₦airaland Forum

FBS:
Not sure who has this email but I can assure you that no one is jumping on the Potter train. Not yet.
It's more like the players finally waking up and they wanted this one.

My guess is he's talking to me. He's an idiot of mega proportions! Blowing hot and cold. There's only one person jumping on and off any Potter train every 5 mins. And it's a child who can't make up their own mind on what flavor lolly pop they want.

He is confusing advocating a 3-4-3 (because of current team set up and what I believe the team is comfortable with) and celebrating a win with endorsement of Potter.

Potter is still an average manager who has no business managing this crop of players, irrespective of any success he achieves this season with a 3-4-3.

Just look at his substitutions.

So 3-4-3 and close the matter or are there still arguments?

Yes!!!!

Ibime:
Rest

We are watching Chelsea game

I already know it will be something about left footed players on left wing

I know he wants to protect the last but bringing Gallagher on will disrupt the rhythm.

Second time lucky!

Penalty

kingBolton:
Great half.
Potter should tell koulibanji to stop jumping out of position.

Dude is literally a DM. I hope he's not playing to instructions. It's happened too frequently for him to be deciding dangerously like that.

I have given stick to Cucurella for a long time but dude came to play today. Sharp, crisp, forward passas time after time.

Despite the goal, I still wouldn't trust Sterling with the second half.

Havertz has been good.

Great half!

Our wing backs are on fire!!!!

Goallll

swiz123:
Is it that my super sports is faster than you guys?

My BT sports online is always a good 20 secs behind live TV.

Did they check that for offside? I don't believe he was.

Well done James

Ibime:
Reece did very well there to stay with that runner

These are the key moments that are easily overlooked

Indeed

popizaino:
That first leg was when we needed to seal our qualification to the quarterfinals. Like @timbros said,BVB defence was wide open.I can guarantee myself of scoring multiple goals against Dortmund if i had sat on the touchline,i just hope we don't end up blaming ourselves for not taking advantage of that first leg.

Unless we turn up like we haven't done in the last 17 games, we will almost be blaming ourselves.

raumdeuter:
of the top 10 coaches you know and top 10 clubs in Europe across different leagues, which of these do you know that use this 3 at the back as their default tactic

A wing back is first a defender by trade and mentality, which is why you will play Reece James and not Ziyech and Pulisic, you see traditional wingers as wing backs when they are throwing the kitchen sink and in desperate times
Top teams put their opponent on the back foot most of the time and they try to get as many players who are naturally inclined to attack

Beyond arguing it on these pages and on the web, there is probably a reason Bayern Madrid Barcelona Liverpool City, United, PSG Dortmund even Arteta's Arsenal do not use this tactic. The tactic has been tried before most of them started playing, yet they don't. These top coaches at these top clubs who think, sleep, drink and eat football

3 at the back in usually make your 3 CBs man mark the opponent forward 3, and win individual battles and this can be a vulnerability when the attackers are drop deep and you have runners from midfield where you are already light in a 2 vs 3 situation this is why 3 at the back teams tend to sit deeper to avoid their CBs being spread thin. Also your CBs can be dragged infield and open spaces for runners

Also another weakness is the half spaces between the Wing back and the RCB/LCB. Your unpredictability in attack is also the vulnerability in defence as a smart winger targets those half spaces and there is a confusion on who to mark who. So your RCB and LCB have to be comfortable playing as full backs when the wing backs are caught upfield

This now bring another level of stress on the wingbacks as they need to have a motor inside them to run forward to cover that wing and run back to d defensive work

These are some of the inherent weaknesses that make many top coaches and top clubs avoid the tactics, Did Chelsea now spend almost 600m to play a tactic that has this much weakness

Again, closed-minded way of looking at it. Saying that wing backs are defenders first only, is a lazy attempt at laying credence to only the defensive side of the set up.

