PDA

View Full Version : 3-5-2 Formation



Diclonius
10-08-2016, 08:57 AM
I think that was the main reason we lost last night. The formation is good when we're up against teams of a similar stature, but not teams who will sit back and defend for 80% of the game.

We were relying solely on Gray and Stevenson to provide width (they're good, but not that good) and playing Keatings behind the strikers meant we only had two recognised midfielders in Bartley and McGinn. McGinn looked lost with no offensive support.

You could see the difference when Lennon subbed off McGregor for Harris right at the end and we went to a flat 4-4-2, but by then it was too late. The blueprint has been established for this division - play with width and pace to beat the wee teams. Using wingbacks solely for that will not work. Here's hoping Lennon realises that and we're using a more conventional formation on Saturday.

Brightside
10-08-2016, 08:58 AM
but we played 343?? had we played 352 we may not have struggled in midfield in the 2nd half.

J-C
10-08-2016, 09:03 AM
We don't need 3 CH's against 1 striker and we need more than 2 CM's against 5 in midfield. 3-4-3 is a very attacking formation giving 5 in attack at times with the wingbacks but the forwards need to score, if they don't take their chances we struggled in the middle, which seemed to be the case last night, Keatings will offer little as a midfielder.

JDHibs
10-08-2016, 09:09 AM
Its technically a 3-4-1-2 formation with wing backs.

Doesnt work against smaller teams who sit back. use the blue print Hearts and Rangers used to get out this league. Fast tempo, out and out wingers and stretch the team.

Said this a few times now, should not be playing with 3 center halfs and a defensive midfielder against teams like QOS.

Since90+2
10-08-2016, 09:16 AM
As has been said already the recurring problem we have is lack of width in the side.

Boyle in my opinion is a very decent player and gives us great pace and directness down the right hand side which we need. If we can get someone similar down the left flank we will be flying.

Smartie
10-08-2016, 09:22 AM
but we played 343?? had we played 352 we may not have struggled in midfield in the 2nd half.

The two aren't that different.

It depends on whether you saw Keatings as an advanced midfielder or a deep forward.

Smartie
10-08-2016, 09:25 AM
As has been said already the recurring problem we have is lack of width in the side.

Boyle in my opinion is a very decent player and gives us great pace and directness down the right hand side which we need. If we can get someone similar down the left flank we will be flying.

I agree. With Gray and Stevenson getting up the park supporting them and overlapping we'll do better.

4 at the back, Bartley (or a.n.other) can drop in defensively when required.

We'll probably need to drop a striker though.

Allant1981
10-08-2016, 09:49 AM
Wasnt this the exact formation folk were screaming out for last season? We have more or less the same team so the formation shouldnt have been an issue, the players switching off in the second half was the issue not the formation in my opinion

number9dream
10-08-2016, 09:51 AM
If we're going 3-4-3 or 3-5-2 at home against defensively minded opponents then why not use Boyle, Harris or Carmichael in the wide positions rather than Gray & Stevenson?

As for pinging in a cross, take a look at Michael Doyle when we play Morton. His delivery is absolutely terrific.

Smartie
10-08-2016, 09:53 AM
Wasnt this the exact formation folk were screaming out for last season? We have more or less the same team so the formation shouldnt have been an issue, the players switching off in the second half was the issue not the formation in my opinion

We created enough decent chances to win several games and some of our defending in the last 30 minutes was pitiful.

It doesn't matter what formation you play, if you do these things then you lose games.

J-C
10-08-2016, 09:55 AM
Wasnt this the exact formation folk were screaming out for last season? We have more or less the same team so the formation shouldnt have been an issue, the players switching off in the second half was the issue not the formation in my opinion


It was but with 3 midfielders not a kid on attacking mid in Keatings who offers nothing in midfield and certainly not a DM like Bartley when you already start with 3 at the back. Fyvie and McGeouch being injured a lot is now proving to be a problem, getting Hendo in will help but I feel we probably need another midfielder if these 2 miss a lot of games.

Allant1981
10-08-2016, 09:57 AM
We created enough decent chances to win several games and some of our defending in the last 30 minutes was pitiful.

It doesn't matter what formation you play, if you do these things then you lose games.

