Does 3-5-2 suit our players better than 4-2-3-1?

[taconinja]

What a refreshing thread. Really interesting as well ... taking on board what everyone's saying about their preferred line ups and positions - it's true what DD says - Mancini head must spin at times trying to pick his best XI.

Overall I think the 3 at the back formation is one he's taken on board because of his aversion to wingers. I suppose it's some consolation but really I'd rather we had Hazard or AN Other proper winger in the squad who Mancini trusts rather than shoe horning ourselves into a 352 to give us more width.

I don't think he necessarily has an aversion to wingers. I think he's dubious as to how open pure wingers leave you especially in Europe, so he wants superlative wingers before installing them into the squad. We have pursued Hazard and Sanchez at the very least.

And yes, it's a fascinating pick for a first eleven. I realize many don't prefer Nasri, but I've been going over games and he does a better and better job the more central and deeper he plays. He plays positional defense really well too. He fits in the position Yaya plays in a deeper role, so I wonder if we'll see him feature there when Yaya goes to Africa.

 

[SWP's back]

Didn't Mancini say he only played it for 5 minutes? I was too pissed to have a strategic view of it in Amsterdam and didn't watch the game again so don't kow if it is true.

 

[taconinja]

Didn't Mancini say he only played it for 5 minutes? I was too pissed to have a strategic view of it in Amsterdam and didn't watch the game again so don't kow if it is true.

I believe yes we only played it for a very few minutes and a couple of our players reacted... poorly.

 

[Anonymous]

Didn't Mancini say he only played it for 5 minutes? I was too pissed to have a strategic view of it in Amsterdam and didn't watch the game again so don't kow if it is true.

I believe yes we only played it for a very few minutes and a couple of our players reacted... poorly.

We played it long enough for Ajax to score a third and restore their two goal lead. It's true he then reverted back to a flat back 4, but to be honest the game had simply run away from us by then. We looked so disjointed as soon as we went to 3 at the back, even when we went back to a 4, we had zero momentum and a two goal deficit.

 

[Danamy]

Didn't Mancini say he only played it for 5 minutes? I was too pissed to have a strategic view of it in Amsterdam and didn't watch the game again so don't kow if it is true.

It's alright for some that could drink in the ground eh? ; -)

 

[SWP's back]

Didn't Mancini say he only played it for 5 minutes? I was too pissed to have a strategic view of it in Amsterdam and didn't watch the game again so don't kow if it is true.

It's alright for some that could drink in the ground eh? ; -)

Haha, thanks again, did I tell you we had a red carpet entrance, never felt so under dressed and never drunk beer from a glass whilst sat in a seat before.

 

[Danamy]

Didn't Mancini say he only played it for 5 minutes? I was too pissed to have a strategic view of it in Amsterdam and didn't watch the game again so don't kow if it is true.

It's alright for some that could drink in the ground eh? ; -)

Haha, thanks again, did I tell you we had a red carpet entrance, never felt so under dressed and never drunk beer from a glass whilst sat in a seat before.

No problem!

If it makes you feel better we had a crushed entrance with around 2,000 fans trying to get through two turnstiles and drank warm water from a plastic cup.

Made up for it when we got back to Dam though ;-)

 

[taconinja]

Didn't Mancini say he only played it for 5 minutes? I was too pissed to have a strategic view of it in Amsterdam and didn't watch the game again so don't kow if it is true.

I believe yes we only played it for a very few minutes and a couple of our players reacted... poorly.

We played it long enough for Ajax to score a third and restore their two goal lead. It's true he then reverted back to a flat back 4, but to be honest the game had simply run away from us by then. We looked so disjointed as soon as we went to 3 at the back, even when we went back to a 4, we had zero momentum and a two goal deficit.

Indeed. Everything in that second half was disastrous.

 

[Berkovic_blue]

Now for me this is our strongest team and formation as it has the right balance as Tevez will play as the link between the midfield and attack, Mario will play in his preferred role which he is effective at. Samir and Yaya will be able to get forward when possible and the wing backs can offer width and a quality delivery. However this leaves us having to keep Silva and Aguero out of the team as although they are better players they are less suited to the system.

Anyone got any other systems what could fit in all players?

The thing is, Silva and Aguero are arguably our two best players, it would be daft to leave them out. I think Silva would be better than Nasri anyway in a 3-5-2, he can play any advanced midfield role.

Keep the 3-5-2 as an option for when needed, not as the default formation. The opposition and their system is also a big factor in when it should be employed.

 

[carlos tevez is a blue]

Why's it limited? It's worked against Utd, Chelsea and Spurs.

That's a wildly subjective way of looking at it.

How many competitive games have we won from making the switch to 3 at the back?

1.V Spuds who I think we won more because of the players rather than formation, only Juve have this system working to perfection, even Barcelona struggle when they play it, how many other teams have won the Premiership playing mainly 3-5-2/3-4-1-2?