Two games ago you would have been mincemeat for making that statement.This formation we are playing with the box midfield 3 at the back, wing backs really is working for us at the moment.
Got me thinking what other teams have used it before??
How would you even list it? 3-4-2-1?
I can’t get some friends to understand having two up front isn’t always more attacking.
It’s working as robins has let Shipley & westbrooke have some freedom & support the striker
That’s because they have 2 players sat behind unlike in the 433 when there was only one.
Can anyone name another English team using this formation?
Not a big fan of 1 central striker, but you cant argue with recent results.
I'm beginning to wonder if MR knows more about tactics and stuff than half of the people on here!
Not a big fan of 1 central striker, but you cant argue with recent results.
I'm beginning to wonder if MR knows more about tactics and stuff than half of the people on here!
I will never get bored of these posts of yours. It’s really enjoyable - because every time you miss it (or ignore...not sure which is worse) the point by a mile it makes you look sillier and sillier whilst simultaneously thinking you’re scoring points. Extra giggle.Pretty much yes.
It's a highly effective formation for the players we have, though I got absolutely pelters off the 'two up front' brigade for saying so.
I will never get bored of these posts of yours. It’s really enjoyable - because every time you miss it (or ignore...not sure which is worse) the point by a mile it makes you look sillier and sillier whilst simultaneously thinking you’re scoring points. Extra giggle.
You love to see it
I love that Robins refers to our midfield as 'The Box'. Weirdly endearing.
Go read @Esoterica post which replied to you when you were last being a nob. He explained it a lot more patiently and politely than I wouldI'm still waiting for you to tell me what this point is that I apparently keep missing (or ignoring)!
The point I have been trying to make this whole time is that 2 central strikers does not automatically mean more attacking and more goals than one central striker. I don't see what's wrong with that?
Go read @Esoterica post which replied to you when you were last being a nob. He explained it a lot more patiently and politely than I would
Is it that or is it because we've played two games where the others have had 3 meaning we have a lot more in the legs?Even Kelly has had his 15 yard string attached to the Centre backs cut and is being allowed to get forward. The quantity of shots he's had from the edge of the box is a clear indicator of that. He’s had more in these away wins than I can remember him having all season. In fact he needs a session or two of practice as they’ve either been shanked or straight at the keeper!
The formation might not have changed but the approach within it has. He’s let the handbrake off, I suppose because of the point in the season, dropping out the top 6 and needing the elusive away win. We've finally seen the true potential of the squad and it’s very exciting.
Was I?Yes it was a good post from him.
But he's not claiming that 2 strikers = more goals like many are/were, which is what I was arguing against. And it is seemingly you that is missing the point!
Is it that or is it because we've played two games where the others have had 3 meaning we have a lot more in the legs?
This formation we are playing with the box midfield 3 at the back, wing backs really is working for us at the moment.
Got me thinking what other teams have used it before??
Can anyone name another English team using this formation?
Remember when anyone mentioned 3 at back they would get lynched lol
How things can change!
Coventry and Man City are probably the only two teams in the country that run this formation right now. That is mad to think about.
Here's a little video about Man City's 3-4-2-1 and how they used it to score against Everton.
I think it is interesting that the group of people that were saying the one up front formation, which was an indication of Robin’s defensive mindset and which was never going to work, are now claiming that the manager has listened to their advice and changed things to make us more attacking. It couldn’t just be that the centre forward he brought in is now fully fit and is taking the chances that were previously created but missed?Yes it was a good post from him.
But he's not claiming that 2 strikers = more goals like many are/were, which is what I was arguing against. And it is seemingly you that is missing the point!
To be fair I’ve always been against 3 at the back as every other time we’ve tried it we’ve been slaughtered and then dropped it a few games later.Remember when anyone mentioned 3 at back they would get lynched lol
How things can change!
Wasnt a dig at anyone. Just funny to think that 3 at back was deemed way too defensive everytime someone( not even me) suggested it in mstch threads etc and now its providing us some great entertainmentTo be fair I’ve always been against 3 at the back as every other time we’ve tried it we’ve been slaughtered and then dropped it a few games later.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?