So! Was it 3 , 4 or 5 at the back?

Just interested given we seemed to be told that the coach preferred a 4?

 

All of those, but I think the intention was 3-4-3.

 

Sounded like a flat bread 4, from where I’m sitting..?

 

I saw it as a 343.
But the wing backs did more than at other times this season to stiffen up the defence. Little surprise for me was Anderson central, With Helik to his right.

 

I thought it was 523 formation

 

We haven’t got a good enough left back to play a back 4 & the central defenders look all over the place in a back 4

 

Andersen was almost playing as a sweeper at some points early on today. Helik and Kitching both seemed to have licence to drive forward when needed and Gomes filled the gap.
Definitely more of a tactical structure and plan then when Schopp was here.

 

Definitely 343

 

Centre backs encouraged to get forward when they can - Helik looked almost like he was playing in midfield in the first half

 

I would like to know what formation he did play todsy.
I sit in the east upper and the default position was 523 but it changed at times to 433 and 343 so the answer to th OP is probably all 3 formations as it interchanges throughout the game.
Helik was wider right than normal and got forward himself or covered Britain when he went forward. Its probably very clever if the players get it.
When Val etc played 343 it was clear that was the formation under Poya it may be 343 but not as fixed.

 

I think you are spot on, I am now sat in the east stand lower & that is how I saw it , when the team was announced it appeared on paper that we had gone back to last seasons formation with wing backs ,but as you point out the system rotated throughout the game & the players seemed relatively comfortable with it .

 

Thenkyou i thought i was going daft, i have read all other threads and this is what i saw but no one else has commented on it being like this. 523 is not a common formation so i understand why.

 

I'm not doubting what you are saying. The starting Formation was definitely 343 (you could argue 5-2-3 but thats semantics with Wing Backs anyway. When you defend its 5 and attack its 3).

We were definitely more fluid with the back line, which was more akin to Wilders Team that got Sheff Utd promoted, where the 2 wider centre halves are given the freedom to overlap and join in the play more, against Vals more rigid version. It still doesn't stop them from being CHs though.

 

I'd say 3-4-3 when we were in possession and 5-4-1 out of it.

 

Definitely started with a 4-3-3.. second half changed it.. couldn't tell what it was

 

Love these responses as it confirms my suspicions. I'd expect highly professional footballers to be able to adapt as circumstances in a game develop, challenge is it isn't easy(I'm told) to pull off. Whatever it is , in my view ,they need to get much, much. much tighter to the player they are meant to be marking as it seems (highlights only) that as soon as possession is relinquished they drop off leaving opposition with as much space as they want to run into and /or shoot from. This looks particularly true down the flanks, Town could measure their crosses they had so much time, same for a string of opponents strikes me. What was that old Cloughism? Build from the back!

 

Helik went wide right near half way line for goal kicks in the second half - not seen that before. Didn't win any like but hey ho tactical innovation.