Jump to content

Is 3-4-3 the way forward?


Hampden Demolition

Recommended Posts

Hampden Demolition

Firstly, I am not a massive fan on Neilson and I am firmly in the camp of he should’ve been sacked after the Brora game. That said, from watching the game on Sunday, I can see what he’s trying to achieve with the way we are set up. 
 

If we can get a RWB that has pace, stamina and crossing ability I think it will make a massive difference. I said on another thread that I’d be happy for Smith to move to central defence alongside Souttar. Personally, I feel this is his future. He’s defensively sound but really is a weak link going forward.

 

Getting Kingsley back in on the other side will also make a difference. He is better going forward that Cochrane and should be at LWB rather than in the middle.

 

Centrally, Beni’s early showings for me mean it’s him and someone else. In the bigger games, Aberdeen, Hibs and the Old Firm, Haring coming in to provide additional cover is fine. I would rather see someone more attacking in here though and it’s possibly where Devlin and Woodburn fit in.

 

Up top, Woodburn providing competition for Ginnelly and GMS can only be a good thing. We really need some cover for Boyce too. The formation however allows the 3 of them the freedom to move around which is good.

 

All in all, a few changes in personnel and some more urgency to press and get the ball moving quicker and I think tactically, we will be making progress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Largely agree with what you've said.

 

I like it and think it's a good formation but as you say requires the signing of a RWB and moving Smith to RCB.

 

It allows us to flex between 3412 with both Gnando and Boyce up top with someone like McEneff playing in behind them or 3421 with GMS and Gino as the wide players.

 

It needs us to probably think of the front 3 as a striker and 2 attacking midfielders rather than striker and 2 wingers as we're a bit short in outright wingers so will probably need to play McEneff and if he comes Woodburn in those roles from time to time.

 

We probably also need +1 striker if we plan on playing two regularly.

 

Its a thumbs up from me if we get the last pieces of the puzzle. If we don't, I'm not really sure our personnel really suit any formation in a balanced manner.

Edited by Taffin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main issue with 4 at the back is that Halkett really struggles with it. He’s far better in a 3 where he has more protection and can go and attack the ball.

 

3-4-3 suits us well however, as you mention, we need attacking full backs for it to be truly effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom Hardy’s Dug

Barely lost a game since we changed formation and Souttar came back. Far from perfect but I forgot when formation was more important than results.

 

Can we have this discussion when the window has shut and we’ve played another 2 of 3 games? We are a long way away from our strongest 11 currently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ex member of the SaS

My big worry is in the striking dept. Should Boyce get injured then who will score our goals? I have said before I am not his greatest fan but he can score goals, but who else in that squad can replace him?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diadora Van Basten

I don’t think it gives us enough width.

 

Gnando and Boyce both like crosses into the box and with 3-4-3 you are chucking it in from 50 yards away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Ex member of the SaS said:

My big worry is in the striking dept. Should Boyce get injured then who will score our goals? I have said before I am not his greatest fan but he can score goals, but who else in that squad can replace him?

Boyce will 100% get injured this season. So it is vital we get another striker in

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quite frankly we need more evidence. 
 

With the exception of Halkett, I would say 4-2-3-1 suits the players we have now. 
 

3-4-3 has the potential to be better but does not suit the full backs at the club and the mix in the middle of the park isn’t right, that should change this week. 
 

I also think I’d prefer Gnando in the front three. If GMS or Ginelly are not on it they are like a man down. If Gnando is not at it, he will still be a handful and a presence and help Boyce play better. 
 

As always with Neilson, more questions than answers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Diadora Van Basten said:

I don’t think it gives us enough width.

 

Gnando and Boyce both like crosses into the box and with 3-4-3 you are chucking it in from 50 yards away.

