Interesting analysis of Juve's 3-5-2 on ITV

Yes I know 'interesting analysis' and 'ITV' don't usually go together but Lee Dixon has been in this case, commenting on the open spaces in wide positions caused by the Juve wing backs failing to track back regularly. Not a problem we seem to be having, so hats off to Golbourne and Delap (latterly Stones) for their work rate and the miles they cover.

I tend to agree with Flicker that the 3-5-2 will be adopted by a lot of teams in the years to come. At the top level, i.e. international and Championship League, possession and dominance of the midfield is key. Not only does the 3-5-2 allow numbers in the middle, but also more options going forward than the 4-5-1 most top teams play at the moment.

Anyway, credit to Flicker and our boys for getting it right recently and long may it continue!

 

The 352 was around before Flicker became the genius he now seemingly is. We played a version of it for years in the early to late 90's.

 

Davey also played the 3-5-2. Played it after the Wembley loss to Cardiff.

 

Everyone seemed to play it in the mid-90s, including England. Weird how things come back into vogue... although I can't see any team adopting a proper old-fashioned 3-2-5 any time soon!

 

Depends on your players - Golbourne and Stones get forward really well and are a threat in the opponents half. It worked so when Stones left we needed someone to fill in - not sure how Delap played Saturday but it worked V Blackpool. When we ahad this system in the 90's under Mel we seemed to take wingers and pull them back into wing back positions - Beresford , Robinson and Archdeacon did it very well. I'd still like to see how O'brien would do there if we wanted to try incorporate Mellis in the side . Got the energy to get up and down the field

 

I think O'Brien could do a great job there. Certainly has the engine, it might just be his positioning that let's him down. I'd like to see Mellis play on Saturday, on his day he can rip teams to shreds.

 

When asked about it on twitter, Jim didn't seem keen...

"the graveyard shift?!!"

 

I can't remember where I heard it but an interviewer asked him what he thought about his new role behind the strikers. He said he didn't mind where he played as long as he was on the field.
That is kind of a standard response for the press though I suppose. He's certainly a lot more open with his thoughts on twitter.

EDIT: Might have been on radio deedar before the Millwall game.

 

When I put forward the proposition we should go to 3-5-2 I mentioned that the weakness is that to combat it you need to play 1 down the middle and 2 out wide to splt the back 3 and exploit the space where the wing backs push on - if you make them drop back into a back 5 you then can control midfield. But you can play 3-5-2 as a more flexible 3-5-2 when you have the ball and 4-4-2 when you don't when one of the 3 can play at right or left back and the other wing back drops in to play the other full back - it makes perfect sense to me, and if you play it right you can dominate with the ball and cover without it. However, I remember when we reached the play off final I had grave doubts we would beat Ipswich as with their 3-5-2 they were one of the few teams who gave us a good hiding at home that season playing 3-5-2 against our 4-4-2 under Bassett. The thing is at a higher level better coaches with good scouting networks can prepare for teams playing 3-5-2 and exploit its weakness, lesser teams don't have that ability.