Win percentage with 3 at the back

Excellent analysis, can't argue with much. But in your conclusions, at 2, you have Kolarov failing to track Mahrez.
For me, this is where the system can be questioned.
If Kolarov does track Mahrez, if he follows him out wide, that leaves Slimani & Vardy 2 on 2. So we have a problem.
Either way Kolarov stays or goes we are out numbered.

The question is then asked, is Mahrez cheating? By cheating I mean not working for his team and just left in our space. Or was he left in a space too wide for the left sided centre back and too deep for a wingback to pick up tactically? He stood in a near identical position for 2 of their goals. So I'd say he was positioned there on purpose. He'll expose his own full back but always be in yards of space.

Leicester are just about the only team along with Watford to play 2 out and out strikers. If you have a back three against a front two, one of the back three simply can't cover the 'channel' as it was traditionally called.
Mahrez used our system against us.
If Chelsea apply their three at the back Alonso will cover Mahrez, not Azpilicueta.

Mahrez took up a space similar to De Bruyne vs the rags & Chelsea, between the lines, between the full/wing back, the centre back and holding midfielder player.

The rest of what you say is bob on though. There are merits to a back three, as Shaelum is saying. Hard working rapid wing backs are one way, we haven't got them, Pep has tried a slight different approach with the holding 2 centre mids expected to cover the channels. Fernando and Zabaleta simply didn't have the legs or the acumen to cover. Fernandinho & Gundogan just may. They did it exceptionally for an hour vs Chelsea.

Regarding 2, the problem with Mahrez is actually the fact Kolarov created the situation in 1. Nonetheless, Kolarov didn't get back up the pitch quickly enough, and for me in that scenario it was 3 on 3, and whilst people hate it what Otamendi can do very well is either pinch the ball, put pressure on or at least give away a tactical foul. Kolarov has no appetite for conflict, but he was the best placed to put pressure on Mahrez in the 3 on 3, which even if Mahrez plays it off, leads us to a different situation, because Vardy's run may have been different, but ultimately once Kolarov failed to deal with Mahrez, he was redundant in the rest of the play, he was wrong side and could have no influence.

In that particular 3-on-3, he was the most appropriate player to push up and make Mahrez's life more difficult. His own error in 1 took the protection in front of him out of play, and he did nothing to address that. If he'd held the line with Stones to salvage #3 instead, and they'd played Vardy offside, then fair-dos, but he did neither, and either way I think that call would have been on Stones as the deepest man to step up on Vardy.

So for me in that scenario Kolarov had left his team in no-man's land and then occupied no man's land himself when I feel, given the lack of input he could have once Mahrez played the ball, that his best option was to prevent Mahrez playing that pass in whatever way necessary, and allowing the team to reset. To put it simply, he couldn't have been anymore ineffectual or out of place than how he ended up anyway, and I feel that in certain situations one of the three can step out, but they have to make a firm impact on the play, not miss the play or be taken out of it by opposition play.

I'm not asking Kolarov to go wide with Mahrez, but when he comes in or into a pocket in front of Kolarov that should be blocked off, then Kolarov should at least be putting Mahrez on his arse. If you're not going to play proper wing-backs, and are going to rely on 2 DMs who can't physically cover that space, then you have to surrender the wide areas and say that you will be compact, really well organised and play your defensive line perfectly. Within the first 2 minutes the back 3 are playing 3 different defensive lines and that's where it all falls apart really quickly.

It's just a lack of leadership.
 
Excellent analysis, can't argue with much. But in your conclusions, at 2, you have Kolarov failing to track Mahrez.
For me, this is where the system can be questioned.
If Kolarov does track Mahrez, if he follows him out wide, that leaves Slimani & Vardy 2 on 2. So we have a problem.
Either way Kolarov stays or goes we are out numbered.

The question is then asked, is Mahrez cheating? By cheating I mean not working for his team and just left in our space. Or was he left in a space too wide for the left sided centre back and too deep for a wingback to pick up tactically? He stood in a near identical position for 2 of their goals. So I'd say he was positioned there on purpose. He'll expose his own full back but always be in yards of space.

Leicester are just about the only team along with Watford to play 2 out and out strikers. If you have a back three against a front two, one of the back three simply can't cover the 'channel' as it was traditionally called.
Mahrez used our system against us.
If Chelsea apply their three at the back Alonso will cover Mahrez, not Azpilicueta.

Mahrez took up a space similar to De Bruyne vs the rags & Chelsea, between the lines, between the full/wing back, the centre back and holding midfielder player.

