New Formation 3 - 5 - 2

[HFC 0-7]

It seems like we will need to play with what we have until January, and i was wondering if 3 - 5 - 2 would work. whats your thoughts of this team?

My thoughts are that Yogi like to attack, hence the 4-3-3 he has been playing. The 4-3-3 hasnt been working because the midfield is empty. this way the midfield is creative, strong and the 2 wide players have defensive qualites. It also provides width that we have been lacking!

Stack

Hogg Bamba Hanlon

Wotherspoon Zemmama Miller Mcbride Murray

Stokes Riordin

[hibbie02]

Totally Agree, see my comments in here:

http://www.hibs.net/message/showthread.php?p=2174100#post2174100

[HenryMonk]

well worth a try as we always get overun in midfield, my starting 11 would be...

stack
hogg-bamba-murray
wotherspoon-miller-zouma-mcbride-galbraith
stokes-riordon

WTF has happened to wee lewis:confused:

[jacomo]

well worth a try as we always get overun in midfield, my starting 11 would be...

stack
hogg-bamba-murray
wotherspoon-miller-zouma-mcbride-galbraith
stokes-riordon

WTF has happened to wee lewis:confused:

You've got all the right people in the right positions here, but 3-5-2 is hardly played by any team in the top leagues around Europe these days.

Unless one or more of your centre backs are very comfortable on the ball and playing out from the back, you're still effectively a man down in midfield. And vulnerable on the flanks as well.

[HFC 0-7]

You've got all the right people in the right positions here, but 3-5-2 is hardly played by any team in the top leagues around Europe these days.

Unless one or more of your centre backs are very comfortable on the ball and playing out from the back, you're still effectively a man down in midfield. And vulnerable on the flanks as well.

I know its not ideal, I am just going with where our strengths are and it seems like it would solve a few of our problems. Bamba is confident enough, but whether he actually has the talent to pull it off I dont know. I would say it would stop us getting pushed back all the time and should see us score goals. Just a thought mind you. I think it would work as the 2 on the flank can track back. It would also let stokes and riordin be lazy which they seem to like.

[HenryMonk]

You've got all the right people in the right positions here, but 3-5-2 is hardly played by any team in the top leagues around Europe these days.

Unless one or more of your centre backs are very comfortable on the ball and playing out from the back, you're still effectively a man down in midfield. And vulnerable on the flanks as well.

here what you are saying, but a working 4-3-3 with 2 full backs bombing forward is best formation in my mind, but we CANT ever seam to play this formation for some reason. so why not try an extra CH with a 5 man midfield and 2 up top. the game is won and lost in midfield! and that is where i think our problem is.

[blackpoolhibs]

Stack


McCann/McCormack Bamba Murray Hanlon



Wotherspoon McBride Miller Zemamma



Stokes Riordan

Starts 4-4-2, but can easily change to 5 in midfield with Hanlon pushing on up the left, and Zemamma moving in a little or the same on the right. If we change to the 3-5-2 we then have 3 central defenders at the back, who are all comfortable with the ball at their feet, and are good competitive
defenders too.

[hibbie02]

here what you are saying, but a working 4-3-3 with 2 full backs bombing forward is best formation in my mind, but we CANT ever seam to play this formation for some reason. so why not try an extra CH with a 5 man midfield and 2 up top. the game is won and lost in midfield! and that is where i think our problem is.

:agree:

[Sloppy]

Stack


McCann/McCormack Bamba Murray Hanlon



Wotherspoon McBride Miller Zemamma



Stokes Riordan

Starts 4-4-2, but can easily change to 5 in midfield with Hanlon pushing on up the left, and Zemamma moving in a little or the same on the right. If we change to the 3-5-2 we then have 3 central defenders at the back, who are all comfortable with the ball at their feet, and are good competitive
defenders too.
no cregg !!!

[blackpoolhibs]

no cregg !!!

