3-4-3

[E3OBE]

3-4-3 is fine if you have the personnel. I question if we really do. Your wingbacks are absolutely critical - they’re your width in attack, they draw players out, open the space in the middle to allow your front three to attack the space left in and around the box. Smith definitely isn’t a wingback and the jury is out on Cochrane. 
 

In no way saying the front three we have are perfect, but we are essentially playing a back 5, two holding midfielders and asking three guys to break down the opposition and win us the game though.

Edited October 31, 2021 by E3OBE

[Nookie Bear]

15 hours ago, Led Tasso said:

This was not the week to change it up with three games in eight days but we need to try out a 3-5-2, a 3-4-1-2, or some other variant.

 

We go wobbly when we go to a back 4 but we're getting overrun in the 3-4-3.

We get overrun because our wide players are weak defensively and too much is out on Beni and Cammy. 

[A_A wehatethehibs]

1 minute ago, E3OBE said:

3-4-3 is fine if you have the personnel. I question if we really do. Your wingbacks are absolutely critical - they’re your width in attack, they draw players out, open the space in the middle to allow your front three to attack the space left in and around the box. Smith definitely isn’t a wingback and the jury is out on Cochrane. 
 

In no way saying the front three we have are perfect, but we are essentially playing a back 5, two holding midfielders and asking three guys to break down the opposition and win us the game though.

Re Cochrane, we’ve got a deadly left footed crossers of a ball Kingsley at CB and a championship class CB on the bench. 

 

For me it’s not Cochrane fault but one change it’s definitely time to try is, Moore into CB and Kingsley out to WB. Cochrane is a really good lad and doing well. But we need to shuffle the pack now and that’s the only change we can make to WB because smith, I think we’re stuck with him, don’t see the alternative. Unless Logan is fully fit and showing he can handle the standard in training. Mceneff there is a bit of a stretch for me. So that means Kingsley to WB is the only move we can make. Agree about the importance of the WBs

[David McCaig]

12 minutes ago, A_A wehatethehibs said:

Re Cochrane, we’ve got a deadly left footed crossers of a ball Kingsley at CB and a championship class CB on the bench. 

 

For me it’s not Cochrane fault but one change it’s definitely time to try is, Moore into CB and Kingsley out to WB. Cochrane is a really good lad and doing well. But we need to shuffle the pack now and that’s the only change we can make to WB because smith, I think we’re stuck with him, don’t see the alternative. Unless Logan is fully fit and showing he can handle the standard in training. Mceneff there is a bit of a stretch for me. So that means Kingsley to WB is the only move we can make. Agree about the importance of the WBs

The attacking alternative is moving Ginnelly to RWB.

 

Asking Gino to take on more defensive responsibility is no more preposterous than asking Smith to become a quasi-winger.

[karipidis]

I can understand the concerns with the formation but after all the focus and preparation being put on it and yesterday being our first real bad performance of the season I think Robbie will and probably should persist with it against Dundee United. If we don’t get a result then the wheels will have fallen off and changes will be required.

 

I think Moore needs to come in for Halkett. 
 

Gordon

 

Souttar

Moore

Kingsley

 

Smith

Beni

Devlin

Cochrane

 

Ginelly

Boyce

McKay

[karipidis]

22 minutes ago, A_A wehatethehibs said:

Re Cochrane, we’ve got a deadly left footed crossers of a ball Kingsley at CB and a championship class CB on the bench. 

 

For me it’s not Cochrane fault but one change it’s definitely time to try is, Moore into CB and Kingsley out to WB. Cochrane is a really good lad and doing well. But we need to shuffle the pack now and that’s the only change we can make to WB because smith, I think we’re stuck with him, don’t see the alternative. Unless Logan is fully fit and showing he can handle the standard in training. Mceneff there is a bit of a stretch for me. So that means Kingsley to WB is the only move we can make. Agree about the importance of the WBs

I like the balance Kingsley gives us at LCB so think the change should be Moore for Halkett. He will drive us up the park more and his quality on the ball will make it harder for teams to press us. Teams almost allow Halkett to have the ball as he doesn’t do much with it and when they do press him he panics and it leads to errors. Crazy not playing Moore. 

[David McCaig]

4 minutes ago, karipidis said:

I can understand the concerns with the formation but after all the focus and preparation being put on it and yesterday being our first real bad performance of the season I think Robbie will and probably should persist with it against Dundee United. If we don’t get a result then the wheels will have fallen off and changes will be required.