True and that was the case on Sunday. However the front three are at liberty to play where they want. Surely one of GMS or Ginelly could chose to go and play wide. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What really disappointed me about Sunday was there was no link between the back three and the midfield two when in posession. As a result again our ball retention and control of the game was poor. 
 

if the midfield two are told to push right up then the wing backs have to tuck into the midfield a bit like Celtic do, or more likely the CHs have to bring the ball out into the middle of the park. I thought Souttar and Cochrane would do more of that at the weekend. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fully agree with the Op. I don’t think constantly changing formation adds any value whatsoever and prevents the side from getting into any rhythm 

 

Like the Op, still unsure re Neilson but compared to last season I can see what he is trying to do with the 3-4-3 and would really like us to persevere with the formation. I still think there is loads of scope to improve and with a few more players in, especially out wide and up top, we should get better. I just much prefer us playing with 2 wingers and when we are pressing and aggressive I think it will cause a lot of teams problems this year 

 

Re RN, I am prepared to give him a chance and hope he proves me wrong.  We have started undefeated and won most of our games in Pre season. Can’t really argue with this and I hope he keeps the side positive with attacking intent as that has been my one major criticism with him
 

Hopefully that’s now in the past and we can see how this new system develops underneath him and moving forward. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would prefer two strikers up top personally. Love Boyce but not as a single striker needs support

 

352 would be my preference with 2 pacy full backs 

 

Smith centre defence 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Hampden Demolition said:

Firstly, I am not a massive fan on Neilson and I am firmly in the camp of he should’ve been sacked after the Brora game. That said, from watching the game on Sunday, I can see what he’s trying to achieve with the way we are set up. 
 

If we can get a RWB that has pace, stamina and crossing ability I think it will make a massive difference. I said on another thread that I’d be happy for Smith to move to central defence alongside Souttar. Personally, I feel this is his future. He’s defensively sound but really is a weak link going forward.

 

Getting Kingsley back in on the other side will also make a difference. He is better going forward that Cochrane and should be at LWB rather than in the middle.

 

Centrally, Beni’s early showings for me mean it’s him and someone else. In the bigger games, Aberdeen, Hibs and the Old Firm, Haring coming in to provide additional cover is fine. I would rather see someone more attacking in here though and it’s possibly where Devlin and Woodburn fit in.

 

Up top, Woodburn providing competition for Ginnelly and GMS can only be a good thing. We really need some cover for Boyce too. The formation however allows the 3 of them the freedom to move around which is good.

 

All in all, a few changes in personnel and some more urgency to press and get the ball moving quicker and I think tactically, we will be making progress.

 

I think that is a pretty good analysis. Overall its a formation I like and I think suits our players pretty well. Our biggest problem is speed of moving the ball forward and the lack of attacking instinct at the two full backs is the main issue for me. That is an issue for Cochrane as much as for Smith. Agree I'd prefer to see Kingsley at right wing back as things stand.

 

I'll be interested to see where Woodburn fits. From the interview on Hearts TV he sounds more of a midfielder than an attacker. Possibly similar to Walker. But I've not seen him play. Unless we replace the two wing backs with more attacking players, I'd prefer to see him replace Haring than GMS or Ginnelly as we need to create more and pose more of an attacking threat than we are at the moment (although I can understand playing two defesive players in the middle against Celtic/Rangers).

 

6 hours ago, Diadora Van Basten said:

I don’t think it gives us enough width.

 

Gnando and Boyce both like crosses into the box and with 3-4-3 you are chucking it in from 50 yards away.

I think that is more an issue with who the wing backs are and how they are playing than with the formation. Smith doesn't play far enough forward to create width. Cochrane doesn't position himself far enough forward when playing wing back and doesn't play the ball to the wing back quick enough when playing left of the back 3. Add in trying to play the ball our from goal kicks and we are too often finding ourselves out of options when we are still 30 or 40 yards away from the goal. But in theory a 3-4-3 with Ginnelly and GMS in it should if anything give us too much width, with both wing backs and wingers out wide, allowing one or other to cut inside when required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 or 3 players from it being successful formation.  We created virtually nothing of note yesterday though. Would be interested to see how many chances we have created this season with the formation.  It requires players to be brave, Souttar needs to step forward with ball more, one of the CMs needs to get into the box, lost count the amount of times we've only had 1/2 players in opponents box. 

 

Its been rigid, but it has been a pretty tough start so can't sniff at the output of 7pts, few more bodies in to fit the system and it could work a treat.  We do need a plan B though, yesterday it wasn't working but absolutely nothing on bench to change things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Taffin said:

Largely agree with what you've said.

 

I like it and think it's a good formation but as you say requires the signing of a RWB and moving Smith to RCB.

 

It allows us to flex between 3412 with both Gnando and Boyce up top with someone like McEneff playing in behind them or 3421 with GMS and Gino as the wide players.

