Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

IGNORED

Midfield Options in 3-5-2


Recommended Posts

If Holden persists with 3-5-2, which midfield 3 would you like to be first choice considering the wealth of options now available. (Very much injury dependent of course)

For me I would like to see Nagy, Williams and Lansbury get a run of games if all fit. I think this gives the team a good balance and platform to build from. Pato and KP can be introduced as impact subs.

Interested to get opinions.

 

 

 

 

Edited by BCFC Josh
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BCFC Josh said:

If Holden persists with 3-5-2, which midfield 3 would you like to be first choice considering the wealth of options now available. (Very much injury dependent of course)

For me I would like to see Nagy, Williams and Lansbury get a run of games if all fit. I think this gives the team a good balance and platform to build from. Pato and KP can be introduced as impact subs.

Interested to get opinions.

 

 

 

 

Would swap massengo for Lansbury, massengo I think is a real talent and would prefer him to get game time for the rest of this season 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

OP, if we are playing a back 3/5, I would t mind seeing a “box” with one up top.

So, Williams, Lansbury, Bakinson and Nagy in the deeper 2.

Massengo, Palmer, Semenyo and Paterson in the forward 2.

Do you not think that’s harder / more time consuming to coach Dave ?

 

With very limited training opportunities it would be a brave shout  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Sheltons Army said:

Do you not think that’s harder / more time consuming to coach Dave ?

 

With very limited training opportunities it would be a brave shout  

Yes, probably, but it’s not too far evolved from the 5122, and probably a tad safer because of the two deeper MFers.  I’d happily go 541, but I think we’d struggle to progress the ball, whilst also there is too much of a tendency to just string them across the park.  I quite like the 4 layers of 5122, 5221.

Does require good comms though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

OP, if we are playing a back 3/5, I would t mind seeing a “box” with one up top.

So, Williams, Lansbury, Bakinson and Nagy in the deeper 2.

Massengo, Palmer, Semenyo and Paterson in the forward 2.

Absolutely this, get some stability, solidity &  energy in the middle, probably Nagy & Williams. Get two behind a front one, my preferred 2 would be Paterson & Palmer. Get them on the ball, playing between the lines. Get Wells stretching them & playing on the shoulders of their defence. COYR 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Holden quickly moving on from 352 now Mawson is out!

There are options though in Kalas, Moore, Vyner and Mapps.

I'd personally go back 4 with Kalas and Moore seeing as Moore has looked good in last 2 starts. I think they look good together. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

We do have enough CB's to stick with 3-5-2. The problem is not just LCB but LWB or LB.
If Towler plays, I would want him as WB rather than FB , TBF is Sessignon comes from nowhere to play I think I'd prefer 5-3-2. I just don't think we have a real FB option available. 

In that case I'd go Wells up front on his own, with Paterson free behind. Williams and HNM with Lansbury as the deeper CMF/pivot. 

I wonder what team we will be able to put out for the last match of the season. 3 whole months trying to avoid season ending injuries, that's a long time. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

If we stick with 3-5-2, I'd consider one of.

   Nagy Williams Lansbury

Or

    Williams Nagy Or Lansbury 

               Paterson

          Semenyo Wells

Not even considered the promise of Bakinson or Massengo here but my reasoning for Paterson is he can pull left when required more readily than Palmer, but he is best as a 10. Feels more versatile than Palmer though.

Then again, if we play a back 3- more difficult with Mawson and the other LCB Baker out- one of Vyner or Moore can pull wider to double up with Hunt to mitigate against the 2 v 1. If one of them can do this then:

              Bentley

      Vyner Kalas Moore

Hunt Nagy Williams Towler

        Palmer Paterson

                 Wells

Lansbury, Bakinson and Massengo also come into consideration but this could have some balance, this shape- though no natural LCB poses a problem.

Edited by Mr Popodopolous
Link to post
Share on other sites

Was thinking we may ditch 352 with Mawson out. But Taylor Moore seemed to give it away that this is what we will carry on with.

I think that will probably mean the one holder and 2 box to box with 2 up top. Holden's preferred wing back system.

So assuming it is that i guess this would be decent

 

               Bentley 

       Vyner Kalas Moore 

Hunt       Bakinson        Towler 

         Lansbury Williams

         Semenyo. Wells 

 

Don't know if Williams is injured though

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Davefevs said:

OP, if we are playing a back 3/5, I would t mind seeing a “box” with one up top.

So, Williams, Lansbury, Bakinson and Nagy in the deeper 2.

Massengo, Palmer, Semenyo and Paterson in the forward 2.

That makes sense with still flexibility to work around injurys, differnt game requirements, change of players from the bench during gamds fitting I to the same set up. 

I do feel 3-5-2 is the way to go and we do have the players to work it injurys or not 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JonDolman said:

Was thinking we may ditch 352 with Mawson out. But Taylor Moore seemed to give it away that this is what we will carry on with.

I think that will probably mean the one holder and 2 box to box with 2 up top. Holden's preferred wing back system.