 

I think Moore needs to come in for Halkett. 
 

Gordon

 

Souttar

Moore

Kingsley

 

Smith

Beni

Devlin

Cochrane

 

Ginelly

Boyce

McKay

That's still a 5-2-2-1!!

 

Yesterday extended our winless run to 4 games, Dundee and St Johnstone were signs of the wheels starting to come loose, yesterday saw them fall off.

 

Dundee United next week needs to see us rebuild better, we are clearly 1 player short in both central midfield and upfront and Smith in incapable of playing as a genuine wingback. We need to address these issues to grow as a team.

[kingantti1874]

9 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

It’s a bit concerning, more than bit, that moving one player into midfield caused such a catastrophic second half. It’s more than bit concerning that I noticed it and noticed the overload in midfield 22 minutes before our manager tried to do something about it. I can’t be the only one who noticed it and expressed concern. Both commentators on Hearts TV noticed it and remarked upon it. It cost us the game. Neilson’s first real big mistake  of the season and it made us look less than ordinary. He has a week to fix it because that’s how easy we are to blow away. A clever old man with a bit of football left in his legs and our coaching team had no answer to it.

this 100%.  Of course it’s hard to be too critical over the course of the season so far.  
 

but it’s easy to be critical today. It’s less about the defeat and more about the fact it’s was avoidable.

 

someone said 3-4-3 works for us. Yes it has but when the opposition Flood midfield and it very obviously isn’t working, when it is very obvious we can’t get out then he needs to react.. no one is saying to stop playing 3-4-3. But his in game management yesterday was shite

Edited October 31, 2021 by kingantti1874

[David McCaig]

13 minutes ago, karipidis said:

I like the balance Kingsley gives us at LCB so think the change should be Moore for Halkett. He will drive us up the park more and his quality on the ball will make it harder for teams to press us. Teams almost allow Halkett to have the ball as he doesn’t do much with it and when they do press him he panics and it leads to errors. Crazy not playing Moore. 

Kingsley is our most under-rated player, brilliant in whatever position he plays.

 

Fantastic at LCH but probably the one genuine wing back in our squad.

[A_A wehatethehibs]

28 minutes ago, David McCaig said:

The attacking alternative is moving Ginnelly to RWB.

 

Asking Gino to take on more defensive responsibility is no more preposterous than asking Smith to become a quasi-winger.

Hmm that’s a questionable one for me mate. Risk and reward. Would say theres probably a greater chance that could lose us a game through a team isolating Ginelly and him giving away a penalty or something. I’m sure it has probably been looked at in training. For me we’re stuck with Smith there till we can sign someone. 
 

20 minutes ago, karipidis said:

I like the balance Kingsley gives us at LCB so think the change should be Moore for Halkett. He will drive us up the park more and his quality on the ball will make it harder for teams to press us. Teams almost allow Halkett to have the ball as he doesn’t do much with it and when they do press him he panics and it leads to errors. Crazy not playing Moore. 

 

Just feel, the question is, are we making the most of kingsleys attacking quality? He can deliver and strike a football. Are we seeing him in positions where he can do the most damage? For me I’d try Moore-Halks-soapy. Whatever we do, with the defensive lapses in the last few games he has got to get Moore back in. Insane not to be playing him, whatever way we shuffle the pack Moore in is the 100% shout. 

[David McCaig]

8 minutes ago, A_A wehatethehibs said:

Hmm that’s a questionable one for me mate. Risk and reward. Would say theres probably a greater chance that could lose us a game through a team isolating Ginelly and him giving away a penalty or something. I’m sure it has probably been looked at in training. For me we’re stuck with Smith there till we can sign someone. 
 

 

 

The risk and reward is that win one, lose one = 3 points whereas two safe draws = 2 points.

[A_A wehatethehibs]

Just now, David McCaig said:

The risk and reward is that win one, lose one = 3 points whereas two safe draws = 2 points.

Yes but what about lose 2. We’ve been leaking goals, no clean sheets in 4. And some silly goals as well. So for me we need to be looking to shore up the defence by getting Moore in there and shifting Kingsley along to see if we get more attacking joy out of him at LWB. That shuffles the attack options without taking much risk in defence. Chucking Gino in at RWB, I just don’t know if it’s the shout at this moment in time. I’d be more looking at putting Ginelly up front through the middle tbh, think that would be a risk worth taking. Get him 1vs 1 foot race in behind Charlie Mulgrew… 

[JimmyCant]

33 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

this 100%.  Of course it’s hard to be too critical over the course of the season so far.  
 

but it’s easy to be critical today. It’s less about the defeat and more about the fact it’s was avoidable.