 

It needs us to probably think of the front 3 as a striker and 2 attacking midfielders rather than striker and 2 wingers as we're a bit short in outright wingers so will probably need to play McEneff and if he comes Woodburn in those roles from time to time.

 

We probably also need +1 striker if we plan on playing two regularly.

 

Its a thumbs up from me if we get the last pieces of the puzzle. If we don't, I'm not really sure our personnel really suit any formation in a balanced manner.

Souttar has to be RCB, you want your most comfortable player in the 2 wide CB positions. If Smith plays CB it should be in the middle as more of a sweeper type. Personally I'd just rather sign a commanding centre half to replace Halkett. Smith in the bench. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lord Beni of Gorgie

3 3 3 1 would be my choice, would actually help Smith as well.

 

Gordon

 

Souttar 

New signing

Halkett/Kingsley/Cochrane

 

Beni

Devlin (leap of faith will be real deal)

Smith/Kingsley/Cochrane

 

Woodburn

GMS

Ginnelly

 

Boyce

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ari Gold said:

Souttar has to be RCB, you want your most comfortable player in the 2 wide CB positions. If Smith plays CB it should be in the middle as more of a sweeper type. Personally I'd just rather sign a commanding centre half to replace Halkett. Smith in the bench. 

 

Whilst I don't disagree, I'd always start by playing your most commanding centre half centrally. With our lack of options you're left with one of imo:

 

Smith Souttar Kingsley 

Smith Halkett Souttar 

Souttar Halkett Kingsley

 

Personally I think the second is the strongest of the 3.

 

Alternatively we buy a centre back and a RWB. Which is the best option but can we get it done? Moving Smith in requires only one signing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3-4-3 is 100% the way forward. 4-2-3-1 has been horrendous for us over the last few years.

 

I think it gives us the right balance. If we were to have Kingsley/Cochrane as wing backs and a more attacking right sided wing back than Smith, it gives us plenty of width and attacking threat. Ginnelly and GMS, and Woodburn now competing, will be like narrow wingers - which means getting bodies closer to Boyce and in the box.

 

It’s that Christmas tree shape formation that Chelsea have played for years. Seems to be working so far. Only criticism is Beni and Haring both sat back a lot on Sunday when I would have liked one of them to be making late runs in to the box. Haring tried but just isn’t his game. Hopefully Devlin is that man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Uncle Buck said:

3-4-3 is 100% the way forward. 4-2-3-1 has been horrendous for us over the last few years.

 

I think it gives us the right balance. If we were to have Kingsley/Cochrane as wing backs and a more attacking right sided wing back than Smith, it gives us plenty of width and attacking threat. Ginnelly and GMS, and Woodburn now competing, will be like narrow wingers - which means getting bodies closer to Boyce and in the box.

 

It’s that Christmas tree shape formation that Chelsea have played for years. Seems to be working so far. Only criticism is Beni and Haring both sat back a lot on Sunday when I would have liked one of them to be making late runs in to the box. Haring tried but just isn’t his game. Hopefully Devlin is that man.

 

Just as a note on that, it works for Chelsea yet neither of their central two make late runs into the box. They generally sit and break up play and one starts their attacks.

 

They're not static and they do get forward but they're not like Lampard for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Taffin said:

 

Just as a note on that, it works for Chelsea yet neither of their central two make late runs into the box. They generally sit and break up play and one starts their attacks.

 

They're not static and they do get forward but they're not like Lampard for example.


That’s very true. It could also be that Smith is a bit hesitant to get forward at times and his first thought is to defend. Just felt like we lacked bodies going forward on Sunday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Uncle Buck said:


That’s very true. It could also be that Smith is a bit hesitant to get forward at times and his first thought is to defend. Just felt like we lacked bodies going forward on Sunday.

 

I didn't see the game sadly but yes, I like Smith but I think his default is always defend and he's good at it, he's just not really what we need as a wing back and it risks making what can be a very attacking formation very defensive instead and causing us to get pinned back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 3-4-3 formation has given us a a bit of joy. We largely control the majority games, and with the players we have with limited ability. Imagine when we start to replace these players with quality (which has already begun), we could definitely be onto a winner. 

