[elkiellis]

Three at the back should be banished as plan A. Possibly forever. Very rarely does it work in this country long term. Defenders just never seem comfortable playing it and good wing backs are hard to find.

Use three at the back sparingly or as a tactical switch in play.

Oh and a club should always have a specialist right back that isn’t 35 or 17 so they at least have an ability to play a proper back four without a shoehorn.

exactly this,and we would probably be 7 points clear at the top,if Dave had realised this,rather than trying to get championship centre halves to bring the ball out like Bobby Moore

[Adder]

Keith Andrews made a decent point that when we were attacking we had a back 3 as Gibbs had plenty of license to get forward down the left whereas Toisin is obviously more defensively minded. Flexibility within certain systems is no bad thing.

Re the midfield, it's difficult to judge relative merits in different systems. In midfield in the last 2 games Livermore and Morrison have both been able to play fairly deep together because of the impetus Phillips has given us playing a bit more centrally than when he's at wing back. With the back 3 system, the central 2 were pretty much split with Livermore more advanced and whether it was Brunt or Barry they were more isolated behind.

With the way the league is shaping up we can't afford to drop points while we adjust to different systems and it's looking like the 4-3-3 is the one we are more comfortable with.

[Standaman]

Having another couple of games with 4-3-3 and a few enforced changes in personnel. I think there are a few things that we can observe.

The 4-3-3 needs two wide attackers being inverted which means a left footer on the right wing to give us balance, we have 3 left footers who might fill the role Robson Kanu Sako or Brunt. While Gayle might be a better finisher than all of the 3 it isn't his natural position and given he is right footed would do much better coming in from the left but Barnes is a fixture there and it might be argued we are 3 deep with cover (Phillips, Burke and Edwards.)

Ultimately I think there is a choice to be made between Rodriguez and Gayle there really is only one Centre Forward slot in the system. The more direct our play the less use we make of Gayle and the more important a player who holds the ball better becomes. In terms of goal threat we should go with Gayle but we cannot loft crosses into the box or hopeful punts forward and expect good things to happen.

The midfield is less broken than it has been for sometime but I thought we missed Morrison on Friday and would go with a default 3 of Livermore Phillips and Morrison. With Phillips playing in the inside right/ right wing space in front of Adaboyio and being the most progressive of the midfielders there is a kind of balance in the side.

Defensively the current back four is the best we have and while not exactly watertight we are improving. While Villa created a lot of chances most happened after we went 2:1 down and we were chasing the game and frankly got a little bit shapeless.

Overall the system is working I don't think we have the personnel to change radically in any event.

[beechyboy90]

Having another couple of games with 4-3-3 and a few enforced changes in personnel. I think there are a few things that we can observe.

The 4-3-3 needs two wide attackers being inverted which means a left footer on the right wing to give us balance, we have 3 left footers who might fill the role Robson Kanu Sako or Brunt. While Gayle might be a better finisher than all of the 3 it isn't his natural position and given he is right footed would do much better coming in from the left but Barnes is a fixture there and it might be argued we are 3 deep with cover (Phillips, Burke and Edwards.)

Ultimately I think there is a choice to be made between Rodriguez and Gayle there really is only one Centre Forward slot in the system. The more direct our play the less use we make of Gayle and the more important a player who holds the ball better becomes. In terms of goal threat we should go with Gayle but we cannot loft crosses into the box or hopeful punts forward and expect good things to happen.

The midfield is less broken than it has been for sometime but I thought we missed Morrison on Friday and would go with a default 3 of Livermore Phillips and Morrison. With Phillips playing in the inside right/ right wing space in front of Adaboyio and being the most progressive of the midfielders there is a kind of balance in the side.

Defensively the current back four is the best we have and while not exactly watertight we are improving. While Villa created a lot of chances most happened after we went 2:1 down and we were chasing the game and frankly got a little bit shapeless.

Overall the system is working I don't think we have the personnel to change radically in any event.

Think your bang on with most of that.
Gayle through the middle for Rodriguez or if we want to play both it needs to be 4312 with Barnes in the free role behind the strikers and just let Phillips bomb town the right so young tosin can concentrate on defending

[GREGMT]

I think Sako shoukd be challenging HRK for one of the 3 upfront.  I'd still pick Gayle over Rodriguez when you think of the chances missed recently.

With midfield, is there any chance a speedier Rakeem Harper could replace Livermore allowing us to play Barry? I doubt if Livermore is going to play every game the demands are too much.  When you look at it although Livrrmore is the most mobile currently he really is only average in terms if pace.

[Atomic]

Having Robson-Kanu wide right suits us because we don't have to play just one way. We can play more directly because of Kanu's physicality while on the other side we have Barnes who is a different type of player. It gives us best of both worlds we can mix things up a bit.

It really is Rodriguez or Gayle for the central role it's not ideal playing either of them in the wide role. I'm not certain that Gayle would fit the system better than JRod does but it's something we can look at and I'm sure eventually we will do.