 

someone said 3-4-3 works for us. Yes it has but when the opposition Flood midfield and it very obviously isn’t working, when it is very obvious we can’t get out then he needs to react.. no one is saying to stop playing 3-4-3. But his in game management yesterday was shite

The last 3 games we’ve struggled in midfield for large parts of them. Playing 2 in there is causing us problems now, especially since our goal threat isn’t great 

[Ernie Eskilsson]

17 hours ago, BigAlim said:

____________Gordon

 

Smith__Moore__Souttar__Kingsley

 

________Devlin__Baningime

 

__McKay__McEneff__Ginnelly

 

____________Boyce

 

This is the team that I want to see next week, stop playing a formation just to suit Halkett when it doesn't suit our full backs or our attacking players at all

Gordon

 

Moore Souttar Kingsley Cochrane

 

Devlin Beni

 

McKay Woodburn Ginelly 

 

Boyce

[David McCaig]

1 hour ago, A_A wehatethehibs said:

Yes but what about lose 2. We’ve been leaking goals, no clean sheets in 4. And some silly goals as well. So for me we need to be looking to shore up the defence by getting Moore in there and shifting Kingsley along to see if we get more attacking joy out of him at LWB. That shuffles the attack options without taking much risk in defence. Chucking Gino in at RWB, I just don’t know if it’s the shout at this moment in time. I’d be more looking at putting Ginelly up front through the middle tbh, think that would be a risk worth taking. Get him 1vs 1 foot race in behind Charlie Mulgrew… 

Our biggest problem is that we are a man short in both central midfield and up front. 

 

Simply shuffling Kingsley to LWB and playing the same formation changes very little.

[Halliphax]

7 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

Get a grip, his substitutions more often than not weaken the team, did it against Aberdeen,Hibs, Motherwell and Dundee at home. Can only think of both games versus Celtic and Rangers away when his subs made a difference, and only because we were playing poorly. 
 

I'll ignore your rude and borderline hostile (for no reason!) tone and reply anyway.

 

Walker for Halliday and two underperforming forwards at the time(Ginnelly and GMS) for Henderson and McEneff are bad subs against Aberdeen? Don't think so. Everyone (including you) probably would have moaned that he never took Ginnelly or GMS when they were making no impact.

GMS off for Ginnelly (when we needed pace and GMS was yet again underperforming), Moore (who we all like) on for a tired (and injured) Smith and McKay on for Woodburn after a suspected injury against Hibs. Two injuries here that forced Neilson to make subs.

 

Against Dundee, Boyce injured so Gnando has to come on (which striker would you have picked, oh that's right, Gnando is our only other striker), Wooburn underperforming so GMS has to come on. The McKay off for Ginnelly sub is probably the only one I'd even think to concede here (since McKay played well) but then again Ginnelly goes on and scores against St Johnstone the very next match so it was probably the right call to make since Boyce was off injured and we needed a goal threat which Gnando wasn't providing.

I wont even get into the Motherwell game because we won 2-0 when they were on a romping form (only other undefeated team if I recall correctly). Halkett was inured so came off for Halliday and we changed formation which allows us to play Haring (for McKay) and defend our two goal lead.

I dunno if you're just excitable because we've lost our first game but Neilson rarely makes the wrong call for subs, he's handicapped by covering injuries or underperforming players but it doesn't take a genius to work out WHY the subs were made. Was bringing Halliday on yesterday a (rare) mistake? Obviously. Is it Neilson's fault that Halliday can't control himself and got red carded? No. Do I need to "get a grip" because he supposedly always ****s up his subs like in the four matches you cited? No.

 

Happy to hear how you would've changed those subs and won us the games but I'd probably rather trust Neilson's word 99% of the time over any armchair managers on JKB or anywhere else.

Edited October 31, 2021 by Halliphax

[A_A wehatethehibs]

41 minutes ago, David McCaig said:

Our biggest problem is that we are a man short in both central midfield and up front. 

