Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Chripper

Livingston currently showing that three at the back CAN work

Recommended Posts

In the SPL today, six out of 10 teams are playing with a variant of 3 at the back. 5 teams are playing with it in the EPL.

Crystal Palace aren't doing a bad job with it against Man City. (Not saying they'll win.)

One of argument it me was "No one plays with 3 at the back anymore".

</Theory bebunked>

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Chripper said:

In the SPL today, six out of 10 teams are playing with a variant of 3 at the back. 5 teams are playing with it in the EPL.

Crystal Palace aren't doing a bad job with it against Man City. (Not saying they'll win.)

One of argument it me was "No one plays with 3 at the back anymore".

</Theory bebunked>

 

 

More teams have been playing three at the back recently.  Scotland looked terrible trying it.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Malcolm said:

 

More teams have been playing three at the back recently.  Scotland looked terrible trying it.

What, you mean the whole 180 minutes we gave It a try? (with one win) Yes, we can it a whole two games and we didn't look like Barcelona, so lets go back to the tried and failed system.

"Repetition is the mother of learning" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Chripper said:

lets go back to the tried and failed system.

"Repetition is the mother of learning" 

Every time you say that it knocks back my ability to listen to anything you say seriously.

You make plenty good points, but that one shows a total ignorance of football. Maybe over the last 20 years if we had played three at the back we might have qualified for something ,maybe not. impossible to have done worse which seems to be what your argument is based on,.

What happens next has nothing to do with what has happened before.

This is nearly a  totally different group of players. End of last season nobody was suggesting Fraser should be in the team, now he is a first choice. Forrest was crap, and we weren't even sure who our best left back was . You can only pick a team with what you have, and if you have enough good players in certain positions you play them in the formations they play well in at club level if possible. Currently we have a number of good players playing in four at the back teams all we can do is fill in the blanks. You seem to think you can just change the system and leave yourself  ten blanks to fill.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, ceudmilefailte said:

Every time you say that it knocks back my ability to listen to anything you say seriously.

You make plenty good points, but that one shows a total ignorance of football. Maybe over the last 20 years if we had played three at the back we might have qualified for something ,maybe not. impossible to have done worse which seems to be what your argument is based on,.

What happens next has nothing to do with what has happened before.

This is nearly a  totally different group of players. End of last season nobody was suggesting Fraser should be in the team, now he is a first choice. Forrest was crap, and we weren't even sure who our best left back was . You can only pick a team with what you have, and if you have enough good players in certain positions you play them in the formations they play well in at club level if possible. Currently we have a number of good players playing in four at the back teams all we can do is fill in the blanks. You seem to think you can just change the system and leave yourself  ten blanks to fill.

 

You make good points, especially with Fraser, Forrest and Robertson, etc.

However, the "That was then and this is now" argument happens after every failed qualification campaign. The exact same thing will happen after the next failed European Championship qualifiers. I guarantee, when we fail to qualify for Euro 2020 the traditional way, I'll bring us altering the system and people will say "That was then and this is now".

I respect your opinion, as I do with everyone here, though it may seem otherwise. But in my opinion we don't have players suitable for a 4 at the back system. You say that we do, fine, how many of our players are still in European competitions? Robertson, Gordon, McGregor, Forrest, McTominay, Tierney. No center backs to be seen.

As I said, I respect your opinion, so there's no hard feelings with anyone here. I don't mind people disagreeing with me, as long as they do it in a respectful way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Malcolm said:

 

More teams have been playing three at the back recently.  Scotland looked terrible trying it.

 

10 hours ago, Chripper said:

What, you mean the whole 180 minutes we gave It a try? (with one win) Yes, we can it a whole two games and we didn't look like Barcelona, so lets go back to the tried and failed system.

"Repetition is the mother of learning" 

 

At club level when you have a lot of time to train up to playing 3 at the back, it may well work for the players Scotland have. If Scotland were a club side, maybe they would have every day at training to learn the system.