I agree completely, i think the players thought it was won and switched off which hopefully lennon will sort out

ancient hibee
10-08-2016, 12:22 PM
Any formation that gives McGregor and Fontaine lots of the ball and expects them to pick out passes will not score many goals.If it's not realised that the way to win the league is pace out wide with the ball being played in behind a retreating d fence then the new manager has not been doing his just b.

MWHIBBIES
10-08-2016, 12:27 PM
Any formation that gives McGregor and Fontaine lots of the ball and expects them to pick out passes will not score many goals.If it's not realised that the way to win the league is pace out wide with the ball being played in behind a retreating d fence then the new manager has not been doing his just b.Fontaine is very good with the ball at his feet.

Maybe, just maybe, the manager has different ideas than Hibs.net? He was doing his job just fine on Saturday.

ancient hibee
10-08-2016, 12:37 PM
Fontaine is very good with the ball at his feet.

Maybe, just maybe, the manager has different ideas than Hibs.net? He was doing his job just fine on Saturday.


He's a centre half,giving him plenty of the ball while the other team falls back is counter productive.Saturday was a different game and the ball was hoofed half the time given the pitch and weather.If the manager doesn't have different ideas to us then we really are in trouble.This is a forum where fans give their opinions so no need for silly remarks.

RIP
10-08-2016, 12:37 PM
We created enough decent chances to win several games and some of our defending in the last 30 minutes was pitiful.

It doesn't matter what formation you play, if you do these things then you lose games.

Gray was playing as a winger. All the QOS goals could have been stopped if he had been playing full back.

Formation to blame and Lennon slow to change.

Smartie
10-08-2016, 12:43 PM
Gray was playing as a winger. All the QOS goals could have been stopped if he had been playing full back.

Formation to blame and Lennon slow to change.

When you have a wingback getting caught up the park, the other defenders need to rotate round and cover. It's not the formation but the way the players play the formation.

Or - if we take one of our easy chances we can change it and keep Gray at fullback.

Radium
10-08-2016, 12:50 PM
When you have a wingback getting caught up the park, the other defenders need to rotate round and cover. It's not the formation but the way the players play the formation.

Or - if we take one of our easy chances we can change it and keep Gray at fullback.

Gray plays 10 yards higher than Stevenson. Presume it is planned as it happens all the time. It works when we get the crosses in but it also isolates McGregor - how often is Gray available short compared to the outlet that Fontain has with Stevenson. At one point in the first half Cummings was covering right-back.

Last night we were slow to adapt to Hammil going off and being replaced with a wing-back.

Also noted we only had 4 right footed [outfield] players in the starting line-up.

ShinyFantastic
10-08-2016, 02:14 PM
Fontaine is very good with the ball at his feet.

Maybe, just maybe, the manager has different ideas than Hibs.net? He was doing his job just fine on Saturday.

"Fontaine is very good with the ball at his feet"!?!? Do you watch the games?

Smartie
10-08-2016, 02:18 PM
"Fontaine is very good with the ball at his feet"!?!? Do you watch the games?

I think Fontaine is good with the ball at his feet. He was a bit tentative defensively once or twice last night but generally he's a good defender.

I tell you what really pisses me off about Fontaine though - these bloody headers he misses! That one he missed last night was an absolute sitter and it's not like he doesn't have previous for this. I hate to think how many free headers from within 8 yards or so he's missed for us. If he scores and it goes to 2-0 then that is a very different game - Queens need to come out a bit more, there's more space and we can pick them off.

I don't think the criticism for our finishing should be restricted to just the strikers.

Godsahibby
10-08-2016, 02:21 PM
The issue wasn't with the formation we started with, it was the lack of changes in the second half to counter QOS who had put Dobbie wide left against a tiring Gray meaning he sat back more and we lost the width. Should have taken off one of the centre halfs at 1-0 put Boyle / Harris or Carmichael wide right. You could have played Keatings wide left or subbed him as well for another winger. Would have strengthened the middle of the park and given us more options to stretch them.

Since90+2
10-08-2016, 02:22 PM
Interesting that 6 of our 11 starting outfield players were left footed. I cant imagine that this is something that happens very often in football.

Left footed players are in general more one footed than right sided players and a couple of the players are certainly very one footed (Stevenson & Keatings).

greenlex
10-08-2016, 02:30 PM
We had plenty chances to score and win the game whatever system or formation was used.

