dr lime Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 Now that we have seen a few games using this system, what can we say? I'm not sure I like it. We beat two shit teams with it, struggled against Perth and were well and truly beaten by WSW despite the scoreline and were also not as good as them for long periods even in the game that we pinched 3-2. My initial feeling is that Mooy is not as involved since we switched to 3-5-2, although I didn't realise he had busted ribs so that may be the reason rather than the system. Also, teams have worked out to stack the middle of defense as we don't have as much width as we did and Harry mainly cuts inside. This leaves Bruno, Harry and Mooy playing intricate passes through the middle of a stacked defense. Not sure this will hold up in finals against better defenses like Sydney FC and WSW. Which would be fine if we weren't copping goals. Overall I think JVS has changed things to fit his system to the players he has (no "very good" right winger/midfielder) rather than deciding on a system and getting players to fit into it. Arguments can be made for both systems but I don't like it. Work on it in the off-season, don't tinker when we are doing well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haz Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 8 minutes ago, dr lime said: Now that we have seen a few games using this system, what can we say? I'm not sure I like it. We beat two shit teams with it, struggled against Perth and were well and truly beaten by WSW despite the scoreline and were also not as good as them for long periods even in the game that we pinched 3-2. My initial feeling is that Mooy is not as involved since we switched to 3-5-2, although I didn't realise he had busted ribs so that may be the reason rather than the system. Also, teams have worked out to stack the middle of defense as we don't have as much width as we did and Harry mainly cuts inside. This leaves Bruno, Harry and Mooy playing intricate passes through the middle of a stacked defense. Not sure this will hold up in finals against better defenses like Sydney FC and WSW. Which would be fine if we weren't copping goals. Overall I think JVS has changed things to fit his system to the players he has (no "very good" right winger/midfielder) rather than deciding on a system and getting players to fit into it. Arguments can be made for both systems but I don't like it. Work on it in the off-season, don't tinker when we are doing well. We're defiantly scoring goals using this formation (about 3 per game), but its our defense that is the issue. I'm no tactician or coach so I'm not sure if its our formation that makes our defense shit or if the players themselves are shit. Unless we can strengthen/discipline our defense, expect us to conceded many more goals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 The problem all season has been a leaky defense - regardless of the system and so far we have tended to use 433 and 352. It has not helped that we began the season with injuries to Hughes, Zullo and Franjic. Hughes has played but is now out again; Zullo played, out and now seems to be hitting his straps; Franjic played, out and back again minus the form. Chapman remains on the sidelines for another six weeks or so but it will take him some time to regain fitness. Kisnorbo is an unknown as he went off with an achilles problem which seems to have miraculously healed during the week. I do take on board that the 352 system is prone to allowing goals (JVS has admitted as much) but it also has brought in a better partnership between Novillo and Fornaroli. Perhaps JVS ought to change the system a bit to match the opposition. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnno cpfc Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 Any self respecting Coach will change the formation to tackle different teams with certain styles of playing. bearing in mind his own player availability but this strict adherence to 3 5 2 is stupid in the extreme. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
belaguttman Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 Whilst not defending JVS specifically, the team is working on a new formation. It has successfully been used by teams like Juve but its new to most of not all HAL players. This produces an opportunity and a dilemma for us as there will be games where other teams create problems for us that cannot be solved during the game but the team needs to grapple with those problems in order to succeed. Do we persist with it during those games and hopefully learn to create future success or do we forgo the opportunity and revert to another formation? JVS is clearly going the first path, it isn't right or wrong in itself but we need to see evidence that the team is learning to use that formation to create problems for opponents and able to adapt within that system to solve the problems set by opponents. The difficulty at the moment is that the 2 wing backs are crucial and both our first choice wing backs are returning from long injury spells so aren't at full fitness. I suppose it depends on what success/failure rate you are willing to accept in that learning period. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
possiblygeorge Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 "Let's change our formation nearing the end of the season." It's a no from me Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neio Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 It's entertaining but I don't think it's sustainable against teams with multiple goal threats eg Victory, Roar but I don't think we should be changing it again this far into season We have the attitude of you score 3 we will score 4 which I don't know how that will stand up in finals Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rass Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 Whichever formation we go with will look better now that Paartalu isn't there pretending to screen the defence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deeming Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 Its not the formation that is causing the stream of goals its the tactics of not manning up particulary around tge box. The tight zonal defence inside the box is not working. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haz Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 A team can easily stand in a formation, but it's how the formation is executed that counts. This is where the coach makes his mark. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 I just think it's that the whole of our defence pushes too far up the park and leaves too much space behind our last line, which every other team has exploited by quickly breaking from their defence. Whether they've scored or not has been largely a matter of how good their forwards have been, how geneous the linesman has been in picking a close-call offside, and whether Sorensen has saved the day yet again. We are too tightly packed in midfield, working forward playing tricky little passes, whereas our opponents play right through us with 1-2 passes and making the ball do the work rather than their players. So many of our goals have been conceded while our defence is still trying to get back to our penalty area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 (edited) malik will make a big difference in this formation imo once he gets going of course. Yeah the defence pushes up too much. but Paartalu would be caught out way to far up and he issnt mobile enough to get back. the bottom line with our IX is that we want Mooy Fornaroli and Novillo in a formation that allows them to work as much as they can as a unit and the 3-5-2 allows this. Plus most aleague defences arnt used to paying against two strikers which works for us as well. Edited February 7, 2016 by Dylan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 1 hour ago, possiblygeorge said: "Let's change our formation nearing the end of the season." It's a no from me 1 hour ago, neio said: It's entertaining but I don't think it's sustainable against teams with multiple goal threats eg Victory, Roar but I don't think we should be changing it again this far into season We have the attitude of you score 3 we will score 4 which I don't know how that will stand up in finals I don't follow this reasoning. First half of the season the team played a 433 formation, then when that was unsatisfactory JVS changed the formation to 352 and success beckoned. What would be the problem of reverting back to a 433 formation for certain matches? Surely most of the players would be familiar with the concept and during the week they should be able to practice the 433 formation as well as the 352. This would allow the team to exploit better the weaknesses of other teams or alternatively prevent our glaring weaknesses from being so overtly exploited. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dr lime Posted February 7, 2016 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 (edited) 4 hours ago, NewConvert said: I don't follow this reasoning. First half of the season the team played a 433 formation, then when that was unsatisfactory JVS changed the formation to 352 and success beckoned. What would be the problem of reverting back to a 433 formation for certain matches? Surely most of the players would be familiar with the concept and during the week they should be able to practice the 433 formation as well as the 352. This would allow the team to exploit better the weaknesses of other teams or alternatively prevent our glaring weaknesses from being so overtly exploited. I agree with most of this but my gut feelimg is that Mooy has dropped form a little lately due to this system starting as he is playing further forward now which means he: -is more reliant on service from others, can't drop deep as easily into more space and orchestrate as much -gets the ball more often with his back to goal so is easier to mark and it makes it harder for him to see and play through balls Now I don't think he has been bad by any means and there is the rib issue, but I think our gains with 3 5 2 have been limited and likely to be "despite" the system rather than "because" of it, whereas the negatives are more obvious. Okay to have a second string to the bow but use it as a backup rather than the main weapon. Edited February 7, 2016 by dr lime 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cityamatic Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 When it's on this system looks great, and produces great football - like we've seen on occasion. However, if the opposition works it out or the players aren't up to it, you get beaten by Newcastle. Not a fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mus-28 Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 Needs players to know their roles and the key is an organized defence with adequate cover and organization when the wingbacks are pushed high up and the ball turns over. Unfortunately our defence isn't remotely organized, easier to organize a back 4 and try and work off a solid foundation rather than persist with a formation that the players aren't improving with. On paper it looks promising, but we're way too gung ho and the defence leaks like a sieve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 The argument for changing back to a 433 or 442 have become stronger. The 352 formation worked at the beginning but no longer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
belaguttman Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 1 hour ago, NewConvert said: The argument for changing back to a 433 or 442 have become stronger. The 352 formation worked at the beginning but no longer. The problem isn't the formation as such, whether we've played 4-3-3 or 3-5-2, the problem is a clear lack of progression in the team in solving problems created by opponents. This is a coaching failure not a formation issue 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n i k o Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 In theory the system is ok. The reality is we can't execute the system effectively over a consistent basis because we turn the ball over way too much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jovan Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 With the best striker in the League and best keeper we should be 10 points clear. Yesterday's loss for me was diabolical pretty much the heart of old. Way the ladder is we'll be lucky to finish top 4. Can see us finishing 5 or 6 and losing week 1 of the finals. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