 

But the national side doesn't have endless amounts of time and the players looked far more comfortable playing 4 at the back. I was in Haifa, we were a shambles defensively that night, with SOD and Robertson both being caught numerous times too high exposing our back three to pacey Israeli wide players. Indeed it was how Souttar ended up being cautioned twice and thus being dismissed.

 

I'm not against 3 at the back, it worked against England last campaign, but for me, the formation needs to be horses for courses. Against Albania and Israel, we were a good enough team to play four at the back and it's no coincidence that when we reverted to that, we got two better results than the games we played 3 at the back. Against inferior teams, 4 at the back works better for us. Against better teams, 3 at the back may have merit but we need to find a better right wing back than SOD to play it.

Personally I also don't agree with comparisons to Craig Brown teams of near 20 years ago. He had players far superior and thus far more able to adapt than Alex McLeish has. Comparing chalk with cheese

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, BucksburnDandy said:

 

 

At club level when you have a lot of time to train up to playing 3 at the back, it may well work for the players Scotland have. If Scotland were a club side, maybe they would have every day at training to learn the system.

 

But the national side doesn't have endless amounts of time and the players looked far more comfortable playing 4 at the back. I was in Haifa, we were a shambles defensively that night, with SOD and Robertson both being caught numerous times too high exposing our back three to pacey Israeli wide players. Indeed it was how Souttar ended up being cautioned twice and thus being dismissed.

 

I'm not against 3 at the back, it worked against England last campaign, but for me, the formation needs to be horses for courses. Against Albania and Israel, we were a good enough team to play four at the back and it's no coincidence that when we reverted to that, we got two better results than the games we played 3 at the back. Against inferior teams, 4 at the back works better for us. Against better teams, 3 at the back may have merit but we need to find a better right wing back than SOD to play it.

Personally I also don't agree with comparisons to Craig Brown teams of near 20 years ago. He had players far superior and thus far more able to adapt than Alex McLeish has. Comparing chalk with cheese

I know that the amount of time the team can practice a system is limited to what, a week or so? I know that that can be a factor, but the more we endeavor and persevere with it the more chance that I think the players have of adapting to it. It won't happen overnight, the only thing that happens overnight is Dawn. Teams across Europe are playing with a variant of 3, and a fair share of them in our top league.

I do agree that we had a better midfield under Craig Brown, but not necessarily better defenders... well... apart from Colin Hendry.

I think it's moot anyway as Alex McLeish will almost certainly play with 4 at the back till he either quits or he's fired.

To be honest, the only chance of us shaking things up is by hiring a progressive manager, but the chances of that happening are nonexistent.

I hope I'm wrong, I hope we qualify for 2020 in a blaze of glory with 4 at the back. We all do, that's what brings us together, even if we may fight like cat and dog, at the end of the day we all want the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sometimes we get too hung up on systems.  Craig brown played four at the back quite a few times by the way.  You need good players at the end of the day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Malcolm said:

Sometimes we get too hung up on systems.  Craig brown played four at the back quite a few times by the way.  You need good players at the end of the day.

I agree that yes, we do get too hung up on systems because at the end of a game it's how the players perform.

He did? I'm sure it was just a couple of times. The Craig Brown years where the generation that I grew up in so I always paid extra close attention to every match.

Back then we did have much better midfielders and better strikers and better keepers, but you could make an argument about McKenna and Bates and Souttar either being as good as or they could be better than Elliot, Matteo, Daily, Boyd, Calderwood, etc. 

The entire philosophy of 3-5-2 is to have 8 players down the middle with the midfield being compact and the defensive three being well organized. If you have numbers in certain positions and you're well drilled then it can be a leveller. The key is having a three at the back because when we play with 2 we're the football equivalent of Swiss cheese.

My seasonal wish is for there to be an opportunity for me to be proven wrong, but I get the distinct impression that McLeish will play 4-3-3 from now on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×