 

Simply shuffling Kingsley to LWB and playing the same formation changes very little.

yea but you’re talking as if we’re adrift at the bottom. We’re sat 3rd. I’m advocating a minor change to get some better crosses in the box and shore up a leaky defence… before we turn to the more nuclear option which is a complete system change to a 4-2-3-1 or suchlike 

[sirwalter]

Actually I thought the problem of being out-gunned in midfield was apparent in the first half and Brown's move into that area was an intensification rather than the root cause. As soon as the penalty hit the back of the net I wanted to see Haring on for GMS in the second half. The latter was contributing nothing and his (unrealized) attacking potential had become less important. With Haring I felt we possibly could secure the win and probably avoid defeat. This view is not intended to be indicative of a lack or loss of faith in Robbie's judgement or a suggested abandonment of 3-4-3. Nobody always gets it right. Only thing is it seemed so obvious. Is there a problem with Haring?

[Tommy Brown]

Watched highlights of DU v StJ.

United peppered the opposition goal and were beaten by an inspired keeper.

 

They gave us a tough 2nd half at Tannadice, we badly need to get back in tune with one another.

[No Idle Talk]

I don't want to rush into saying we should abandon this formation when we have only lost one league game in twelve. I think the lack of goals we are scoring from open play does indicate that there are one or two issues with it though.

 

The two main issues I have with it are:

 

1. We have seven defensive players(and a goalkeeper) starting every week. This is too negative. We are relying almost totally on our front three to provide the goals. And they're not really doing it. The defenders are chipping in now and then but there is nothing coming from the midfield as far as goals go. That is a problem.

 

2. We are not getting enough out of the wing back positions. Alex Cochrane is doing ok and may improve further in time. My own view is that Stephen Kingsley would be better than Cochrane in this role but the manager seems to prefer to have Kingsley in the back three so it is what it is. The bigger issue is the RWB position. Michael Smith is not up to it. He's just not. He does not offer anywhere near enough going forward and, at the age he's at, I don't really think he has the pace or the legs to play that position anymore. We need a new signing there. A younger player with more speed and who is capable of delivering good crosses into the box when they get into the final third. This would make a big difference.

 

Obviously we can't sign anyone until January so I wouldn't be averse to seeing us have a wee tinker with the front three in the meantime to see if we can get things moving on the goalscoring front. I feel with the 3-4-3 that Beni and Cammy get swamped a wee bit in the middle of the park at times. They are both performing admirably but if you're outnumbered you're outnumbered. I wouldn't mind seeing us play more of a 3-4-1-2 shape with Woodburn playing in front of Beni and Cammy, and play Boycie and Gino up front together. I can't help thinking Woodburn is a square peg in a round hole out wide. Moving him into a more central area could really help him. Boycie is great but he is slow. Gino has speed to burn. Putting him alongside Boycie would give us that pace up front to threaten defences in behind and make them defend a bit deeper. At the moment, teams don't need to worry too much about us getting in behind them because Boyce isn't quick enough to outrun most people. 

 

It's just an idea I have been mulling over but it might be worth a try if results don't pick up soon.

Edited October 31, 2021 by No Idle Talk

[gregzy2k7]

5 hours ago, E3OBE said:

3-4-3 is fine if you have the personnel. I question if we really do. Your wingbacks are absolutely critical - they’re your width in attack, they draw players out, open the space in the middle to allow your front three to attack the space left in and around the box. Smith definitely isn’t a wingback and the jury is out on Cochrane. 
 

In no way saying the front three we have are perfect, but we are essentially playing a back 5, two holding midfielders and asking three guys to break down the opposition and win us the game though.

Change in shape needed imo until we get the quality in to play 3-4-3.

I think 4-2-3-1 with souttar and Moore the centre backs.

[Pasquale for King]

5 hours ago, Halliphax said:

I'll ignore your rude and borderline hostile (for no reason!) tone and reply anyway.

 

Walker for Halliday and two underperforming forwards at the time(Ginnelly and GMS) for Henderson and McEneff are bad subs against Aberdeen? Don't think so. Everyone (including you) probably would have moaned that he never took Ginnelly or GMS when they were making no impact.

GMS off for Ginnelly (when we needed pace and GMS was yet again underperforming), Moore (who we all like) on for a tired (and injured) Smith and McKay on for Woodburn after a suspected injury against Hibs. Two injuries here that forced Neilson to make subs.