MWHIBBIES
10-08-2016, 03:33 PM
"Fontaine is very good with the ball at his feet"!?!? Do you watch the games?Yes I do. Fontaine is clearly very good with the ball at his feet. There is a reason he plays on his preferred side and steps into midfield so often. Did you see his goal in the league cup final? Technically he is very solid for a central defender.

JDHibs
10-08-2016, 03:38 PM
Yes I do. Fontaine is clearly very good with the ball at his feet. There is a reason he plays on his preferred side and steps into midfield so often. Did you see his goal in the league cup final? Technically he is very solid for a central defender.

fonts is shocking with the ball at his feet.

He 9/10 out gives possession away when he steps into midfield, also ends up looking like a rabbit in the headlights whenever hes running forward.

Solid defender but should leave the all playing to others.

MWHIBBIES
10-08-2016, 03:49 PM
fonts is shocking with the ball at his feet.

He 9/10 out gives possession away when he steps into midfield, also ends up looking like a rabbit in the headlights whenever hes running forward.

Solid defender but should leave the all playing to others.I don't even know what to say to that. If you genuinely think Fontaine gives the ball away 9 times out of 10 then there is nothing I can say that'll help you.

JDHibs
10-08-2016, 03:51 PM
I don't even know what to say to that. If you genuinely think Fontaine gives the ball away 9 times out of 10 then there is nothing I can say that'll help you.
It would appear i need to help you with your reading skills.

I said, he loses the ball 9/10 when he steps into midfield...

I.e when hes stepped up and trys to force a move, like hes a creative player, which he isnt. Hes a defender. We have midfielders to do that...

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

CapitalGreen
10-08-2016, 03:52 PM
I don't even know what to say to that. If you genuinely think Fontaine gives the ball away 9 times out of 10 then there is nothing I can say that'll help you.

His distribution is awful.

MWHIBBIES
10-08-2016, 03:55 PM
His distribution is awful.Vs Falkirk on Sat he played the first pass in both goals. I wish all our players distribution was that bad.

MWHIBBIES
10-08-2016, 03:59 PM
It would appear i need to help you with your reading skills.

I said, he loses the ball 9/10 when he steps into midfield...

I.e when hes stepped up and trys to force a move, like hes a creative player, which he isnt. Hes a defender. We have midfielders to do that...

Sent from my SM-G920F using TapatalkExcept we don't because the 2 midfield players we have who take the ball off the back 4 are injured.

Fontaine doesn't even lose the ball 2/10 times he steps into midfield, I suggest to watch the game a bit closer.

Trys? hes? i? isnt? I don't think it's my reading that is the problem.

hibeerealist
10-08-2016, 04:01 PM
Shuts his bloody eyes when heading the ball OR his heid is badly shaped for heading either way he should have improved that part of his game by now!!

Poor stuff from him

Disappointed that NL did not change things earlier when QOS were dominating possession after spending most of the game defending, it was like watching a Stubbsy team from last season trying to break down the bus parkers!!

Nuff said, lessons not being learned and same probs surfacing that we had last season





I think Fontaine is good with the ball at his feet. He was a bit tentative defensively once or twice last night but generally he's a good defender.

I tell you what really pisses me off about Fontaine though - these bloody headers he misses! That one he missed last night was an absolute sitter and it's not like he doesn't have previous for this. I hate to think how many free headers from within 8 yards or so he's missed for us. If he scores and it goes to 2-0 then that is a very different game - Queens need to come out a bit more, there's more space and we can pick them off.

I don't think the criticism for our finishing should be restricted to just the strikers.

Franck Stanton
10-08-2016, 04:14 PM
We created enough decent chances to win several games and some of our defending in the last 30 minutes was pitiful.

It doesn't matter what formation you play, if you do these things then you lose games.