Yes it is true that we play James and Chilly in those positions, but why is it that we hate Chalobah and Cucurella in the same positions? The answer to that question is the exact reason it is a hybrid attacking set up when you have the right players, and not the ultra defensive game-play you are making it out be.

It comes down to the understanding of the evolution of tactics.

I am not sure I care about what the top 10 managers employ. Heck I have seen Managers like Mancini, JM, and Simeone use a 4-3-3 and still select 7 defensive-minded players. So what is the point you are trying to make?

I know one top manager who won the CL with a 3-4-3....And when he got a blank cheque the following season to build a proper squad, he targeted players to fortify a 3-4-3, instead of migrating to 4-3-3.

Why's that?

lordfalcao:
first the lie that 3-4-3 is a tactical formation to shield some players have been busted

Secondly how many top club are very productive with 3 at the back ? It's not a formation that gets the best out of any attacking team.


We have signed good technical and attacking players, is there any need of playing 3 at the back when there is no tactical deficiency players again..

I cannot give you the answer to the question when you keep saying the reason for the 3-4-3 is to protect tactically deficient players, yet disagreeing with the same notion at the same time.

What is the answer you want?

raumdeuter:
How many of your newly signed players played 3 at the back in their previous clubs?

many postulated here that the reason Chelsea were being reactive and play 3 at the back is to cover some deficiency and a short term fix until you get the right players to play expansive football

3 at the back is not a style you use for proactive football, as you have 10outfield players by playing 3 atb, plus 2 wingbacks plus 1/2 DM. that is effectively 6 to 7 defensive players. The only coach who uses 3 ATB as his default formation is Cuntay and we know the type of haram football he resort to 70% of the time

There is a reason many TOP coaches and top clubs don't use it. And growing up 3-5-2 is mainly associated with Cattenacio and Italian NT

Tuchel before his stint at Chelsea was not a 3ATB coach either in Dortmund or in PSG

Like I said, it is all a matter of personal preference and opinion. And in my opinion, it is closed-minded way of seeing 3-4-3.

Football (and tactics specifically) evolves. There was a time when proactive football was considered to be a 4-4-2. Who uses a 4-4-2 now except in throw-the-kitchen sink-at-it scenarios?

I remember having this same debate with some guys back in 03/04 when most British clubs were still heavily using 4-4-2 and JM came to the PL sticking with a 4-3-3. I was asked at the time, how many top teams were using a 4-3-3?

Statistically, there are more coaches using 3 at the back than 10 years ago. It only means that there are more tacticians seeing the benefits of a 3-4-3 as a means of proactive attack.

The difference in opinions comes down to the definition of the wing backs. Where the wing backs are ultra-attacking players like James and Chilwell (and not the likes of Cucurella), they are seen as extra wing forwards, rather than wing backs. A tactician can then tell you that they are deploying 6 attacking players (3 forwards, 2 wing forwards, and 1 central midfielder) out of 11 in the attacking phase of play, but able to be pragmatic in defence at the same time, because the starting positions of the WBs is the middle of the pitch.

Change the text book definition of a wing back, and suddenly, it's another attacking player.

In the next few years, WBs will be become hybrid players contributing seriously to GAs, rather than purely defensive players now.

lordfalcao:
we are not spending 600M to play a tactics that was said to hide players deficiency..


Haven't the players who they said to have that deficiency gone?

Rudiger, Alonso, jorginho, Christensen


Why should we stick to 3-4-3 to salvage points. Instead of playing football that will make us dominant.

You don't sign big amount of players to play 3-4-3. Brighton playing four at the back do not have players as much experienced than us.


Spend 590M and be dominant...

This is a myth. You are only parroting the talking points of others. Form your own opinion.

Until James and Chilly got injured, I failed to see a game where we were not the overwhelmingly dominant team under Tuchel. I think City and Madrid away were the only teams that dominated us with James and Chilly present. Go and rewatch what we did to Juventus at SB in a 3-4-3.

It is a myth that you cannot be dominant with a 3-4-3. I don't want to get into the debate of whose deficiencies were being covered with the deployment of the set-up.

