where near creative enough. Mount or Grealish should have started

Also Declan Rice is overrated

We played 2 CMs- Henderson and Rice I think, alongside Mount in Prague last year.

Tactically did not go well!

[Mr Popodopolous]

4-3-3 vs 3-5-2. A quick interpretation of how it might go.

3-5-2 in its most basic form means you rely on wingbacks- well maybe not rely on, but they are integral to the system and the success of it I reckon.

4-3-3 in its more modern form- Back 4 with attacking full backs, 3 CM- maybe one defensive, and two passers or one defensive, one passer and one who can slot between attacking midfield and passing CM.

Up front, striker- mobile yet can be physical, two wide forwards, maybe wingers or something between the two.

With that last bit you can isolate, you can bypass the wingbacks and get them in 2 v 1 situations quite often. Big outlet lost- Can maybe cause problems defensively for the side with wingbacks too- suddenly they are pushed back and the whole line is deeper, initiative ceded.

3-5-2 side can rectify it in game but may require a CM to come out and help on Flank 1 and a forward to help on Flank 2.

That solves the Flank issue (if it's the right kind of player- if it's say Palmer who is naturally central helping out the wingback it's unbalanced more)! but then Striker 2 is isolated vs two CBs- not impossible but much harder now. Meanwhile, you have two in CM and that can fall into a 3 v 2 scenario. 

Maybe a CB can step up into midfield but then that can leave a side exposed at the back on one level- or bit less balanced at least- creating a space for one of the CM 3 to now burst between the lines and support the striker. Can badly unbalance a side who setup with 3-5-2 if the opposition get it right!

Attacking CBs on either side, can tip the balance once more but it can be quite problematic for a side! On the flipside if there is more than one non attacking CB, older school less mobile and technical CB in the back 3, they can either a) Be isolated as appropriate or b) Maybe allow one to keep the ball as the opposition know it'll be safer for them to have it while pressing and maybe tracking the more modern CBs.

Now 3-4-3, that can actually stop a number of these issues IMO, while retaining some of the strengths of 3-5-2. Depends on the type of setup, 3 strikers possibly not, striker and two wide forwards or modern wingers though...

[Mr Popodopolous]

12 hours ago, MATT BCFC said:

Southgate has done a good job but think he has been quite lucky to be honest. We had a easy route to the semi finals in the world cup. 

Apart from the Spain win I can't from the top of my head remember us beating anyone I wouldn't expect us to beat under Southgate. 

Unfortunately I don't think the FA will be proactive in getting rid. 

Thought the Croatia Nations League win was quite good- remember how they gave us the runaround just less than 6 months previous in midfield especially, not to begin with but as they grew into it and started to control midfield. Mind you that Croatia side was somewhat diminished- no goalie, no Mandzukic and maybe some more. We also had switched to 4-3-3, happily which helped!

OTOH, we had some luck in that run- school of thought I've read online from some pundits is thjat had Colombia a) Had James available and if that's not possible, b) Perhaps not gone in with 3 destroyers in CM, they might have beaten us. Two solid CMs and a fit and firing James Rodriguez- no guarantee we win that game!

They have had a reputation for quite flair football down the years Colombia, so them going in with 3 destroyers in midfield was either a notable mark of respect to us or perhaps a slight element of over-respect? Maybe a bit of both- did we have the fear factor for 3 destroyers in CM?

Thinking a bit further about that run, didn't Panama nearly score a couple of early goals against us?? Clearly we were better and they were very physical but they missed two big chances first 10 minutes as I recall- we certainly allowed chances on our goal that tournament.