So assuming it is that i guess this would be decent

 

               Bentley 

       Vyner Kalas Moore 

Hunt       Bakinson        Towler 

         Lansbury Williams

         Semenyo. Wells 

 

Don't know if Williams is injured though

Think Holden implied the same in the week in fairness.  Think he has realised mixing it up hasn’t worked, and that perhaps a return to basics (Holden’s basics) is best.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Davefevs said:

Think Holden implied the same in the week in fairness.  Think he has realised mixing it up hasn’t worked, and that perhaps a return to basics (Holden’s basics) is best.

But did we not start the season 3-5-2. And had good run of results. I still do not see why it had to change. Even with the injurys. 

But hey just my humble opinion 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rocking Red Cyril said:

But did we not start the season 3-5-2. And had good run of results. I still do not see why it had to change. Even with the injurys. 

But hey just my humble opinion 

Tend to agree, although there were a couple of games where Rowe was selected as the third CB, when Kalas was injured.  But other than that we’ve always had three out of Mawson, Kalas, Moore and Vyner.

I wouldn’t begrudge Holden the odd back 4 switch as a horse for courses game....but the fundamental shift to a back 4 disappointed me.

The late switch to 433 to turnaround a losing position at Huddersfield and having returned to 352 v Watford (solid enough 0-0), the defeat v Reading saw it tossed aside.

Wrongly imho.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

Tend to agree, although there were a couple of games where Rowe was selected as the third CB, when Kalas was injured.  But other than that we’ve always had three out of Mawson, Kalas, Moore and Vyner.

I wouldn’t begrudge Holden the odd back 4 switch as a horse for courses game....but the fundamental shift to a back 4 disappointed me.

The late switch to 433 to turnaround a losing position at Huddersfield and having returned to 352 v Watford (solid enough 0-0), the defeat v Reading saw it tossed aside.

Wrongly imho.

Yes I do really feel the players need to know the shape is 3-5-2 and this is how we play. Yes there will be odd times it needs to change and formation changes  need to be flexible during a game 

This has been DH biggest mistake to move away from what was working and could of given further security in all to know the way DH was going to play

again INMHO

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I quite like the 3-5-2 and then step it up to 4-3-3 later in the game, unleashing Semenyo against tiring legs. We've struggled all season though without an attacking FB/WB option down the left-hand side, which has scuppered all sorts of formations and left us one dimensional. Unfortunately 3-5-2 is the formation where we have looked the most organised (except for Norwich) and where we look to have some semblance of a plan.

If Williams is fit I think he starts. I'd like to see Bakinson and Massengo used more, but not overused like Bakinson was earlier in the season. So I'd probably rotate them both with Williams and Nagy, leaving Paterson, Lansbury and Palmer to fight it out for the third spot or a second AM role if we go one upfront.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Rocking Red Cyril said:

But did we not start the season 3-5-2. And had good run of results. I still do not see why it had to change. Even with the injurys. 

But hey just my humble opinion 

I think at one stage we were so short of CB's Holden decided on a 4. Can't remember which game (with my memory could be wrong) but we had 3 fit CBs' . I guess he may have thought , one injury and we have to change, so change from the start ? Only guessing. 
 

I really think now, with so few options, 3 CB's is the only option. Just feels if Towler or Sess get a run there will (in theory) a little extra cover. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, 1960maaan said:

I think at one stage we were so short of CB's Holden decided on a 4. Can't remember which game (with my memory could be wrong) but we had 3 fit CBs' . I guess he may have thought , one injury and we have to change, so change from the start ? Only guessing. 
 

I really think now, with so few options, 3 CB's is the only option. Just feels if Towler or Sess get a run there will (in theory) a little extra cover. 

Yes liked the look of Trowler other day and what we saw, not much, of Sess as well. 

Does seem the time, which probably has been all season, to just get the youth in and playing and learning 

Link to post
Share on other sites

                                     Bentley 

                        Vyner     Moore       Kalas

Hunt            Bakinson             Nagy          Towler 

                  Massengo           Palmer     

                                    Fam

 

Assuming Williams is not ready. If (and only if) he is 100 percent, Williams in for Bakinson, but no way should he be risked otherwise.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The teams that play this system well, are the teams with wingbacks who are quick, energetic, forward thinking and CONSISTENTLY join in the midfield to give extra numbers/options. They get players ahead of the ball. 

When we play it, it almost always turns into a back 5 because we play so deep and rarely win the ball back high up the pitch. It’s what happened mid-week and it was dreadful to watch. 

I like the system if it’s played correctly, with the correct players. We need to get higher up the pitch as a collective but I fear Holden likes it for the wrong reasons - we are slightly more difficult to break down. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Kibs said:

The teams that play this system well, are the teams with wingbacks who are quick, energetic, forward thinking and CONSISTENTLY join in the midfield to give extra numbers/options. They get players ahead of the ball. 

When we play it, it almost always turns into a back 5 because we play so deep and rarely win the ball back high up the pitch. It’s what happened mid-week and it was dreadful to watch. 