Nail, Hit, Head........ last night far too many players turned up with the attitude " Ach, it's only QotS, We are Hibernian and we will win this without getting out of 1st gear" ....Oh Really !!!!!!
McGregor last night was, well, terrible. Been a great signing imo but he was terrible last night. Offered Gray no cover on the right when Gray was upfield "overlapping" as he has been told to do. \Gave away far too many balls when not under any pressure what-so-ever. worst of all, he wasn't the only one not to turn up.
SJM was well off the boil, dare I say had his worst game for us since signing.
Keatings was about the only player in a Hibs strip to get pass marks.
Lets hope it was a "one-off" bad day at the office.

blackpoolhibs
10-08-2016, 04:19 PM
I'd say the 3 central defenders were given virtually no help last night, McGinn was woeful, Bartley just as bad and Gray and Stevenson pushing on and doing what the usually do which is not a lot.

Hardly their fault because they are not really creative wingbacks.

JDHibs
10-08-2016, 04:47 PM
Except we don't because the 2 midfield players we have who take the ball off the back 4 are injured.

Fontaine doesn't even lose the ball 2/10 times he steps into midfield, I suggest to watch the game a bit closer.

Trys? hes? i? isnt? I don't think it's my reading that is the problem.
Oh run out of decent points in the debate so you go after my spelling and grammar skills?

Bravo sir, bravo. Mr Smith my old English teacher is disappointed that I failed to give a random online the extra time of day to double check.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

MWHIBBIES
10-08-2016, 05:02 PM
Oh run out of decent points in the debate so you go after my spelling and grammar skills?

Bravo sir, bravo. Mr Smith my old English teacher is disappointed that I failed to give a random online the extra time of day to double check.

Sent from my SM-G920F using TapatalkI made 2 points in that post and replied to you questioning my reading ability.

J-C
11-08-2016, 09:51 AM
I must admit I'm not keen on Lennon attempting to use Keatings as an attacking midfielder, as good a player he is you still need to have certain midfield attributes to help out your team mates there. Most AM will drop into the midfield to help out in numbers but we can't afford the luxury of having a player like Keatings in the team if he's posted missing in the midfield. Can someone who was at the game tell me if this was the case and how was Keatings, I've read a few posts on other threads stating that Bartley and McGinn were the only 2 in midfield and were overrun in the 2nd half when QOS changes tactics.

I would much rather have a natural midfielder playing instead of Keatings and leave him to be a striker which he's better at, if 3-4-4/3-5-2 is what Lennon wants to play the Stanton would've been a better option than Keatings and if he doesn't rate Stanton, then we are in need of another 2 midfielders for the squad.

Smartie
11-08-2016, 10:04 AM
I must admit I'm not keen on Lennon attempting to use Keatings as an attacking midfielder, as good a player he is you still need to have certain midfield attributes to help out your team mates there. Most AM will drop into the midfield to help out in numbers but we can't afford the luxury of having a player like Keatings in the team if he's posted missing in the midfield. Can someone who was at the game tell me if this was the case and how was Keatings, I've read a few posts on other threads stating that Bartley and McGinn were the only 2 in midfield and were overrun in the 2nd half when QOS changes tactics.

I would much rather have a natural midfielder playing instead of Keatings and leave him to be a striker which he's better at, if 3-4-4/3-5-2 is what Lennon wants to play the Stanton would've been a better option than Keatings and if he doesn't rate Stanton, then we are in need of another 2 midfielders for the squad.

I wasn't keen on it until I saw him play there the other night.

He did really well, he's looking fit and sharp and he should be playing. We've got a lot of shot-shy midfielders - Keatings ain't shot-shy and we need players who are prepared to have a go from distance. His passing and general awareness was a lot better than I thought it would be.

Keatings or Keatings playing in that role was certainly not the reason we lost the other night. We can't have it both ways - we either want to be positive and attacking and try to kill teams off or we don't.

I think we've got the age old England problem of a lot of good players that we can't really accommodate. TBH with the players we have I'd like to see a traditional 4-4-2 with Keatings playing off another striker, probably Holt (I know, I know, we can't drop Cummings). Then we'd have the 2 wide midfielders to help Gray and Stevenson defensively and creatively and 2 central midfielders. I think this would spread more goals throughout the team and not be reliant on Cummings as the only goalscorer.

Or maybe have Keatings wide left and Cummings up front with Holt?