The rest of what you say is bob on though. There are merits to a back three, as Shaelum is saying. Hard working rapid wing backs are one way, we haven't got them, Pep has tried a slight different approach with the holding 2 centre mids expected to cover the channels. Fernando and Zabaleta simply didn't have the legs or the acumen to cover. Fernandinho & Gundogan just may. They did it exceptionally for an hour vs Chelsea.

This is a good post, I think some others have become a bit confused over the main theme of the thread. I'm not suggesting a back 3 can't work, I'm not saying the back 3 is the route of all of our problems.

What I'm saying is, playing 3 at the back the way we do, with a high line and wingers as opposed to wing backs, causes us to have vulnerabilities at the back that we weren't seeing this season with a back 4.

I'm also saying the direct style of English football makes our particular brand of 3 at the back particularly vulnerable where it might not be in other countries.

It's about space, whether the wide centre back being dragged wide and leaving space inside, or the central player diving in high up the pitch and leaving acres behind them, it's the availability of space for opponents to run at us on the break that is the problem. Or the isolating of our players one v one. We weren't seeing those problems to anywhere near the same extent with 4 at the back.
 
Regarding 2, the problem with Mahrez is actually the fact Kolarov created the situation in 1. Nonetheless, Kolarov didn't get back up the pitch quickly enough, and for me in that scenario it was 3 on 3, and whilst people hate it what Otamendi can do very well is either pinch the ball, put pressure on or at least give away a tactical foul. Kolarov has no appetite for conflict, but he was the best placed to put pressure on Mahrez in the 3 on 3, which even if Mahrez plays it off, leads us to a different situation, because Vardy's run may have been different, but ultimately once Kolarov failed to deal with Mahrez, he was redundant in the rest of the play, he was wrong side and could have no influence.

In that particular 3-on-3, he was the most appropriate player to push up and make Mahrez's life more difficult. His own error in 1 took the protection in front of him out of play, and he did nothing to address that. If he'd held the line with Stones to salvage #3 instead, and they'd played Vardy offside, then fair-dos, but he did neither, and either way I think that call would have been on Stones as the deepest man to step up on Vardy.

So for me in that scenario Kolarov had left his team in no-man's land and then occupied no man's land himself when I feel, given the lack of input he could have once Mahrez played the ball, that his best option was to prevent Mahrez playing that pass in whatever way necessary, and allowing the team to reset. To put it simply, he couldn't have been anymore ineffectual or out of place than how he ended up anyway, and I feel that in certain situations one of the three can step out, but they have to make a firm impact on the play, not miss the play or be taken out of it by opposition play.

I'm not asking Kolarov to go wide with Mahrez, but when he comes in or into a pocket in front of Kolarov that should be blocked off, then Kolarov should at least be putting Mahrez on his arse. If you're not going to play proper wing-backs, and are going to rely on 2 DMs who can't physically cover that space, then you have to surrender the wide areas and say that you will be compact, really well organised and play your defensive line perfectly. Within the first 2 minutes the back 3 are playing 3 different defensive lines and that's where it all falls apart really quickly.

It's just a lack of leadership.


But they're you're asking a very limited left back to be a World class left sided defender in a back three.
He isn't, never will be and never was.

Saturday's system was at fault partially as were the players.

Expecting the left sided centre back to do three jobs is too much.
Yes, he's given the opportunity to Leicester but he is totally isolated. Fernando not in position to help and De Bruyne not a wing back in a month of Sunday's!

As I say the system is not all to blame and with the right personnel it may be great.
That system Saturday with those players carries plenty of blame for the result!
 
But they're you're asking a very limited left back to be a World class left sided defender in a back three.
He isn't, never will be and never was.

Saturday's system was at fault partially as were the players.

Expecting the left sided centre back to do three jobs is too much.
Yes, he's given the opportunity to Leicester but he is totally isolated. Fernando not in position to help and De Bruyne not a wing back in a month of Sunday's!

As I say the system is not all to blame and with the right personnel it may be great.
That system Saturday with those players carries plenty of blame for the result!

It's not asking much for a defensive line of either 3 or 4 to hold one single defensive line, step up and play others offside, do as they're told regarding playing out from the back and on certain occasions where the need arises, to spoil the opposition's attack.

It's nothing to do with the system, just players making stupid mistakes and not defending properly. You may disagree on 2, but there are 4 other stages where that goal doesn't go in and 3/4 at the back makes not a jot of difference. Neither did it for goal 2, neither did it for Stones's daft backpass, and the other was Kolarov going walkies, no-one stepping back to cover and us playing a back one because Sagna didn't even bother to play the system either. So I'm not going to blame the system when the defenders blatantly decide not to adhere to it from minute 1.