 

Against Dundee, Boyce injured so Gnando has to come on (which striker would you have picked, oh that's right, Gnando is our only other striker), Wooburn underperforming so GMS has to come on. The McKay off for Ginnelly sub is probably the only one I'd even think to concede here (since McKay played well) but then again Ginnelly goes on and scores against St Johnstone the very next match so it was probably the right call to make since Boyce was off injured and we needed a goal threat which Gnando wasn't providing.

I wont even get into the Motherwell game because we won 2-0 when they were on a romping form (only other undefeated team if I recall correctly). Halkett was inured so came off for Halliday and we changed formation which allows us to play Haring (for McKay) and defend our two goal lead.

I dunno if you're just excitable because we've lost our first game but Neilson rarely makes the wrong call for subs, he's handicapped by covering injuries or underperforming players but it doesn't take a genius to work out WHY the subs were made. Was bringing Halliday on yesterday a (rare) mistake? Obviously. Is it Neilson's fault that Halliday can't control himself and got red carded? No. Do I need to "get a grip" because he supposedly always ****s up his subs like in the four matches you cited? No.

 

Happy to hear how you would've changed those subs and won us the games but I'd probably rather trust Neilson's word 99% of the time over any armchair managers on JKB or anywhere else.

He subs rarely make a positive impact, away to Dundee Utd was one. His insistence on subbing both wingers in most games hinders his opportunity to change. 
Ads for Halliday he signed him and also put him on, being an Uber Hun he was always going to lose the plot. When you have better players like Haring, McEneff and Walker why even bother putting him on, he’s garbage and never helps us play better. 
I wasn't excitable after the game, raging would be a better term, because this result and performance has been coming for weeks and he’s done nothing about it. 

If his options are limited, they’re not, then maybe he should’ve signed players more suited to the system he’s trying to play, like wing backs that can cross, why they’re taking corners is beyond any geniuses comprehension. 
 

[Pasquale for King]

4 hours ago, No Idle Talk said:

I don't want to rush into saying we should abandon this formation when we have only lost one league game in twelve. I think the lack of goals we are scoring from open play does indicate that there are one or two issues with it though.

 

The two main issues I have with it are:

 

1. We have seven defensive players(and a goalkeeper) starting every week. This is too negative. We are relying almost totally on our front three to provide the goals. And they're not really doing it. The defenders are chipping in now and then but there is nothing coming from the midfield as far as goals go. That is a problem.

 

2. We are not getting enough out of the wing back positions. Alex Cochrane is doing ok and may improve further in time. My own view is that Stephen Kingsley would be better than Cochrane in this role but the manager seems to prefer to have Kingsley in the back three so it is what it is. The bigger issue is the RWB position. Michael Smith is not up to it. He's just not. He does not offer anywhere near enough going forward and, at the age he's at, I don't really think he has the pace or the legs to play that position anymore. We need a new signing there. A younger player with more speed and who is capable of delivering good crosses into the box when they get into the final third. This would make a big difference.

 

Obviously we can't sign anyone until January so I wouldn't be averse to seeing us have a wee tinker with the front three in the meantime to see if we can get things moving on the goalscoring front. I feel with the 3-4-3 that Beni and Cammy get swamped a wee bit in the middle of the park at times. They are both performing admirably but if you're outnumbered you're outnumbered. I wouldn't mind seeing us play more of a 3-4-1-2 shape with Woodburn playing in front of Beni and Cammy, and play Boycie and Gino up front together. I can't help thinking Woodburn is a square peg in a round hole out wide. Moving him into a more central area could really help him. Boycie is great but he is slow. Gino has speed to burn. Putting him alongside Boycie would give us that pace up front to threaten defences in behind and make them defend a bit deeper. At the moment, teams don't need to worry too much about us getting in behind them because Boyce isn't quick enough to outrun most people. 

 

It's just an idea I have been mulling over but it might be worth a try if results don't pick up soon.

Spot on, I’m not sure we can wait much longer to change it though as teams have worked us out. 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

19 hours ago, NB GIN said:

We are near the top of the league 

1 defeat so far would you not take that at the start of the season ? 

 

I didn't mean my question as a criticism of the players or of playing the 3-4-3 so far. But there's a lot of chat on here about how one player or another isn't good enough, to the point that I'd say every single attacking player -- Boyce, Gnanduillet, Ginelly, Woodburn, GMS, and McKay -- are now getting called not good enough on the board. 

