PDA

View Full Version : Could we play 3-5-2?



Unseen work
11-08-2013, 05:52 PM
Thoughts on a 3-5-2 formation? Think we have the players for it and could have a good balance to it

Williams

Forster. Nelson. Hanlon

Mullen. Taiwo. Thomson Craig. Mcgivern

Collins vine

scuttle
11-08-2013, 06:01 PM
Swap Mcgivern for Mccourt and Mullen for a new signing then why not ,worth a bash couldnt be any worse than today

Thecat23
11-08-2013, 06:03 PM
Thoughts on a 3-5-2 formation? Think we have the players for it and could have a good balance to it

Williams

Forster. Nelson. Hanlon

Mullen. Taiwo. Thomson Craig. Mcgivern

Collins vine

Fully agree, I also think we could play this. Not under this clown though.

Unseen work
11-08-2013, 06:04 PM
Swap Mcgivern for Mccourt and Mullen for a new signing then why not ,worth a bash couldnt be any worse than today

Don't think McCourt would work as a wing back personally as cant see him too interested in defending. Think mcgivern would be a very good wingback too! Saying that with having 3 defenders and 2 sitting midfielders they should be going across the midfield sweeping everything up

patch1875
11-08-2013, 06:09 PM
Hopefully Clancy back soon with McGivern on the other side. Still need another ch as hanlons not the answer.

Wotherspiniesta
11-08-2013, 06:09 PM
Doesn't matter what formation we play, or who we play in what position.

The tactics are absolutely terrible.

Punt, punt, punt. Awful, predictable and uncondusive football and I'm sick of watching it.

Winston Ingram
11-08-2013, 06:47 PM
Thoughts on a 3-5-2 formation? Think we have the players for it and could have a good balance to it

Williams

Forster. Nelson. Hanlon

Mullen. Taiwo. Thomson Craig. Mcgivern

Collins vine

3-5-2 died in the 90's and rightly so. Saying that, it's got Pat Fenlon master stroke written all over it

Treadstone
11-08-2013, 06:48 PM
Patenaccio

Unseen work
11-08-2013, 06:49 PM
3-5-2 died in the 90's and rightly so. Saying that, it's got Pat Fenlon master stroke written all over it

Iv always been a fan of it, get alot of time one the ball as a midifler and can play triangles easily, defence copes well too as they get plenty cover from full backs and sitting midfielders

craigmounthibs
11-08-2013, 06:52 PM
We wre at our best under McLeish with 3-5-2, though having some decent players helped!

Winston Ingram
11-08-2013, 06:59 PM
Iv always been a fan of it, get alot of time one the ball as a midifler and can play triangles easily, defence copes well too as they get plenty cover from full backs and sitting midfielders

It was binned by everyone because once a wing back was caught up field the team was vulnerable, which pretty much happened in every game for most teams around the 70 min mark as they were both ****ed.

There's only 1 team I've seen do it recently and that's Napoli which was mainly down to the fitness of Christian Maggio. Saying that they binned it when they played in the CL and Benitez will no doubt chuck it as well.

hibbymick
11-08-2013, 07:01 PM
Maybe would work under a different manager but certainly no when Fenlons around. Fenlon has this uncanny knack of bringing in midfielders only to miss them out by playing hoofball. The man truely is an enigma.

Hibercelona
11-08-2013, 07:03 PM
I nominate the Christmas tree formation. If we're going to continue playing without wingers, then we may as well play as narrow as possible....

Delboy4
11-08-2013, 07:08 PM
If you have the right players, a 3-5-2 is the way in my opinion.
this 4-1-4-1 etc etc just confuses players, well especially ours! It doesnae take a monkey wae a biscuit tin erse to understand formations but our team look all at sea...!
I cannot believe we got bossed from an under 20 side today, it's shambolic!
Fenlon should do the respectable thing and walk...!

neil7908
11-08-2013, 07:09 PM
I actually think that based on the current make up of our squad (lots of players who play centrally, very little width) that its the ideal formation for us.The team you've put out there plays to our strengths but unfortunately I think you need players and a manager who are tactically intelligent to switch formations in such a drastic way.