[seteefeet]

I think we need to address the elephant in the room, in that, 433 may work better without Gayle. So, the options are; plough on without him and use him off the bench or, switch back to 352/ 442.
Personally, I think 433 works for the greater good and suits more players, Phillips, Barnes, Livermore, Morrison and HRK all look better in this system not to mention all of the back 5.
I know it's controversial but, if this is the system of choice, we should pull out all the stops in January to get a replacement for Rodriguez, to play the main striker role in a 433.

[TheJacko2000]

I think we need to address the elephant in the room, in that, 433 works better without Gayle. So, the options are; plough on without him and use him off the bench or, switch back to 352/ 442.
Personally, I think 433 works for the greater good and suits more players, Phillips, Barnes, Livermore, Morrison and HRK all look better in this system not to mention all of the back 5.
I know it's controversial but, if this is the system of choice, we should pull out all the stops in January to get a replacement for Rodriguez, to play the main striker role in a 433.

Gayle is yet to play centre forward in the 433 so that is simply not true. We have no idea whether it works any better.

[Albion79]

I risk contradicting myself here as i am not a fan of shoe horning players into positions!

However with the 4-3-3 if Morrison is unavailable or tired i personally would try Rodriguez in the attacking midfield role until we do / try sign a natural attacking midfielder.

I believe that Jrod has played there previously earlier in his career, when on the ball he does tend to use the ball well, quite often though he isnt involved enough. What he does add is an attacking mindset which is what Morrison offers too, that forward thinking play, on friday we had Livermore and Barry both being more cautious. I also think Jrod has the energy and work rate to track back too.

I would have Barry or Livermore in there sitting, with Phillips the more box to box (again get him on the ball as much as possible) with Jrod the attacking midfielder getting in and around and into the box with Gayle down the middle.

[seteefeet]

Gayle is yet to play centre forward in the 433 so that is simply not true. We have no idea whether it works any better.

Edited.
I do however think that the reason that we haven't yet seen it is because it doesn't suit him.

[Oldbury24]

I think we need to address the elephant in the room, in that, 433 may work better without Gayle. So, the options are; plough on without him and use him off the bench or, switch back to 352/ 442.
Personally, I think 433 works for the greater good and suits more players, Phillips, Barnes, Livermore, Morrison and HRK all look better in this system not to mention all of the back 5.
I know it's controversial but, if this is the system of choice, we should pull out all the stops in January to get a replacement for Rodriguez, to play the main striker role in a 433.

In the first half against Brentford the front three of Barnes trickery and pace, J-Rods work rate and touch and HRK's physicality were an almost perfect combination for the 4-3-3.   Well perfect except for one thing!!!   When Gayle is fit he must play, as his goal threat is just so superior to JRod and HRK; could you have seen JRod tucking that chance away into the corner so coolly the other night?  It will be interesting to see who plays once HRK is fit, as he does offer something different coming in off the right....I'm not sure what it is but it seems effective.

I would wholeheartedly agree with getting another striker, but I do genuinely think that a RB (as we don't have one) and a forward thinking CM with legs (what happens if Jimmy gets injured) are the key priorities.





 

[Adder]

The Leeds game was when we probably had the best balance in the team this season. HRK is obviously more suited to playing on the right than Gayle is, which allowed Phillips to play in more of a central driving midfield role.
This leaves a bit of an issue, last night we were back to Gayle playing more centrally, Phillips wider on the right and J-Rod dropping deeper. This will always mean we only have 2 in CM. We will get over-run at times playing like this. We were 2nd best for the first 35 minutes last night but then managed to take control.
We've managed to win a lot of games this season while being over-run for longish periods, mainly through the cutting edge and goals that Barnes, Phillips, Gayle + J-Rod give us.
My concern is we won't finish in the top two if we are struggling to control games and relying on the odd bits of magic to win us games.

[Atomic]

The Leeds game was when we probably had the best balance in the team this season. HRK is obviously more suited to playing on the right than Gayle is, which allowed Phillips to play in more of a central driving midfield role.
This leaves a bit of an issue, last night we were back to Gayle playing more centrally, Phillips wider on the right and J-Rod dropping deeper. This will always mean we only have 2 in CM. We will get over-run at times playing like this. We were 2nd best for the first 35 minutes last night but then managed to take control.
We've managed to win a lot of games this season while being over-run for longish periods, mainly through the cutting edge and goals that Barnes, Phillips, Gayle + J-Rod give us.
My concern is we won't finish in the top two if we are struggling to control games and relying on the odd bits of magic to win us games.

Phillips didn't play wide right and Gayle didn't play through the middle. The rotation we have throughout our team means players end up in other areas of the pitch from time to time like when Phillips went wide for the second goal. Gayle looked dangerous second half coming narrow off the right hand side.

The 4-3-3 really works for us because we have intelligent players that make the system fluid. it's the perfect system for us because we can adapt during games within that system. The players suit it.

[mulliganstired]

Yes, if Gayle's going to start on the right on paper, he's got to be allowed to drift around inside as he did last night, that five yard burst he has is wasted otherwise.

[Adder]

Phillips didn't play wide right and Gayle didn't play through the middle. The rotation we have throughout our team means players end up in other areas of the pitch from time to time like when Phillips went wide for the second goal. Gayle looked dangerous second half coming narrow off the right hand side.