Your powers of observation are faultless.:wink:

[HibbyAndy]

Stack


McCann/McCormack Bamba Murray Hanlon



Wotherspoon McBride Miller Zemamma



Stokes Riordan

Starts 4-4-2, but can easily change to 5 in midfield with Hanlon pushing on up the left, and Zemamma moving in a little or the same on the right. If we change to the 3-5-2 we then have 3 central defenders at the back, who are all comfortable with the ball at their feet, and are good competitive
defenders too.



Thats 12 players :greengrin

[hibsbollah]

I always thought 3-5-2 was the formation we should have gone with under Mowbray, when we had Murphy and Whittaker, who were absolutely purpose built for the wingback role. He never did it to my recollection.

As to the 4-3-3, it works fine for lots of other teams and theres no reason why it wouldnt work with us either. I think its partly coincidence that we just happen to be stinking when Mixu or Yogi has tried it, and people get on the 'anti-4-3-3' bandwagon. I also get the impression that people develop their favourite formations from playing fantasy manager games, which affect their judgement. The quality of the player is almost always more important than the formation IMO.

[blackpoolhibs]

Thats 12 players :greengrin

Even better.:greengrin

[Kato]

Hogg Bamba Hanlon



Takes a special player to play in the middle of a back three.

What evidence do you have that Bamba is that person?

I reckon we'd shift a lot goals against with him there.

Murray has played there and is very very good.

[HFC 0-7]

Takes a special player to play in the middle of a back three.

What evidence do you have that Bamba is that person?

I reckon we'd shift a lot goals against with him there.

Murray has played there and is very very good.

I put those player there because thats all we have to go in there. You mention murray can play there but I think in this formation he would be better on left of midfield, because he can go forward and defend. I have heard it before that you need to be a special player to be in the back 3 but I dont see why. When defending it is basically a back 4 or 5 if the 2 on the flank do there job. The reason I suggested this formation is that we have a lot of good midfielders and this is a way to utilise them all. If you have a good midfield the defense shouldnt get used as much as it is now, which in my opinion is a good thing. With the players we have in defense we will concede whether its a back 3 or 4. At least with a 3 - 5 - 2 you can use the best players and look to score goals.

[Kato]

I put those player there because thats all we have to go in there. You mention murray can play there but I think in this formation he would be better on left of midfield, because he can go forward and defend. I have heard it before that you need to be a special player to be in the back 3 but I dont see why. When defending it is basically a back 4 or 5 if the 2 on the flank do there job. The reason I suggested this formation is that we have a lot of good midfielders and this is a way to utilise them all. If you have a good midfield the defense shouldnt get used as much as it is now, which in my opinion is a good thing. With the players we have in defense we will concede whether its a back 3 or 4. At least with a 3 - 5 - 2 you can use the best players and look to score goals.

You need to able to read the game like a book - I don't think Bamba can do that yet. The outside two of the three are centre-halfs so that rules Hanlon out.

I like 352 but it's a bit out of fashion as most coaches know that a defensive 442 nullifies it.

Still

hogg-murray-bamba
mccormack-mcbride-zoumer-cregg-hanlon
riordan-stokes

would do some damage

[HFC 0-7]

You need to able to read the game like a book - I don't think Bamba can do that yet. The outside two of the three are centre-halfs so that rules Hanlon out.

I like 352 but it's a bit out of fashion as most coaches know that a defensive 442 nullifies it.

Still

hogg-murray-bamba
mccormack-mcbride-zoumer-cregg-hanlon
riordan-stokes

would do some damage

Your probably right, but I am just going on the basis of trying to do the best with what we have got. We have a wealth of talent for midfield so sticking the 5 in there would utilise them. Got to be better than 4-3-3!

[Kato]

Got to be better than 4-3-3!

agreed

[Castle Hibs]

I would rather see 4 - 5 - 1 with zouma and deeks supporting stokes up front when we have the ball. We have decent enough football players in the team to spread the play and enable zouma and deeks to get in good attacking positions with stokes playing as an out and out centre forward.

Must be worth a try and would mean we would have more players involved in the game.

[brydekirk]

3-5-2 with wing backs. :thumbsup: