Formation

[dastardly8]

I thought last night we made the pitch wider with more time on the ball , good sign , middle of the park needs improvement , fullbacks looked better as well with more time on the ball

[Winston Ingram]

I thought last night we made the pitch wider with more time on the ball , good sign , middle of the park needs improvement , fullbacks looked better as well with more time on the ball

Genuinely baffles me why we switch to 352. We’re far less of an attacking threat and Boyle gets a lot less of the ball in a through the middle. The left flank is pretty much vacant in an attacking sense and neither of our front 2 can hold the ball up which means when can’t get out when we’re under pressure.

Genuinely think the opposition managers are delighted when we play that way.

[MWHIBBIES]

Genuinely baffles me why we switch to 352. We’re far less of an attacking threat and Boyle gets a lot less of the ball in a through the middle. The left flank is pretty much vacant in an attacking sense and neither of our front 2 can hold the ball up which means when can’t get out when we’re under pressure.

Genuinely think the opposition managers are delighted when we play that way.

Depends purely on the players you have an execution of the formation. 352 is no less attacking than anything else.

Also, we played 343 last night.

[Winston Ingram]

Depends purely on the players you have an execution of the formation. 352 is no less attacking than anything else.

Also, we played 343 last night.

We played 352. Allan wasn’t up front.

[Tyler Durden]

We played 352. Allan wasn’t up front.

It was clearly a 3-4-3. Allan occupying the left slot and often interchanging with Nisbet.

Doubt anyone will change your mind of course.

[Smartie]

Genuinely baffles me why we switch to 352. We’re far less of an attacking threat and Boyle gets a lot less of the ball in a through the middle. The left flank is pretty much vacant in an attacking sense and neither of our front 2 can hold the ball up which means when can’t get out when we’re under pressure.

Genuinely think the opposition managers are delighted when we play that way.

Our best performances and results with this group of players have come playing this way.

I can’t understand why we’ve bothered so long with a 4231 (or variation thereof). Persisting with it whilst not having the players to play it has seen off our last 2 managers.

[Winston Ingram]

It was clearly a 3-4-3. Allan occupying the left slot and often interchanging with Nisbet.

Doubt anyone will change your mind of course.

Absolutely was not. Allan was in the 10 slot. When Murphy came on I was hoping he’d change it to 343 but no, he played 10 as well.

[B.H.F.C]

It was clearly a 3-4-3. Allan occupying the left slot and often interchanging with Nisbet.

Doubt anyone will change your mind of course.

That’s how I saw it also. Certainly in terms of their starting positions although the front three have plenty freedom to move around.

[Winston Ingram]

Our best performances and results with this group of players have come playing this way.

I can’t understand why we’ve bothered so long with a 4231 (or variation thereof). Persisting with it whilst not having the players to play it has seen off our last 2 managers.

What performances and results?

Here’s our formations this season.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/hibernian-fc/spielplan/verein/903

[Allant1981]

Was very clearly a 343 last night, if he is going to go with this formation we really need some new players

[Smartie]

What performances and results?

Here’s our formations this season.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/hibernian-fc/spielplan/verein/903

So what would you do instead?

I take your point about getting the best out of Boyle, and a 352 doesn’t do that.

But we don’t have anyone who is fit and can play up front on their own.

It is literally impossible to make a good team out of our current players - so it’s a case of “least worst” option and hope we address the situation early in January.

[Brightside]

Absolutely was not. Allan was in the 10 slot. When Murphy came on I was hoping he’d change it to 343 but no, he played 10 as well.

We played 343.

[Winston Ingram]

So what would you do instead?

I take your point about getting the best out of Boyle, and a 352 doesn’t do that.

But we don’t have anyone who is fit and can play up front on their own.

It is literally impossible to make a good team out of our current players - so it’s a case of “least worst” option and hope we address the situation early in January.

433 or 4231. You rarely get any good attacking teams that play 352. Literally struggling to think of a single club side that plays on the front foot that regularly plays that way.

[Tyler Durden]

433 or 4231. You rarely get any good attacking teams that play 352. Literally struggling to think of a single club side that plays on the front foot that regularly plays that way.

But funnily enough lots of good teams play 3-4-3 😉

[Smartie]

433 or 4231. You rarely get any good attacking teams that play 352. Literally struggling to think of a single club side that plays on the front foot that regularly plays that way.

Either of those options realistically means Nisbet up front on his own with Murphy on the left and Boyle on the right.

Nisbet just can’t play that role. Doidge has done it justice once.

Murphy has flattered to deceive for a while. Glides about, creates or scores almost zero. Double up on Boyle and we have no attacking threat.

That is pretty much the story of the late Jack Ross era. Our front 3 fail to score, we lose the first goal, then struggle.

I’d be happy to play the way you suggest - but we need a central striker and cover, a left sided attacker and cover, and cover for Boyle before we can do it justice. So we’re realistically only the 5 players short (McKay or Mueller might be a couple of them. Doidge might be backup striker, but his chances of making a success in that role depend on us either getting Magennis fit or getting decent cover for him).

The best Hibs team I’ve seen in recent years played 352. It’s very effective if you’ve got the players. Or - it’s preferable to a more fashionable formation if it happens to suit your players better.