 

I say when your entire squad of players, almost all of whom have strong records of success elsewhere, are not looking good, maybe it's not the squad that's the problem, but that opposing managers have sussed our tactics and we need to shake something up,

 

11 hours ago, David McCaig said:

We need to decide if we are genuinely playing wing backs or not? If we are we can't possibly play two wingers as well.

 

We are one body short up front and a body short in midfield, we are asking Beni/Devlin and Boyce/Gnando to do the impossible.

 

Our 343 is a bizarre 5221.

 

If we want to stick to a back 3 it has to be 352 which means either Smith does the wing back role with the expectation that he fills the role of both full back and winger or we ask Ginnelly to play the role with the emphasis on attack rather than defence.

 

I'd probably move Kingsley to LWB in such a system.

 

Of course 352 means no genuine wingers which is a conundrum when we have 3 in Gino, BM and GMS.

 

Gino should be encouraged to switch to RWB, Barry McKay could potentially partner Boyce up front and GMS could warm the bench.

 

352 also gives an extra body alongside Beni/Devlin... Surely the role McAneff was signed to play.

 

The alternative is we switch to a back 4 and Halkett drops out the team.

 

Bolded part strikes me as the core of the matter. Well said.

 

I'd say we can either sacrifice a winger for a central attacking midfielder, or sacrifice a CH (or possibly just move Souttar forward) to allow Beni and Devlin to play higher up the pitch in what becomes effectively a 4-3-3 with an inverted triangle midfield. I prefer the latter but something needs to change.

 

I don't like the 4-2-3-1 shape -- Robbie fell in love with it a bit too much the last time he was here and I thought it lent to opponents pressing our midfield and we had to result to hoofball far too often.  I think Beni and Devlin are too good to tie down in low midfield pivot and putting a CAM in front of them robs us of their ability to do a high press. 

 

If were going to keep the 3-4-3, we can't keep throwing out two wing forwards. It puts Boyce or Gnando in the "false 9" role, and I'd much rather one of them played more of a true 9 and the other a true 10. I'd still start McKay and let him pick his preferred side (probably right TBH) and let the formation be a bit unbalanced. (Another thing I'd like to see European football learn from Latin American football is Latin sides go with asymmetrical formations all the time and don't worry about it.)

[Watt-Zeefuik]

10 hours ago, Nookie Bear said:

We get overrun because our wide players are weak defensively and too much is out on Beni and Cammy. 

By our wide players do you mean Cochrane and Smith? I don't see defence as their weakness!

[daavojaay]

On 30/10/2021 at 17:51, Led Tasso said:

This was not the week to change it up with three games in eight days but we need to try out a 3-5-2, a 3-4-1-2, or some other variant.

 

We go wobbly when we go to a back 4 but we're getting overrun in the 3-4-3.

Only wobbly because halkett can't play in a 2 we need to switch him for Moore. If Robbie can't see all this. This could go one way or the other just hope we aren't gonna implode as I don't think Robbie will change anything, he seems like he's one of the thickest managers I have seen in a long time, his reaction time is like a dementia patient and the silly mistakes are there for the the team again. It was so blatant that Beni is being singled out on set pieces by opposition as his marking is awful but still stick with the same instead of helping him and getting someone to double up with Beni at set pieces. Think 3 of last 4 goals we have conceded are from Beni mistake at set piece but still he can't see he needs help even though every team are aiming for the person Beni marks every set piece that's taken. Frustrating manager he is. Hasn't got the balls to admit he is wrong and change right away and always seems to leave it till it's too late.

[daavojaay]

11 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

I didn't mean my question as a criticism of the players or of playing the 3-4-3 so far. But there's a lot of chat on here about how one player or another isn't good enough, to the point that I'd say every single attacking player -- Boyce, Gnanduillet, Ginelly, Woodburn, GMS, and McKay -- are now getting called not good enough on the board. 

 

I say when your entire squad of players, almost all of whom have strong records of success elsewhere, are not looking good, maybe it's not the squad that's the problem, but that opposing managers have sussed our tactics and we need to shake something up,

 

 

Bolded part strikes me as the core of the matter. Well said.

 

I'd say we can either sacrifice a winger for a central attacking midfielder, or sacrifice a CH (or possibly just move Souttar forward) to allow Beni and Devlin to play higher up the pitch in what becomes effectively a 4-3-3 with an inverted triangle midfield. I prefer the latter but something needs to change.

 

I don't like the 4-2-3-1 shape -- Robbie fell in love with it a bit too much the last time he was here and I thought it lent to opponents pressing our midfield and we had to result to hoofball far too often.  I think Beni and Devlin are too good to tie down in low midfield pivot and putting a CAM in front of them robs us of their ability to do a high press. 

 

If were going to keep the 3-4-3, we can't keep throwing out two wing forwards. It puts Boyce or Gnando in the "false 9" role, and I'd much rather one of them played more of a true 9 and the other a true 10. I'd still start McKay and let him pick his preferred side (probably right TBH) and let the formation be a bit unbalanced. (Another thing I'd like to see European football learn from Latin American football is Latin sides go with asymmetrical formations all the time and don't worry about it.)

That would probably be too much for Robbie's brain to handle

[Watt-Zeefuik]

2 minutes ago, daavojaay said:

Only wobbly because halkett can't play in a 2 we need to switch him for Moore. If Robbie can't see all this. This could go one way or the other just hope we aren't gonna implode as I don't think Robbie will change anything, he seems like he's one of the thickest managers I have seen in a long time, his reaction time is like a dementia patient and the silly mistakes are there for the the team again. It was so blatant that Beni is being singled out on set pieces by opposition as his marking is awful but still stick with the same instead of helping him and getting someone to double up with Beni at set pieces. Think 3 of last 4 goals we have conceded are from Beni mistake at set piece but still he can't see he needs help even though every team are aiming for the person Beni marks every set piece that's taken. Frustrating manager he is. Hasn't got the balls to admit he is wrong and change right away and always seems to leave it till it's too late.

 

Beni made mistakes in past weeks on set pieces but I feel pretty strongly that he was tracking the runner and was illegally blocked off by Scott Brown pushing another Aberdeen defender into his path.

[daavojaay]

Just now, Led Tasso said:

 

Beni made mistakes in past weeks on set pieces but I feel pretty strongly that he was tracking the runner and was illegally blocked off by Scott Brown pushing another Aberdeen defender into his path.

Yeah but he's being targeted as a weak link by teams at set pieces and Robbie can't see it when it's so obvious

[Skacelsid]

Gordon

 

       Moore,Souttar

Smith               Kingsley

 

 Beni  Devlin  Cochrane

 

             Mckay

 

Ginelly            Boyce

 

Our 3-4-3 has been sussed out. Maybe a 4-3-1-2.  prefer something this, Mckay can be Woodburn, GMS, McEneff even Walker. We can do without a left winger with Kingsley and Cochrane, prefer someone creative in front of Beni and Devlin and behind the strikers supporting supporting them. RN is always seems reluctant (scared) to change though.

 

[Tommy Brown]

24 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

Beni made mistakes in past weeks on set pieces but I feel pretty strongly that he was tracking the runner and was illegally blocked off by Scott Brown pushing another Aberdeen defender into his path.

Seen the Dundee goal again today.

Yes, Beni was on Cummings, but

a) Halkett was too far forward and there as the man to head clear.

b) Gordon should be reading it and catching it.

 

Yesterday 

Gnando is in a position to be moving out and heading clear, he made a poor effort. 

[Pasquale for King]

41 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said:

Seen the Dundee goal again today.

Yes, Beni was on Cummings, but

a) Halkett was too far forward and there as the man to head clear.

b) Gordon should be reading it and catching it.

 

Yesterday 

Gnando is in a position to be moving out and heading clear, he made a poor effort. 

Agreed, he was also partly at fault for the St J goal but so were others. 

[gregzy2k7]

On 31/10/2021 at 15:57, Jambo Moose said:

The worry for me is we’ve seen this defeat and performance coming for weeks but RN has blindly persisted. We don’t have the personnel for 3-4-3. It’s 6 defensive players and 3 strikers-and they’ve felt like a separate entity recently. we’ve cried out for a number 10 to link the two lines and support a striker centrally. For me our players suit a 4231 perfectly. It would mean a straight choice between cochrane and Kingsley unfortunately as both have been great. Woodburn isn’t a wide player and I feel had he been operating in a 10 with 2 wide men either side recently, we’d have carried a larger threat. 
people calling for maceneff amuse me- I’d like him to get chances but he didn’t shine against poor opponents last season so not sure now why he could morph into zidane- hope I’m wrong 

Mceneff has scored 1 more goal than 0 goals Woodburn this season and looked decent when he played at Celtic Park, the boy deserves a chance imo, as does Jamie Walker, but Walker is not a starter for me, he should definitely be on the bench though ahead of both Halliday and Gnando and brought on for the last 20 in games, much like against Inverness when we couldn't seem to buy a goal and he popped up with the winner, with a brilliant finish might I add.

