• Current Donation Goals

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

Alonso is not a WB.  Any more than Ballack was a box to box midfielder.  Ballack was box or box, and Alonso is the same.  Quite decent at either end of the pitch but not a player to be quantum leaping from one end to the other every few seconds (Essien, Kante, Ashley Cole, even Moses).  Nor does he have the fine judgement that Ivanovic had about where exactly to stand at any moment.  Alonso was much better at WB in 16/17 than as FB in 18/19.  But then he was just as bad in 17/18 as 18/19.

So we don't have the option of 352 or 343 as "3 at back" is usually played.  We don't even have the Conte version of 3CBs, 1 WB (Moses) and one FB who is often pushed forward.  Our current option would be 3CBs and 2FBs, with either or both FB sometimes pushed forward.  532 or 532.

I think you are nit picking a bit here, Alonso was clearly better in a back 5 whatever level you want to put on it. 17/18 he was picked in PFA team of the season, let's hope he and a few others are that terrible this season. You seem to be bigging up Moses as the key player, he was dire that season.

There is definitely an arguement that nearly all of our defenders are more effective in a back 5, both offensively and defensively. As someone posted earlier, I don't think Frank Is well versed in it which could spell disaster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lump Of Celery said:

I think you are nit picking a bit here, Alonso was clearly better in a back 5 whatever level you want to put on it. 17/18 he was picked in PFA team of the season, let's hope he and a few others are that terrible this season. You seem to be bigging up Moses as the key player, he was dire that season.

There is definitely an arguement that nearly all of our defenders are more effective in a back 5, both offensively and defensively. As someone posted earlier, I don't think Frank Is well versed in it which could spell disaster.

I agree, Alonso in a back 5 or 3 cb system is one of our better players. Obviously, he still has draw backs but overall he is very good in that position. The same can also be said of Dave and Luiz who are also much better in such a system and overall I would say a starting 5 of Zappa/James, Dave, Luiz, Christ/Rudi, Alonso actually makes it one of the best defensive units in the league. 

As for SFL, to be fair he only has one year of management experience so any formation he uses is going to be relatively new to him. For me, the best managers always find the best formations for the players they have, rather than shoehorn their preffered formation on players that are ill-equipped for it; this goes double when they cannot go to the market to try and make it work. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lump Of Celery said:

I think you are nit picking a bit here, Alonso was clearly better in a back 5 whatever level you want to put on it. 17/18 he was picked in PFA team of the season, let's hope he and a few others are that terrible this season. You seem to be bigging up Moses as the key player, he was dire that season.

 

You are missing the point.  Alonso is fine in a back 4.  He is fine as an extra forward.  He is rubbish at trying to do both at the same time (many are).  Whatever he is it is not a WB in the conventional sense.
in 16/17 we dominated most games and he could camp in the oppo half and do his stuff.  In 17/18 and 18/19 we never dominated and he was not nearly as effective.  

And the truth is that most top 6 teams all have FBs that are able to motor up and down and do more damage up front than any of our FBs or WBs could under Sarri or Conte.
 

(Moses was rubbish at FB and at RW, but he was able to be rubbish at both at the same time.  I'm certainly not bigging him up.)

3 hours ago, Lump Of Celery said:

There is definitely an arguement that nearly all of our defenders are more effective in a back 5, both offensively and defensively. As someone posted earlier, I don't think Frank Is well versed in it which could spell disaster.

Our CFs we are told are better in a pair, I'm pretty certain our CMs are better in a 4 and our AMs are best in a 3.

Twin GKs would be a formidable defence.
What am I missing here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xCELERYx   
7 hours ago, Lump Of Celery said:

I think you are nit picking a bit here, Alonso was clearly better in a back 5 whatever level you want to put on it. 17/18 he was picked in PFA team of the season, let's hope he and a few others are that terrible this season. You seem to be bigging up Moses as the key player, he was dire that season.

There is definitely an arguement that nearly all of our defenders are more effective in a back 5, both offensively and defensively. As someone posted earlier, I don't think Frank Is well versed in it which could spell disaster.

Nit picking is an understatement. Alonso, even back in Italy flourished and came into his own when moved into the WB role at Fiorentina. His impact on games increased tenfold and far and away played his best football after being pushed further forward. That hasn't been any different since he joined Chelsea. His strengths lie up field and having that extra CB behind him in a 3ATB, provides that cover when he doesn't have the leg speed to get back. 

There's not even an argument to be had to be fair, they're all more effective in a back three system. It does the best job of nullifying the individual weaknesses had, while highlighting their positive attributes the most. No shock that Alonso, Luiz and Azpi all played the best football of their careers in such a system. Of course, I'm not expecting us to go down that route with Lampard but I think it would provide us with the best defensive foundation possible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paulw66   
11 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

 

Our CFs we are told are better in a pair, I'm pretty certain our CMs are better in a 4 and our AMs are best in a 3.

Twin GKs would be a formidable defence.
What am I missing here?