 

If we had that wee bit extra quality on Sunday we would've absolutely pummelled Aberdeen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watt-Zeefuik

You can't rebuild a squad for a new formation overnight and I think we've got some growing pains showing that. That said, 3-4-3 has been my favorite formation since Costa Rica used it to place first in a group with England, Uruguay, and Italy, beat Greece, and almost beat the Netherlands in 2014. It's flexible enough to be resilient against squads with a bit more quality but without giving over to just sitting in. (Yes, we sat in against Celtic, but I think that was a bit of fear from the players and not the game plan.)

 

Right now for us, I think its biggest advantage is that it makes the best use of Souttar, letting us play very tidy defense but also giving him a chance to step out a bit. I do think we need a CB and RWB upgrade, but perhaps that is just Smith moving inside and getting a bit more pace on the outside.

 

But Clarke's success with Scotland (partially due, I know, to having Tierney and Robertson playing together on the left side) is a good testament to how it fits Scottish players well, working best when players show a bit of creativity and bravery. And frankly a back 4 just always seems to bring out the most dreary parts of British football. I absolutely love seeing Hearts working our way into it.

 

Just needs a bit more time and a bit more work on the squad IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surprised to see so many people saying its 3-4-3 when in reality Smith is struggling to get forward. More often than not since the start of the season it has been a back 5, and against Aberdeen we also had Beni and Haring virtually as holding midfielders. 

 

It can be a good formation offensively but on Sunday we really seen the limitations of it. Look how isolated Boyce was at periods. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holyrood_Hearts

The key to 3-4-3 working is the wing backs.  Sunday highlighted the problem having Smith & Halliday providing the width for the team. Both neither have the engine or a quality regular final ball into the box. Kingsley & Cochrane might well be the answer on the left, but Smith definitely isn’t on the right. 
 

I do wonder if Gino could be asked to play that role now that Woodburn can play his position. Even if that meant Smith going to left CB (keeping Soapy & Halkett in their current positions) & Kingsley or Cochrane going to LWB 

 

Gordon

Souttar Halkett Smith 

Ginnelly Beni Haring Kingsley 

Woodburn Boyce GMS 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Holyrood_Hearts
6 hours ago, Taffin said:

 

Just as a note on that, it works for Chelsea yet neither of their central two make late runs into the box. They generally sit and break up play and one starts their attacks.

 

They're not static and they do get forward but they're not like Lampard for example.

Totally agree. For their 2nd goal, both wing backs are the furthest up the pitch when James goes. The back 3 tend to sit while the 2 CM’s (in this case Kovacic & Jorginho) sit & cover the space behind Reece James & Alonso. 
 

This will sound daft but the way we play the shape, we lose possession so often & frequently trying to switch balls across the pitch from Souttar to Halliday/GMS and Cochrane to Smith/Ginnelly. Obviously it’s something Neilson wants to try but we totally by-pass Haring/Beni in doing so. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Juho_Makela_Goal_Machine

Looked our best in 3-4-3 by a mile both attacking and defending imo. Getting kingsley back and woodburn in the side will make our left side a proper threat. Souttar smith kingsley making links on the right is very promising also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watt-Zeefuik
6 hours ago, Holyrood_Hearts said:

The key to 3-4-3 working is the wing backs.  Sunday highlighted the problem having Smith & Halliday providing the width for the team. Both neither have the engine or a quality regular final ball into the box. Kingsley & Cochrane might well be the answer on the left, but Smith definitely isn’t on the right. 
 

I do wonder if Gino could be asked to play that role now that Woodburn can play his position. Even if that meant Smith going to left CB (keeping Soapy & Halkett in their current positions) & Kingsley or Cochrane going to LWB 

 

Gordon

Souttar Halkett Smith 

Ginnelly Beni Haring Kingsley 

Woodburn Boyce GMS 

 

Ginnelly has the handle and the pace to play RWB, but you also have to be have some skill as a tackler to disrupt play down the side and stop opposing fullbacks from marauding forward. I'm open to seeing him do it but I'm still hoping we bring in a new face.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know tbh. If we bring in another quality Centerhalf and RWB. 4-2-3-1 or

4-3-3 looks like the formations where we can get all our best players on the pitch. 

 

I.E.

           Boyce

GmS Woodburn Gino

      Devlin? Beni

Kingsley            RWB

      CB.     Souttar 

           Gordon 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...