Hibrandenburg
11-08-2013, 07:16 PM
After watching that garbage today I'm not sure we have a team that can play at all. Only Hibs player who moves is the player with the ball, the most passes we strung together before losing the ball was 7 and our first touch was pathetic. If we can't get the basics right then talking about tactics is pointless.

Headless ****ing chickens.

BOB MARLEYS DUG
11-08-2013, 07:16 PM
With everyone fit.

Williams

Forster McPake McGivern

Harris Robertson Thomson Taiwo Craig

Collins Vine

Unseen work
11-08-2013, 07:36 PM
It was binned by everyone because once a wing back was caught up field the team was vulnerable, which pretty much happened in every game for most teams around the 70 min mark as they were both ****ed.

There's only 1 team I've seen do it recently and that's Napoli which was mainly down to the fitness of Christian Maggio. Saying that they binned it when they played in the CL and Benitez will no doubt chuck it as well.

See where your coming from but as I see it if we play a standard 442 and the full back bombs on IMO were in the same scenario with less people there to cover him. If it was 3-5-2 you would still have the 3 defenders spaced out across keeping their positions where if it was a 4 you would have a gap as for example the right back prob wouldn't shuffle across to a centre half position. Also 2 of the 3 midfielders would be there to cover and fill in gaps left when a player goes out of position. Players like Thomson and taiwo IMO have the ability and awareness to he able to see a space that had been left open by us and cover it well IMO.

As far as I see it we have nothing to lose trying something different and I think alot of teams in the spl wouldn't know how to cope with us as their not used to it.

patch1875
11-08-2013, 07:46 PM
Williams
Clancy mcpake nelson mcgivern
Harris thomson taiwo
Craig
Vine. Collins

Shields Hibee
11-08-2013, 08:04 PM
Would Fenlon change it though? If I was clinging onto my job, I'd be doing anything to turn it round even if it meant playing a way which was untried in my managerial career.

Steve Bruce used it at Hull & got them up albeit looked at times nervy in defence in games which were against their fellow chasers.

Fenlon needs to sort out the tactical side though, hoofing balls up the park isn't working & if we continue doing this then no matter formation he plays, results or performances ain't going to change much.

GlasgowHibee
11-08-2013, 08:06 PM
With everyone fit.

Williams

Forster McPake McGivern

Harris Robertson Thomson Taiwo Craig

Collins Vine

Forgive me if i'm wrong but I thought the whole idea of a 3-5-2 system was to have wide men who were equally as good defensively as offensively, I think it would be a waste for Harris to be tracking back all of the time.

AlbertK86
11-08-2013, 08:07 PM
Hopefully Clancy back soon with McGivern on the other side. Still need another ch as hanlons not the answer.

Foster and Nelson in centre for me

Alfred E Newman
11-08-2013, 08:11 PM
This Collins, Vine combo up front looks pretty cumbersome to me. I know the service consisted of aimless blooters up the park but their prowess in the air reminded me of Tony Higgins. Mind you, Tony would be a revelation in that load of crap.

J-C
11-08-2013, 11:14 PM
For a 3-5-2 to work you need either 2 wing backs who can put in a shift, or 2 wingers who can also defend, ATM we have neither, so suggesting we play this system is a nonsense.
4-2-3-1 is what most teams now play, or versions of it, allows you to play attacking wide men, or 5 in the middle.

hibee19
11-08-2013, 11:40 PM
Under a new manager yes. Under Fenlon no. It would just be one extra player to watch the ball being hoofed over his head.

Sweet Left Peg
12-08-2013, 12:43 AM
Swap Mcgivern for Mccourt and Mullen for a new signing then why not ,worth a bash couldnt be any worse than today

Paddy McCourt as a wing back? Are you off your head?

scuttle
12-08-2013, 08:30 AM
Paddy McCourt as a wing back? Are you off your head?

No im not. Can you really see Lewis or Mcgivern Clancy or Maybury bombing up the flanks beating men ,delivering crosses etc they get nose bleeds if they cross the half way line at present

Love the Green
12-08-2013, 08:46 AM
Thoughts on a 3-5-2 formation? Think we have the players for it and could have a good balance to it

Williams

Forster. Nelson. Hanlon

Mullen. Taiwo. Thomson Craig. Mcgivern

Collins vine

ffs we couldnae play tiddlywinks with yet another batch of talentless players. never mind another system

Try to
"keep the faith"

Sweet Left Peg
12-08-2013, 09:20 AM
No im not. Can you really see Lewis or Mcgivern Clancy or Maybury bombing up the flanks beating men ,delivering crosses etc they get nose bleeds if they cross the half way line at present

Can you really see Paddy McCourt busting a gut to track back and defend? You need a particular type of player to play this system, like Agathe, Laursen or Murphy. McCourt, Maybury, Stevenson, Mullen are not these types of player. In short, we don't have the right players to play that system, therefore we will not play it. Obviously Fenlon doesn't want to play 352 otherwise he would have tried to bring in wing backs. I am not against us playing 352 if we have the right players, but we don't so I cannot see the point of trying it just because the current system is not working.

TheFamous1875
12-08-2013, 09:37 AM
We have no natural width in the team (re Harris) so could we play the Christmas Tree formation? 4-3-2-1

Williams

Mullen. Nelson. Hanlon. McGivern.

Robertson Taiwo Thomson

Craig. Vine.

Collins


All good teams needs width and pace, but since we don't have it just now, maybe we should at least have our players playing in their correct positions? Surely that's the best approach to getting the best out of them.
I also think Forster needs game time, so I'd like to see a back 5 with Mullan and McGivern getting further forward. Dunno if it would work, but there's a chance it would with the players we've got.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Waxy
12-08-2013, 10:04 AM
Better playing 433 the way our midfield get missed out

pontius pilate
12-08-2013, 10:08 AM
[QUOTE=TheFamous1875;3716041]We have no natural width in the team (re Harris) so could we play the Christmas Tree formation? 4-3-2-1

Williams

Mullen. Nelson. Hanlon. McGivern.

Robertson Taiwo Thomson

Craig. Vine.

Collins


All good teams needs width and pace, but since we don't have it just now, maybe we should at least have our players playing in their correct positions? Surely that's the best approach to getting the best out of them.
I also think Forster needs game time, so I'd like to see a back 5 with Mullan and McGivern getting further forward. Dunno if it would work, but there's a chance it would with the players we've got.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD[/QUOTE

That would work for me having vine and Craig who played together last season so well for st j playing just behind Collins in more or less their correct position.
Wether P.F would adopt that is anyone's guess

J-C
12-08-2013, 10:22 AM
Players we have and in their right positions.

.................................................. .............Williams............................. ...............................

Mullen/Clancy...............Nelson/McPake...............................Hanlon/Forster................McGivern/Stevenson

.............................Taiwo/Jones.................................Thomson/Stevenson.................................

Harris(when fit).............................................. ....Craig......................................... Cairney (when fit)

.................................................. .............Collins/Vine.............................................. ..........

All this shows is we are desperately short of attacking options, we need another 2 wide men as cover/pushing for games, and another attacking midfielder in case Craig gets injured. Personally I'd never have got Vine, think he's a huddie, would rather give Handling and Caldwell a chance as back up striker, or even play Handling behind the main striker as he's fairly intelligent as a player.

NORTHERNHIBBY
12-08-2013, 10:22 AM
The formation is academic just now. Probably a keeper that can launch it box to box to reach ten six foot plus burly forwards would suit our style. Maybe a formation of 1-10

scuttle
12-08-2013, 11:24 AM
Can you really see Paddy McCourt busting a gut to track back and defend? You need a particular type of player to play this system, like Agathe, Laursen or Murphy. McCourt, Maybury, Stevenson, Mullen are not these types of player. In short, we don't have the right players to play that system, therefore we will not play it. Obviously Fenlon doesn't want to play 352 otherwise he would have tried to bring in wing backs. I am not against us playing 352 if we have the right players, but we don't so I cannot see the point of trying it just because the current system is not working.

Thats why you have three centre backs ,one shuffles across to cover as should the holding midfielder. As you say the current system is not working and we are creating very little so why not try something different even 433 which is probably more suited to the hoofball we are playing at present

ian cruise
12-08-2013, 12:12 PM
3-5-2 died in the 90's and rightly so. Saying that, it's got Pat Fenlon master stroke written all over it

I think with more teams going 4-5-1 you might see a return of 3-5-2 but it needs the right players and the right manager. We possibly have the players but, and I don't like saying this, I don't think we have the right manager.