Allant1981
11-08-2016, 10:08 AM
I must admit I'm not keen on Lennon attempting to use Keatings as an attacking midfielder, as good a player he is you still need to have certain midfield attributes to help out your team mates there. Most AM will drop into the midfield to help out in numbers but we can't afford the luxury of having a player like Keatings in the team if he's posted missing in the midfield. Can someone who was at the game tell me if this was the case and how was Keatings, I've read a few posts on other threads stating that Bartley and McGinn were the only 2 in midfield and were overrun in the 2nd half when QOS changes tactics.

I would much rather have a natural midfielder playing instead of Keatings and leave him to be a striker which he's better at, if 3-4-4/3-5-2 is what Lennon wants to play the Stanton would've been a better option than Keatings and if he doesn't rate Stanton, then we are in need of another 2 midfielders for the squad.

Did you not call keatings a kid on midfielder who offered nothing in midfield yet you didnt even go to the game to see how he played

J-C
11-08-2016, 11:32 AM
Did you not call keatings a kid on midfielder who offered nothing in midfield yet you didnt even go to the game to see how he played

I seen him last season a few times playing there and wasn't impressed, I feel he's a striker not a midfielder. If he can be used as a creative player then fine but we also need the balance in the middle, it's obviously getting that balance.
Stubbs got it last year by using the diamond at the expense of natural width and pace.

I did ask how Keatings played.

ancient hibee
11-08-2016, 12:37 PM
I must admit I'm not keen on Lennon attempting to use Keatings as an attacking midfielder, as good a player he is you still need to have certain midfield attributes to help out your team mates there. Most AM will drop into the midfield to help out in numbers but we can't afford the luxury of having a player like Keatings in the team if he's posted missing in the midfield. Can someone who was at the game tell me if this was the case and how was Keatings, I've read a few posts on other threads stating that Bartley and McGinn were the only 2 in midfield and were overrun in the 2nd half when QOS changes tactics.

I would much rather have a natural midfielder playing instead of Keatings and leave him to be a striker which he's better at, if 3-4-4/3-5-2 is what Lennon wants to play the Stanton would've been a better option than Keatings and if he doesn't rate Stanton, then we are in need of another 2 midfielders for the squad.

I thought Keatings was much better in the role than he was last season-particularly going forward.He knows the kind of passes that strikers want and he played a few of them and of course his dead ball delivery was excellent with balls into the box just begging to be put in.He struggled when Queens started to come through the middle but the real reason the midfield toiled was that McGinn looks as if he badly needs a rest or needs someone in there to do some of the running.

Brightside
11-08-2016, 12:39 PM
I seen him last season a few times playing there and wasn't impressed, I feel he's a striker not a midfielder. If he can be used as a creative player then fine but we also need the balance in the middle, it's obviously getting that balance.
Stubbs got it last year by using the diamond at the expense of natural width and pace.

I did ask how Keatings played.

He was playing just behind the front 2... its was 3 upfront no doubt...he just came deeper than the other to get involved and left Cumming and Holt to chase. He also took every dead ball and his delivery was top class.

Winston Ingram
11-08-2016, 01:06 PM
3-5-2 works in certain games but it's not the formation to win this league.

I rate Gray and Lewis but we can't go another season with them as the sole provider of width. If we do, i fear it'll mean a further season in the Championship.

They're good players but they are full backs and don't have the craft of specialist attacking wide player

J-C
11-08-2016, 01:59 PM
I thought Keatings was much better in the role than he was last season-particularly going forward.He knows the kind of passes that strikers want and he played a few of them and of course his dead ball delivery was excellent with balls into the box just begging to be put in.He struggled when Queens started to come through the middle but the real reason the midfield toiled was that McGinn looks as if he badly needs a rest or needs someone in there to do some of the running.


He was playing just behind the front 2... its was 3 upfront no doubt...he just came deeper than the other to get involved and left Cumming and Holt to chase. He also took every dead ball and his delivery was top class.


Cheers for that, it looks like Lennon rates Keatings and sees him in that role in the hole behind the strikers, it's now all about getting the balance in the middle and out wide, which then begs the question who we may see coming in. Do you think we may see Lennon going with 1 up top and Keatings behind or will he stick with playing the 3 with Keatings in the hole, it means you lose a CM and weakens that area.


There are times when it's not great to have too many good players as it causes headaches trying to fit them all in, Stubbs had this problem and it's why he stuck with the diamond.