The players completely disobeyed and failed Pep on Saturday, and whilst he can defend them in public, I hope there are enough sticks of explosives up their arses that the Russians would think we were weapons testing.
 
It's not asking much for a defensive line of either 3 or 4 to hold one single defensive line, step up and play others offside, do as they're told regarding playing out from the back and on certain occasions where the need arises, to spoil the opposition's attack.

It's nothing to do with the system, just players making stupid mistakes and not defending properly. You may disagree on 2, but there are 4 other stages where that goal doesn't go in and 3/4 at the back makes not a jot of difference. Neither did it for goal 2, neither did it for Stones's daft backpass, and the other was Kolarov going walkies, no-one stepping back to cover and us playing a back one because Sagna didn't even bother to play the system either. So I'm not going to blame the system when the defenders blatantly decide not to adhere to it from minute 1.

The players completely disobeyed and failed Pep on Saturday, and whilst he can defend them in public, I hope there are enough sticks of explosives up their arses that the Russians would think we were weapons testing.


The system has faults, all systems do.

The players made mistakes you've listed them and I don't disagree.

Guardiola also made mistakes.
Expecting Kolarov to be part of a back 3 marking two strikers is one thing, but ignoring the league's best player from last season is another.

The first goal is the perfect example of Pep's attacking philosophy. A triangle between the lines and using the space the oppositions system allows.

However you want to look at it, for goals 1 & 3 Mahrez is exploring the space a back 3 allows.
However it arose, they were 3 on 3 for goals 1 & 3 and Mahrez used his intelligence to exploit it.
 
Lol, ok mate

Kolarov, I think, boots the ball away then it's like "right that's that sorted, fancy a pint lads?"

Leicester players go "might be something on here" . They react we don't. If we did, it would be very difficult to score that goal rather than very easy. If they then still score, fair play to them.

As Domalino has pointed out, most of these games is not actually a back 3 anyhow. It's both & more.
 
going to put my two cents worth in here, by giving my take on Leicester's opening goal. Just to demonstrate my view that it's not the 3 at the back system, but the error strewn displays of the players within it. I will be using some very rudimentary images and scribbles to illustrate.

I would say there are 5 phases to the first goal, within each are what I believe to be errors from City players that led to the goal being conceded.

Stage 1: The Kolarov Clearance
Phase%201%20Leicester%201%20up.png

Stage 1 shows the backline spread with the purple line. Kolarov has the ball in his own area, you can see the vast spread of City players in front of him, there is a huge gap between the lines which Pep seeks to avoid. This is one of the reasons he likes his teams to play out from the back. Now Kolarov should have 3 options, play long, play inside to Fernando or outside to De Bruyne. Fernando hasn't tracked over enough to provide that option which may have influenced Kolarov, but he still had a very playable ball to De Bruyne which would have retained possession. Kolarov's decision to hoof it long up the centre of the pitch is the critical mistake, and the catalyst for the goal.

Stage 2: Kolarov fails to track Mahrez
phase%202%20Leicester%201%20up.png

Apologies for all of the squiggles but I don't have sophisticated tools. Huth inevitably won the header, the blue curves show that the City players have been turned back towards their own goal after pushing out after Kolarov's clearance. The yellow lines show the huge gaps between the City lines, because of Kolarov's rushed clearance, players like Fernando, Zabaleta & De Bruyne have been caught in no-man's land as Huth's header sails back over them. Crucially, in Phase one you can see how close Mahrez was to closing Kolarov down. By Phase two Kolarov has let Mahrez go completely and both he and Slimani are completely unmarked. This then allows Mahrez to play a ball unchallenged to Slimani to set up Stage 3.

Stage 3: Whose line is it anyway?
Phase%203a%20Leicester%201%20up.png

This image (badly) shows the positioning of the back 3, and how they are not holding one line. In fact, they've got themselves into such a disorganised pickle they have their own clearly definable defensive lines. This creates a big problem as illustrated below.
Phase%203b%20Leicester%201%20up.png

Now this is where it comes to my opinion, but whilst there are attacking benefits to a high defensive line, the key part of that phrase is "defensive line" i.e. one of them. The onus here for me falls on Stones, he is the central player in that 3 and he is also the deepest. There needs to be clear leadership from one of the three (like Vinnie at his best) and clear instruction on how to deal with this situation.

Now for me this falls into one of two errors by Stones. The first, and gravest if true, is that Stones fails to read the situation properly. Slimani has taken his touch, and this pass is the most telegraphed pass you will see all season. Stones's rough field of vision (or at least his sphere of what he should be aware of and alert to) is in blue. Stones should read that:
-Vardy is committed to making a run off his left shoulder.
-Vardy is the only viable passing option for Slimani.
-Slimani's lack of technique means it is evident even from the still that he is telegraphing this pass.
-He is the last line of defence.

Now if Stones didn't read the situation, then we have a problem because he'll endlessly make these errors of judgement. The second option is that he made the wrong call to deal with it. At this point, and yes hindsight is a wonderful thing, with Stones backpedaling and Vardy already on his run, for me Stones has to realise he cannot win that foot race in those circumstances. Therefore for me, as outlined with the purple arrows, he should step up and instruct Kolarov to do the same. By stepping up he has the chance to play the committed Vardy offside, or alternatively pressure Slimani into misplacing the pass. At worst, Vardy somehow beats the trap and ends up in the same situation anyway, a goal-scoring opportunity with Bravo. For me the sensible option for Stones was to step out, and not backpedal.

Stage 4: Still time to rescue this.
Phase%204%20Leicester%201%20up.png

Stones backpedals, and Kolarov commits to chasing Vardy. Vardy is now off and this pass is about to be played. This is milliseconds after the previous image but Stones has already back-pedaled several steps and AK is committed to the run. At this point a signal from Stones and one last change of decision, and stepping up, can play Vardy clearly offside. It leaves it in the hands of the linesman, but at this point Vardy is ahead of AK and turned onto his run whilst Stones is still facing the ball. At this point neither Stones or Kolarov can get the ball off Vardy. For me this is the final chance for Stones to step up and make the right move. He fails to do this twice.

Phase 5: Bravo fails to read the play
Phase%205%20Leicester%201%20up.png

We move the footage on, Vardy has run clean through. Now there is a risk of him being lobbed, but if Bravo stands up then I think he makes the chance much harder for Vardy. The fact is though, Vardy has run clean through and now has the ball, and Bravo is only just coming off his line. For me, Bravo reacts FAR too late to the move, and should be anticipating this chance once Stones starts to backpedal and Vardy is on the turn. He should be out much quicker and at the edge of the blue box area (6 yard line side), thus making him bigger in the goal and starting to narrow Vardy's angle. Instead, the ball is almost past Bravo before he reacts to try and save because he is still on the move trying to narrow the angle, and because he hasn't come out far enough he's left the angle open to the far post, the one area a right footed player will naturally aim for. If Bravo had reacted quicker, and narrowed Vardy's angle, he takes away the far corner and has much more chance (although Wickham's goal suggests otherwise) of preventing Vardy scoring either in the middle of the goal or to his near post, which is the much harder shot for a right footer.

So a very long post, with big images with amateurish scribbles on, but I hope my points get across. In summary it comes down to five key phases:

1. Kolarov goes against Pep's teaching and clears the ball long with his team out of balance, and with a viable passing option to De Bruyne available.
2. Kolarov fails to track Mahrez properly and put him under enough pressure to prevent him playing an uncontested pass.
3. The back 3 take up their own defensive lines instead of one uniform line and Stones decides to backpedal instead of step up and play Vardy offside.
4. Given a second chance to step up, Stones fails to do so and Vardy will now have an uncontested chance at scoring past Bravo.
5. Bravo reacts far too slowly to the unfolding action and fails to close down Vardy quickly enough, resulting in Vardy getting a clean strike into his preferred area of the goal which was unguarded.

and for me, none of it is down to playing 3 at the back. Feel free to completely disagree, I'm not Pep after all.


Can't disagree with much of that.
 
The system has faults, all systems do.

The players made mistakes you've listed them and I don't disagree.

Guardiola also made mistakes.
Expecting Kolarov to be part of a back 3 marking two strikers is one thing, but ignoring the league's best player from last season is another.

The first goal is the perfect example of Pep's attacking philosophy. A triangle between the lines and using the space the oppositions system allows.

However you want to look at it, for goals 1 & 3 Mahrez is exploring the space a back 3 allows.
However it arose, they were 3 on 3 for goals 1 & 3 and Mahrez used his intelligence to exploit it.

a back 4 allows space if there's space between defence & midfield, space is space. I don't feel you distinguish between weaknesses in a system and the system failing because the players completely fail to execute it. It was a total failure in execution, and the basic tenants of what each defender was asked to do were not majorly different to those in a 4.

Mahrez & Vardy exploited the fact that Kolarov, Stones & Sagna played like twats, nothing more.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.