Regarding the extra body in midfield, Tuchel solved that problem by evolving Chilly and James to be tactically aware and tuck into midfield at intervals between attacking and defensive positions. Some say it was to cover for Jorghinho, but it was also to provide outlets for tactical flexibility in midfield, so it appeared at times that we were playing with 3 in the midfield depending on the phase of play in time.

3-4-3 is not synonymous with defensive play. You just need a tactical genius like Tuchel to show you how. Imagine what he could do with these crop of players.

lordfalcao:
so we invested millions in this team to start playing 3 at the back?

What is the upgrade, if you are playing three at the back?

You no kuku no ball

What is wrong with 3 at the back though? Since Lampard, the profile of this team has been set up for a 3-4-3. It's one of the reasons I liked Tuchel. Tuchel focused tactically on the specific distances between players at all times, making sure there was aalways a passing option in a triangle.

You don't have James and Chilly in the team, see how devastatingly effective these guys are at overloading the flanks, contributing to goals, yet continue to stick them way back in a 4-3-3. In fact, next season, we will have James and Gusto for the right; and potentially Chilly, Maatsen, Cucu, Hall for the left positions, if we didn't go to the market.

It also allows us effectively distribute playing time to the defenders, Silva, CSO, Fofana, Badiasihle, and next season, Cowill joining the squad.

In midfield, we never really invested heavily. Apart from Enzo, most of the £600m has been spent on fortifying positions in 3-4-3 anyway.

In my opinion, Potter should never have left it. 3 at the back to me is the way the team should continue for him to have any marginal success. He desn't seem to have the genius to set up any other way.

Man U pipe don burst. At least we go hear word for this thread.

Ibime:
Felix is useless, and a tactical liability without the end product to justify the risk. Just dey deceive gullible leprous fingers that like fancy players. No be Potter cause this one. He should take his £100m scam elsewhere

With the risk being £100m, I cannot disagree. Historical numbers are shocking for a forward at any level. Personally, I would have preferred we chased Thuram.

I think the main point I was trying to make is that he could perhaps be marginally better in a less restrictive tactical set-up than Simone's. I cannot be certain of this but at the moment, there is no one in the squad who is doing any better....And this is where the Potter reference came about.

Liverpool came to play.

I think there's an overreaction to Felix. I criticised the moved at the time, but I cannot help but think that everyone is just bad because of Potter.

He lacks strength but he makes up in creativity in attack. As bad as things may seem now for Felix, there is no one better in terms of attacking contribution, in the squad as of now.

So is he really that bad or is Potter just unable to make everyone better?

A001:
Despite the win, I strongly hope Potter gets sacked this month. He com be like say Boli was sent to run the club aground.

This is not London actually.

popizaino:
He is not a striker.

He is not a winger.

He is not a midfielder.

He doesn't win aerial due up front.

No tangible hold up play.

He can't dribble.

I just keep wondering what he brings to the team fan fan.

Not to mention the way he barges into opponents with zero intelligence when a simple foot-to-the-ball will do. He brings absolutely nothing.

Wow Arsenal. Championship mentality. Can't stand them but round of applause!

Lana1:
A40, raumdeuter, Jodera, Roland17 na true?

Hehehe. Obviously the point of view of someone that started watching football this season. Zinchenko bench Alaba, Ben White for Lahm...Ramsdale for Neuer?

Joke of the century.

FBS:
Finally.

It.Is.OVER!

Whichever side of the divide you are on, lets hope things will get better.

What's the benefit of announcing election results at 4am?

BlueMann:
Since November 5th, we've only scored SIX goals in all competitions.

February is about to finish.

That's six goals in fifteen games.

Don't forget to add that this is the fewest of any side in the first four divisions in England.

To put things in perspective, in the last 16 games, we have scored 6 fewer goals than Wigan, who are about to be relegated from the Championship.

This is the process the owners are backing.