I like the system if it’s played correctly, with the correct players. We need to get higher up the pitch as a collective but I fear Holden likes it for the wrong reasons - we are slightly more difficult to break down. 

And some people suggest all Weimann did was run around a lot!  I produced some “ball wins in final third” graphics for one of my previews early in the season and Weimann was key to that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you play 352...the wing backs are pivotal in achieving success if played in a traditional way.

With the players fit...does anyone think Hunt and Fowler are the answer?

They imo...are the weak links.

If I was an opposition manager I'd be aiming at hitting their areas all the time. 

With the personnel available...I'd be looking at fielding the players that have most energy and have shown some type of form.

I'd stick with a back three...but I wouldn't play wing backs. I'd play wider midfielders, but who didn't run the line. 

Swamping midfield with Five...and when dropping back have the two wider defenders go wide, and two midfielders drop into the middle space they've left. 

Creating the five at the back. 

A 3511 offensively or 541 when defending.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, spudski said:

If you play 352...the wing backs are pivotal in achieving success if played in a traditional way.

With the players fit...does anyone think Hunt and Fowler are the answer?

They imo...are the weak links.

If I was an opposition manager I'd be aiming at hitting their areas all the time. 

With the personnel available...I'd be looking at fielding the players that have most energy and have shown some type of form.

I'd stick with a back three...but I wouldn't play wing backs. I'd play wider midfielders, but who didn't run the line. 

Swamping midfield with Five...and when dropping back have the two wider defenders go wide, and two midfielders drop into the middle space they've left. 

Creating the five at the back. 

A 3511 offensively or 541 when defending.

That was the rationale for the team I picked for Brentford!

In terms of Hunt, I think he is an effective enough WB in a system where we progress possession, like we did early season.  But we must keep the ball.  The whole way we play our 352 has to be based around having more of the ball than our opponent.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

That was the rationale for the team I picked for Brentford!

In terms of Hunt, I think he is an effective enough WB in a system where we progress possession, like we did early season.  But we must keep the ball.  The whole way we play our 352 has to be based around having more of the ball than our opponent.

Exactly Dave...but my problem with 352 and wing backs in general, is how a ball is delivered into the box from wide.

With Hunt...it's generally a cross from deep.

99% of the time, we lose possession from it and end up on the back foot. 

I really don't see the point of knocking it around in midfield, only for it to eventually go wide and aimlessly pinged into the box. You may as well just play direct from the start and don't waste energy in midfield.

Wing backs work when you have the energy and creativeness of Bryan, DaSilva and Ayling. Who work hard with energy, but have the creative ability to find a probing pass or even score themselves.

We don't have that now.

With a back three and then Williams, Lansbury, Nagy, Massengo, Palmer, Bakinson, Semenyo and Pato ahead, we would have of team of energy and creativity, that could press from the front and play football through the thirds. 

That imo...from the personnel available right now would be my preference. 

Fed up of aimless balls into the box and two forwards just jogging about and not winning anything.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, spudski said:

Exactly Dave...but my problem with 352 and wing backs in general, is how a ball is delivered into the box from wide.

With Hunt...it's generally a cross from deep.

99% of the time, we lose possession from it and end up on the back foot. 

I really don't see the point of knocking it around in midfield, only for it to eventually go wide and aimlessly pinged into the box. You may as well just play direct from the start and don't waste energy in midfield.

Wing backs work when you have the energy and creativeness of Bryan, DaSilva and Ayling. Who work hard with energy, but have the creative ability to find a probing pass or even score themselves.

We don't have that now.

With a back three and then Williams, Lansbury, Nagy, Massengo, Palmer, Bakinson, Semenyo and Pato ahead, we would have of team of energy and creativity, that could press from the front and play football through the thirds. 

That imo...from the personnel available right now would be my preference. 

Fed up of aimless balls into the box and two forwards just jogging about and not winning anything.

Yeah I want to see a ball played into a striker who will control the ball. And I want us to be able to press and win back possession. 

With Fam and Wells we don't get either of those things. A bad strike partnership can really make things a lot harder for the rest of the team.

  • Flames 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, spudski said:

Exactly Dave...but my problem with 352 and wing backs in general, is how a ball is delivered into the box from wide.

With Hunt...it's generally a cross from deep.

99% of the time, we lose possession from it and end up on the back foot. 

I really don't see the point of knocking it around in midfield, only for it to eventually go wide and aimlessly pinged into the box. You may as well just play direct from the start and don't waste energy in midfield.

Wing backs work when you have the energy and creativeness of Bryan, DaSilva and Ayling. Who work hard with energy, but have the creative ability to find a probing pass or even score themselves.

We don't have that now.

With a back three and then Williams, Lansbury, Nagy, Massengo, Palmer, Bakinson, Semenyo and Pato ahead, we would have of team of energy and creativity, that could press from the front and play football through the thirds. 

That imo...from the personnel available right now would be my preference. 

Fed up of aimless balls into the box and two forwards just jogging about and not winning anything.

Yes, we have to back to early season when Hunt actually broke in on the blind side, and pulled back or crossed from much narrower positions to onrushing players,

  • Flames 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...