possiblygeorge Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 We're farked lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bt50 Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 Works against certain opposition, not against others. It limits your ability to have the initiative in midfield and it showed badly yesterday. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CityHeart Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 All formations work and dont work. All depends on the resources at hand. That said, Im pretty sure JVS has no idea about the tactical or man management side of the game. That is the problem. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeartFc Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 This formation worked great in championship manger 2006. I approve. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjake1234 Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 16 minutes ago, CityHeart said: All formations work and dont work. All depends on the resources at hand. That said, Im pretty sure JVS has no idea about the tactical or man management side of the game. That is the problem. This is the problem. You set up the structure and the tactics to suit the team you're playing. JVS seems to have an inability to do this, is so predictable and is being completely outcoached by every other coach in the league. The sooner he goes the sooner we can realise the potential in the team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
possiblygeorge Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 15 minutes ago, mjake1234 said: This is the problem. You set up the structure and the tactics to suit the team you're playing. JVS seems to have an inability to do this, is so predictable and is being completely outcoached by every other coach in the league. The sooner he goes the sooner we can realise the potential in the team. By then it will be all too late and half our current squad will have shipped overseas including Bruno & Harry. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewConvert Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 1 hour ago, belaguttman said: The problem isn't the formation as such, whether we've played 4-3-3 or 3-5-2, the problem is a clear lack of progression in the team in solving problems created by opponents. This is a coaching failure not a formation issue I fully agree that the problem is a coaching failure. However, it is clear that 3-5-2 requires some exceptional talent for it to work every week. We don't have that talent and JVS should have recognised this already rather than persist with it every week. When he first sprang it, it worked because it caught opposition coaches by surprise but these days it has been worked out. As for lack of progression, I am not surprised since we keep turning over half the squad every season. Progression requires some player continuity. Don't get me wrong, I think that the club needed to turn over players and with the signing of Paartaalu for four years and Mooy for three we could have hoped that the continuity would be there. The other problem which I have mentioned consistently is the lack of available players for defense. First we began the season with 6 defenders of which three were injured (Hughes, Zullo and Franjic) who have never been at full fitness. Secondly, we lost Chapman, most likely for the season because of his lack of fitness when he becomes available. For all of this some, if not all, the blame should be laid at JVS' feet. The only possibility that I can think of that may reduce culpability is that the players were exhausted by last week's game. And again, why is it that our players lack stamina? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n i k o Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 Did it actually work though when he first introduced it? Round 13 against Sydney in the second half. We lost that half 1-2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rass Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 For mine, it's simple: we don't have a midfield. Or at the very least, it's misfiring badly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jovan Posted February 7, 2016 Report Share Posted February 7, 2016 3 minutes ago, rass said: For mine, it's simple: we don't have a midfield. Or at the very least, it's misfiring badly. Exactly. We started with Melling and Retre as the 2 dm and Mooy sitting in the hole. Problem was/is these 2 dm need to be intelligent players and no disrespect to Melling and Retre they are not that yet. Caceras may help but I still think our midfield is unbalanced and lacks any clear definition of roles. Just very awkward. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playmaker Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 Do it right and the 3-5-2 is brilliant, do it wrong and it's self-destructive. Franjic and Zullo not good enough for this formation. We are constantly getting killed down the oppositions L and R forward wings. Plus playing the high line with no wing cover!! This is managed by a crazy man. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n i k o Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 (edited) Agree with the above. My understanding also is that this system works best when marking 2 strikers like in a 4-4-2 system. However when the three at the back have 1 player to look it requires very good understanding and organisation amongst them. Not only as to who will mark the forward but also making sure the forward doesn't drag the defenders out of position. Edited February 8, 2016 by n i k o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadete Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 I dont mind the formation when we have two genuine CB's in the side but playing three Centre Halves when one is really a CDM and the other a FB was just plain stupid. At least if Kisnorbo had just been paired with one of the other two, then things would have been more simple for the other CB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n i k o Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 3 minutes ago, cadete said: I dont mind the formation when we have two genuine CB's in the side but playing three Centre Halves when one is really a CDM and the other a FB was just plain stupid. At least if Kisnorbo had just been paired with one of the other two, then things would have been more simple for the other CB. JVS argument to you would be that he did play 2 genuine centre backs in Kisnorbo and Clisby. I still believe this system would have worked fine yesterday if we could even remotely reduce our turnover rate. I don't understand why we cant hold onto the ball for longer. In saying that there are a few players I'd single out that are the main culprits, not only with their ball control but the quality of their distribution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