The 4-3-3 really works for us because we have intelligent players that make the system fluid. it's the perfect system for us because we can adapt during games within that system. The players suit it.

We didn't see Phillips surging forward through the middle last night it was all down the right. Even if they officially started as you said there's the natural tendency to revert to type. My main point is we have a central two who will get outnumbered and overrun in several games. We have struggled to control many games this season because of that.

[timdon]

The Leeds game was when we probably had the best balance in the team this season. HRK is obviously more suited to playing on the right than Gayle is, which allowed Phillips to play in more of a central driving midfield role.
This leaves a bit of an issue, last night we were back to Gayle playing more centrally, Phillips wider on the right and J-Rod dropping deeper. This will always mean we only have 2 in CM. We will get over-run at times playing like this. We were 2nd best for the first 35 minutes last night but then managed to take control.
We've managed to win a lot of games this season while being over-run for longish periods, mainly through the cutting edge and goals that Barnes, Phillips, Gayle + J-Rod give us.
My concern is we won't finish in the top two if we are struggling to control games and relying on the odd bits of magic to win us games.

Or to put a different perspective on it, we were playing a team above us in the table at their home ground and we were the best team by a distance for two thirds of the match. Glass two thirds full for me last night. DM tweaked a few things at half time - it's what good coaches do.

[frazzle]

I’d prefer to see JRod wide and Gayle central. I can only see benefit from doing that for both players.

[Standaman]

In terms of tactical changes between the two very different halves they we quite subtle but very effective.  While the shape was basically the same I thought we were a lot more compact as a unit in the 2nd half. This was achieved by the back four playing a little bit further up Phillips playing a little wider which reduced the space Sheffield had in the 1st half and once we denied them the overloads on our right which was the basis for their earlier dominance we got control of the game.

Again it is difficult to accomodate both Gayle and Rodriguiz in the 4-3-3. At the moment with HRK sidelined the obvious left footed player is not available however we must be getting to the point where Moore has to pick a Centre Forward and go with it. Two Centre Forwads on the pitch seldom works it certainly doesn't double the firepower.

It seems likely that Darren will probably have the full squad available for the trip to Rotherham assuming noone has picked up a knock yesterday it will be intreging to see who is picked.

[BigFrank20]

I’d prefer to see JRod wide and Gayle central. I can only see benefit from doing that for both players.

I could have sworn Gayle was thundering bang down the middle when shoved over from behind for the denied penalty?

[Hunnington Baggie]

I could have sworn Gayle was thundering bang down the middle when shoved over from behind for the denied penalty?

he was, but he ran in from the right wing and came across the defender.

[VANDERLEI]

I think we need to address the elephant in the room, in that, 433 may work better without Gayle. So, the options are; plough on without him and use him off the bench or, switch back to 352/ 442.
Personally, I think 433 works for the greater good and suits more players, Phillips, Barnes, Livermore, Morrison and HRK all look better in this system not to mention all of the back 5.
I know it's controversial but, if this is the system of choice, we should pull out all the stops in January to get a replacement for Rodriguez, to play the main striker role in a 433.

Gayle is head and shoulder above our other strikers. He simply must play and centrally. He guarantees   enough goals per season (and assists/penalties won). The elephant in the room is the fact that that we are shoehorning Rodriguez into the team. I like Rodriguez as a player but I've always felt that if you set the team up to provide for Gayle, he'll score at any level. Rodriguez looks low on confidence at the moment and is out of form. He needs to sit out for a few matches.

[elkiellis]

For all the different tactics ,formations and players Dave has used,apart from a couple of games we still look pretty unconvincing,we lack  fluidity and cohesion and have done so since August,its training ground stuff that's letting us down

[skyclad99]

For all the different tactics ,formations and players Dave has used,apart from a couple of games we still look pretty unconvincing,we lack  fluidity and cohesion and have done so since August,its training ground stuff that's letting us down

You are right there, that 2nd half performance against Sheffield was very unconvincing. I wonder who turned that around at half time? Oh that will be Darren then .....he hasn’t a clue has he? 👍😂

Seriously though, we are not the only team to have bad days at the office. I admire Darren for trying different systems and tactics, completely different to our previous incumbent ( I am not counting that latter buffoon). I am not sure what some posters are expecting these days, 3rd in the league scoring for fun... rubbish really isn’t it?

[OldburyWBA]

Cut the personal comments please, getting sick of it now, time to start handing the 7 days out maybe

[BigFrank20]

I wasn't sure about putting this thought here or on the DM thread but decided this might be the better place for it
Substitutions, where does it say in the rules or coaching manuals you have to make x number of substitutions in every game?
Where does it say they should be made at a fixed point in time?
I'm starting to think that Big Dave might, just might, have developed a new and novel coaching approach to the use of substitutions, only use them when you absolutely have to and not specualtively just in case the substitution might make a difference or to appease the support base in some oblique way
To date my view is that his approach to the use of his substitutes has been right more often than it has been wrong based on our squads current weaknesess in certain areas
Just some lateral thinking to try and move the debate along so please play nice
COYB