Well, quite. We'd all like to a do a job where there is someone sitting next to you covering your mistakes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

Our CFs we are told are better in a pair, I'm pretty certain our CMs are better in a 4 and our AMs are best in a 3.

Twin GKs would be a formidable defence.
What am I missing here?

And that pretty much closes this discussion. If only we could play with 15 players we’d walk the league! 

2 GKs, 3 CBs, 2 FBs, 3 CMs, 3 AMs and 2 S. Not even City could challenge us! How come no manager has ever thought about that before? Roman, sign me up! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 hours ago, Martin1905 said:

Anything but 5 at the back.

To play five at the back when we lack goal scorers is nothing but absolute madness. We don’t have an attacking player to sacrifice! 

But I feel 100% confident we won’t have to watch that rubbish under Lampard. He’ll go with a high energy 433/4231 as his base formation with the occasional shift to a 442 diamond. That’s how he has played most of his career as a player and the formations he knows best. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, xCELERYx said:

Nit picking is an understatement. Alonso, even back in Italy flourished and came into his own when moved into the WB role at Fiorentina. His impact on games increased tenfold and far and away played his best football after being pushed further forward. That hasn't been any different since he joined Chelsea. His strengths lie up field and having that extra CB behind him in a 3ATB, provides that cover when he doesn't have the leg speed to get back. 

 

So why not just play Alonso as an extra AM and forget about the pretence of him getting back for anything but corners.

(Actually that is pretty much what he did as WB).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

You are missing the point.  Alonso is fine in a back 4.  He is fine as an extra forward.  He is rubbish at trying to do both at the same time (many are).  Whatever he is it is not a WB in the conventional sense.

My original post was meant to say 'whatever label' rather than 'whatever level', which doesn't make sense.

Just odd that odd that Conte Kante made a long post about formations and you came with an elaborate response about one word of that post, I don't know if it some attempt to discredit the other sensible points he made in his lengthy post. LB or LWB is just a shorthand way of differentiating between 'playing in a back 4' or 'playing in a back 5', do you think Alonso was more effective last season in a back 4? Otherwise you were arguing a point nobody was discussing. 

12 hours ago, Droy was my hero said:

And the truth is that most top 6 teams all have FBs that are able to motor up and down and do more damage up front than any of our FBs or WBs could under Sarri or Conte.

I just checked the goal and assist outputs for last season and this appears to only apply to the Liverpool FB's and Mendy. The Arsenal FBs were arguably on a par with him last season.

56 minutes ago, The_Ghost said:

 

To play five at the back when we lack goal scorers is nothing but absolute madness. We don’t have an attacking player to sacrifice! 

Barkley and Kovacic got 3 goals between them so if we dropped one of them and could get Alonso scoring 6-7 again, as Conte Kante was suggesting as a plus from playing a back 5, we've doubled our output from one position while also playing two AM's and a ST. Those are the balances that have to be weighed up, for example a diamond formation might not really allow for getting more goalscorers on the pitch as we would have to drop the wingers. Saying we should play 15 players is just being silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Lump Of Celery said:

My original post was meant to say 'whatever label' rather than 'whatever level', which doesn't make sense.

Just odd that odd that Conte Kante made a long post about formations and you came with an elaborate response about one word of that post, I don't know if it some attempt to discredit the other sensible points he made in his lengthy post. LB or LWB is just a shorthand way of differentiating between 'playing in a back 4' or 'playing in a back 5', do you think Alonso was more effective last season in a back 4? Otherwise you were arguing a point nobody was discussing. 

I just checked the goal and assist outputs for last season and this appears to only apply to the Liverpool FB's and Mendy. The Arsenal FBs were arguably on a par with him last season.

Barkley and Kovacic got 3 goals between them so if we dropped one of them and could get Alonso scoring 6-7 again, as Conte Kante was suggesting as a plus from playing a back 5, we've doubled our output from one position while also playing two AM's and a ST. Those are the balances that have to be weighed up, for example a diamond formation might not really allow for getting more goalscorers on the pitch as we would have to drop the wingers. Saying we should play 15 players is just being silly.

Exactly. The other problem is even if we go for a 442/4231/4131 who is getting goals anyway? Any of those formations for us is very easy to defend against as we have no clinical players. Willian in his time here has averaged 6 goals a season and Pedro 8. Pulisic is new to the league and 20, when was the last time a player came in from outside the league at such an age and scored for fun, especially one whose average is 3.75 across three seasons. As for the CM we know it is highly unlikely that Kante, Barkley, Jorgi, Mount or Barkley will start banging them in. RLC has a chance but I do not expect him back until Xmas and he is always injured so you cannot relie on him for the second half of the season. As for the strikers, Giroud has 3 league goals in 18 months for us in the league and does not look like he will improve that unless we start getting more crosses into him - which is one of my arguments for 5atb - Bats has no all round game and Tammy is only proven at Champo level. I just do not see how any of these player (or a number of them) start getting into double figures that would be required to offset making 4atb worthwhile. 

Edited by Conte Kante

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now