[OTT]

23 hours ago, E3OBE said:

3-4-3 is fine if you have the personnel. I question if we really do. Your wingbacks are absolutely critical - they’re your width in attack, they draw players out, open the space in the middle to allow your front three to attack the space left in and around the box. Smith definitely isn’t a wingback and the jury is out on Cochrane. 
 

In no way saying the front three we have are perfect, but we are essentially playing a back 5, two holding midfielders and asking three guys to break down the opposition and win us the game though.

 

We don't have the personnel. Wingbacks are absolutely crucial as you point out, and we have two excellent fullbacks, if we were playing a back 4, I'd have no complaints but neither of our wingbacks can really beat a man or put in consistent crosses/offer much attacking threat. IMO Kingsley would be best at LWB and we sign a proper left sided centreback. Shaun Rooney would be my pick for RWB. I think those changes would really help us going forward and allow our wingers to spend more time driving into the box than putting crosses in to a heavily marked CF. 

 

I think for the time being we need to look at a formation change. Drop Halkett and play a 433/4231 with Moore coming in. Woodburn in behind Boyce and we could bring McEneff or Walker on towards the end of games to boost our threat. I like the formation, its different, a bit awkward and offers so much defensive stability in a league where you can just as often take points off the OF as you can drop points to relegation fodder BUT its came at the expense of a meaningful attacking threat. You add a proper pair of wingbacks into that formation and you're laughing. Maybe a better option to Gnando too if finances allow it. 

[gregzy2k7]

I agree with people saying we don't have the wingbacks to play a 3 and I also feel we are doing it to accommodate halkett for some strange reason, I think for our next game we should make 3 changes to our starting line up, Drop Halkett, Cochrane and Gnando

Bring in Moore, Mceneff and Boyce

And play 4-2-3-1.

Gordon

Smith Souttar Moore Kingsley

Beni Devlin

McKay Mceneff Gino

Boyce

 

For me that's our best team, and fits the players we have, play that team and we will win on Saturday imo

[Pasquale for King]

9 hours ago, OTT said:

 

We don't have the personnel. Wingbacks are absolutely crucial as you point out, and we have two excellent fullbacks, if we were playing a back 4, I'd have no complaints but neither of our wingbacks can really beat a man or put in consistent crosses/offer much attacking threat. IMO Kingsley would be best at LWB and we sign a proper left sided centreback. Shaun Rooney would be my pick for RWB. I think those changes would really help us going forward and allow our wingers to spend more time driving into the box than putting crosses in to a heavily marked CF. 

 

I think for the time being we need to look at a formation change. Drop Halkett and play a 433/4231 with Moore coming in. Woodburn in behind Boyce and we could bring McEneff or Walker on towards the end of games to boost our threat. I like the formation, its different, a bit awkward and offers so much defensive stability in a league where you can just as often take points off the OF as you can drop points to relegation fodder BUT its came at the expense of a meaningful attacking threat. You add a proper pair of wingbacks into that formation and you're laughing. Maybe a better option to Gnando too if finances allow it. 

Agree with all that.
I think we have three fullbacks that are good enough for this league, if he’s going to stick with this formation then Moore in for Halkett and switch Kingsley and Cochrane (even if it’s for periods during the game if Kingsleys fitness isn’t up to it). 

But changes have to be made as we are on a bad run as teams have worked out how to stop us. 

[Pasquale for King]

1 hour ago, gregzy2k7 said:

I agree with people saying we don't have the wingbacks to play a 3 and I also feel we are doing it to accommodate halkett for some strange reason, I think for our next game we should make 3 changes to our starting line up, Drop Halkett, Cochrane and Gnando

Bring in Moore, Mceneff and Boyce

And play 4-2-3-1.

Gordon

Smith Souttar Moore Kingsley

Beni Devlin

McKay Mceneff Gino

Boyce

 

For me that's our best team, and fits the players we have, play that team and we will win on Saturday imo

I would be happy with that team on Saturday.