[Fergus52]

433 or 4231. You rarely get any good attacking teams that play 352. Literally struggling to think of a single club side that plays on the front foot that regularly plays that way.

Our shape lasts night was almost identical to Chelsea and Belgium.

The front 3 was quite fluid - sometimes it was Boyle and Allan on each wing either side of nisbet, and other times Allan was at 10 with Boyle and nisbet up front.

So I can see where the debate on the formation is coming from but it was definitely much more of a 343 than a 352 to me.

[sauzeelegod]

Was definitely a 343 or probably more accurately a 3421

[jacomo]

So what would you do instead?

I take your point about getting the best out of Boyle, and a 352 doesn’t do that.

But we don’t have anyone who is fit and can play up front on their own.

It is literally impossible to make a good team out of our current players - so it’s a case of “least worst” option and hope we address the situation early in January.


We can play Boyle at right wing back and Doidge and Nisbet up front.

With McGinn behind him to mop up and Josh on the other wing there’s a bit of balance there.

I think we need 3 in the middle to control games.

[Unseen work]

343/3421

Whatever way you want to say it we set up like

……………………Macey…………..

………McGinn….Porteous…..Hanlon…..

Cadden…….JDH……Campbell…….Doig……

……….Boyle…………………..Allan…….

……………………….Nisbet………

This is why Allan never got on the ball as much as normal as he was trying to run in behind more. You’ll see a lot of times it went to Doig Allan immediately tried to run in behind up the same flank. Boyle was the same on the right hand side and often found himself in little gaps between defence and midfield which was hard for him to be picked up.

Having no one in behind Nisbet meant he could drop deep into that gap without overcrowding the area and at that point the other two would go long.

Defensively it was noticeable too, especially in the last 20 minutes.

Boyle was on the right and Murphy on the left, both of them winning the ball back quite successfully in these positions.

[superfurryhibby]

Our shape lasts night was almost identical to Chelsea and Belgium.

The front 3 was quite fluid - sometimes it was Boyle and Allan on each wing either side of nisbet, and other times Allan was at 10 with Boyle and nisbet up front.

So I can see where the debate on the formation is coming from but it was definitely much more of a 343 than a 352 to me.

I agree the front 3 changed shape over the first 60 minutes. Allan was often through the middle when we were on the ball and moving forward.

I noticed during the warm up that the players were doing drills as a back 4 and during the game they definitely defended as a 4.

Formations can be a bit baffling for me, I suspect I’m not alone :greengrin

[MWHIBBIES]

433 or 4231. You rarely get any good attacking teams that play 352. Literally struggling to think of a single club side that plays on the front foot that regularly plays that way.

https://twitter.com/theeuropeanlad/status/1434862102007648262?lang=en

I'll let Mr Van Gaal explain this to you.


What performances and results?

Here’s our formations this season.

https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/hibernian-fc/spielplan/verein/903

Transfermarkt is not reliable for the formations Hibernian play. You think they have someone watching every game?


We played 352. Allan wasn’t up front.

No. Allan was on the left of the front 3. When Murphy came on to replace him, he was also on the left. He struggled a bit to get involved, but his main position was floating around on the left.

[A Hi-Bee]

That's it then, I knew I was missing something, this football is a numbers game.
:greengrin

[Brightside]

https://twitter.com/9125analysis/status/1474122550716289028?s=21

[Hibee Mac]

https://twitter.com/9125analysis/status/1474122550716289028?s=21Those videos were brilliant, hats off to whoever made them. Love seeing stuff like that more tailored to Hibs

[Winston Ingram]

But funnily enough lots of good teams play 3-4-3 😉

So not 352 then?

[BoomtownHibees]

Was definitely 343 with Allan mainly off the left

[Winston Ingram]

Either of those options realistically means Nisbet up front on his own with Murphy on the left and Boyle on the right.

Nisbet just can’t play that role. Doidge has done it justice once.

Murphy has flattered to deceive for a while. Glides about, creates or scores almost zero. Double up on Boyle and we have no attacking threat.

That is pretty much the story of the late Jack Ross era. Our front 3 fail to score, we lose the first goal, then struggle.

I’d be happy to play the way you suggest - but we need a central striker and cover, a left sided attacker and cover, and cover for Boyle before we can do it justice. So we’re realistically only the 5 players short (McKay or Mueller might be a couple of them. Doidge might be backup striker, but his chances of making a success in that role depend on us either getting Magennis fit or getting decent cover for him).

The best Hibs team I’ve seen in recent years played 352. It’s very effective if you’ve got the players. Or - it’s preferable to a more fashionable formation if it happens to suit your players better.

I wouldn’t pick Nisbet. I’d pick Doidge. I think Doidge is better up on his own with 2 wide attackers beside him.

Obviously if Nisbet plays, he’s not good enough to play up front on his own. Every team needs someone to hold the ball up, which isn’t Boyle.

I also think your being a little harsh on Murphy. Admittedly he was rotten on Sunday, but generally has done pretty well when he’s been fit. His fitness and availability has been the major issue with him and I accept our options have been limited as a result but with Mueller coming in and with McKay coming back from injury, that gives us plenty options.

[Dmas]

Good video by Tifo on the 3-4-3 formation, think we definitely saw bits of this early in the game on Wednesday

https://youtu.be/hfNDVz1LdMI