voyeur
Well-known member
I'm fine with us having a long term vision, But why a back three? Lads mostly learn to play in a four, and most teams play with a four. Including City, Liverpool, Arsenal etc. As well as Posh, Pompey etc. For good reasons. One advantage is that new players don't have to send months learning a new system.I think that's a valid point, although I think I differ from you in how I look at it. I think we have a long term objective as to how we intend to play football and I think that is best addressed straight away, in League 1, rather than putting it off and essentially just making do. If we go down the route of compromising the system, then ultimately we'll never make the transition.
If it was a case of Cricthley coming in half way through a season, with the objective to survive, then I would agree that employing a simple system that fits the players and 'get's the job done' would be the way forward. As it is, I think (as fans) we need to be more focused on the longer term vision and making sure we have the very best chance of survival when we do get promoted.
We have conceded in a few games and that needs to be addressed. On balance, I think the system does expose a couple of issues, based on the Grimmy discussions we've had recently. Firstly, I think Grimmy's limitations as a keeper (not commanding his area) are probably exposed in the system and secondly, we've started to see a pattern of mistakes emerge from Casey. (conclusion, the system works bets with a commanding keeper and /or a commanding Central Defender) I would also say that I think Grimshaw has probably just not been at his usual best from a shot-stopping perspective in recent weeks and I'm not sure that is necessarily related to the system.
OK... Getting on to the new system..
The intention seems to be to try and dominate possession, so is that something we could do so easily whilst playing 4 at the back?
We could go with a 4231, which retains 5 in the Middle of the park, but we also know that Rhodes works better (in fact works at all) with a Strike Partner to bounce off. 442 potentially yields the Midfield advantage to the opposition and we'd be back to the former 'concede possession and hit them on the break' kind of style that we employed to decent effect in the Championship... (not exactly great football for the longer term though).. 433? Are we back to potential issues with Rhodes?
Personally I think the 3 at the back option is worth the wait, but I think we will need to shuffle the pack and see a few incomings / outgoings before we get there and that's not great in the short term.
I think if we had started pre season with a four we would be further on now, and would continue to improve. Instead we are lagging behind, and we are getting worse defensively. With our best defender sitting out, and our most creative player, a lot of the time. There is no sign that Critch knows how to combine three players in the middle of the park. I am sure it will improve, especially if he takes the stabiliser wheels off and lets players play their natural game a bit more. He's making bloody hard work of it, constraining people and asking people to function in ways they are not comfortable with. Perhaps it will morph into a super team that dominates possession, scores for fun and leaks very few goals. I hope so, but I won't hold my breath tbh. If the system was that good, it would be employed by more successful coaches than Critch.