playmaker Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 I posted something in another thread which makes it easier to understand. 1. The wings need to be marathon sprinters with lungs bigger than a horse. 2 the DM and CBs needs to be in perfect alignment with exposure of the wings being countered with a sweeper and zoning. 3. Or if one of our wingers press high then the other needs to fall back and defence becomes a 4 back with a CB covering the opposite wing and DM may press forward. 4. relies on possession and precision more than a back 4 structure. Not a formation for an disorganized structure and takes years to perfect. The Italians found it easier to transition to this as it was similar to the discipline and player types we saw in their more defensive catenaccio (1 3 5 1) or (1 3 4 2) systems, however in the 3 5 2 the sweeper becomes the DM. Both systems rely on the wing counter and central playmakers vision, and the counters are still as devastating in both systems. Again the problem with the 3 5 2 is the holes it leaves on the wings when the opposition counters, its has greater scoring potential than the older italian system but is much more destuctive if it is not done right as we can now see. Hope this helps. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnno cpfc Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 Look, whatever system we use the players must understand it and the coach must be acutely aware when things are not working to make a change even in the midst of a game. This is just not happening with JVS who just sits glum faced throughout the game and makes no moves at all. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonyboozeadams Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 On 7 February 2016 at 3:20 PM, johnno cpfc said: Any self respecting Coach will change the formation to tackle different teams with certain styles of playing. bearing in mind his own player availability but this strict adherence to 3 5 2 is stupid in the extreme. can you give Arsene Wenger a call and ask him to change his tactics every now and again..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Defibrillator Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 Been giving this a lot of thought - I'm enjoying this thread. I partly disagree with the above Bela - I agree the coaching is contributing to our woes at present, but I think a 3-5-2 is definitely wrong for this team and is certainly not playing to our strengths. We don't have three quality CBs (I would argue 2), we don't have fit full backs who can get up and down the park all day (crucial to a 3-5-2 to prevent wide opposition attacks which are killing us - but we do have two quality full backs working themselves in to fitness) and we haven't been playing midfielders with intelligence to screen the back 3. The strength of our team is the 10 and the two lads up front - they have been performing with little midfield support. My mind on the 3-5-2 changed in the Wellington home game - the first half arguably the best football we've played this year. The thing that stood out like dogs balls was the instruction for the 6 and 8 to sit and screen the defence. Paartalu amd Caceras were brilliant in this game for this (and Malik moved in) and nothing got through. Melling went in there for the last 10 minutes and was woeful. The thoughts above about intelligent midfielders is spot on - only look at Wanderers away with Paartalu having a shocker and going walkabout so many times (the ultimate frustration for me with Paartalu was his inconsistency - you never knew what you were going to get). I don't think Retre has the quality to work smartly with a team mate and I sure as hell know Melling doesn't. To me this team should be playing 4-2-3-1 or 4-2-1-3 with the 6 and 8 sitting deep and well structured (Malik and Caceras) - exactly what WSW are doing to great effect with Dimas and Andreau. The fullbacks need not be so suicidally advanced like at present - they're not fit enough anyway but a deep 6 and 8 can tuck in if they get adventurous. The forward third is looking after itself and should be left to do its work. Bruno, Harry and Mooy usually conjure something amongst themselves - imagine just this week, with Brunos brilliant effort, if the other end of the park was well protected - bank the points. This push forward at all costs (which is implicit in a 3-5-2) is failing against disciplined teams at the top of the table. Sure it's been good for shits and giggles against crap opposition, but how many on here think this formation and mentality can deliver us the title? I'd suspect not many. I honestly think we we have the players who are smart enough, skilled enough and disciplined enough to gel together but the formation is wrong and the team instruction is wrong. I'd try: Sorensen Franic. Wilkinson. Paddy. Zullo Caceras. Malik Mooy Fitzgerald. Bruno. Harry with the option to push Mooy up and isolate Bruno higher if that was working better. Ditch the 3-5-2. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HEARTinator Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 Somebody like Popa would have sorted us out ages ago. Instead we have Mr Tinkerhead. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffplz Posted February 8, 2016 Report Share Posted February 8, 2016 15 hours ago, mus-28 said: Needs players to know their roles and the key is an organized defence with adequate cover and organization when the wingbacks are pushed high up and the ball turns over. Unfortunately our defence isn't remotely organized, easier to organize a back 4 and try and work off a solid foundation rather than persist with a formation that the players aren't improving with. On paper it looks promising, but we're way too gung ho and the defence leaks like a sieve. what is an organised defense in your eyes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.