Tactics and formation

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
benditlikeabanana

benditlikeabanana

Well-Known Member
Feb 26, 2011
3,745
647
113
bogota
First of, I am really enjoying the style of play from Saints, MP has the team playing roughly the same as NA but pushing higher and on supercharger. We have battered some of the best teams in the land yet struggled against some of the lower teams, loosing against QPR and drawing against Norwich and Wigan, I have not included Newcastle because they had some freaky goals and we generally played well. My question is should we change tactics against certain teams or just keep on playing our way ? MP was accused by fans in Spain of not being able to change formation even when he longer had the players that could play how he wanted, but that should not be a problem here.
 
Seems like it works best against teams who fancy themselves against us and may leave themselves light at the back, so perhaps we need a plan B for when the opposition park the bus, but the fact is you can't win every game and even Barcelona struggle to beat the likes of Celtic occasionally.

We need more games to judge whether this strategy is a good one in general.
 
It seems to me like the danger to pressing is getting caught out.

But the only game where Saints have really given up a bunch of goals is against Newcastle. And that was the Fox handball, plus ball off Hooiveld's face, plus offside goal that should not have been allowed. The defensive WAS bad that game, but it wasn't bad because of the formation or tactics. It was the incompetent execution. I would say similar about the Wigan game.

We are still vulnerable to the diagonal longball over the top because of the non-paciness of our CB's and the tactics we use and it happens to us at least twice a game.

But to be perfectly honest, I almost kind of like the long balls. Because I have way more confidence in Boruc than I do in any of the CB's. And even with the CB's, I have more confidence in the CB's making a goal-saving tackle on the stretch than I do them actually mounting a some kind of sustained defensive effort that doesn't involve getting schooled off the dribble, own goal, or horrendous mistake trying to play out of the back.
 
We dominated QPR, Norwich and Wigan. 67% possession against QPR (21shots to 7), 59% against Norwich (15 shots to 6) and 55% against Wigan (17 shots to 7). I think the tactics were right for all those games and every game so far. Putting the ball into the net is not something Pochettino can do for them.
 
In my opinion, we have to start Jay Rodriguez, Rickie, Lallana and Ramirez at the moment. Jay and Rickie both have to play up front, meaning that Lallana goes on the left and Ramirez on the right. Cork and Schneinderlin pick themselves. I'm still not sure as to why Poch is putting Hooivelt in the team, rather then just sticking with the Fonte/Yoshida combination. Shaw should be starting every game, as should Clyne. Boruc has really made a name for himself and is a definite number one at the club.

The best subs to be used are Davis for Ramirez, Guly for Lambert or Lallana, and JWP for Ramirez or Lallana
 
If we play a side with an eight man defence and two wide men as QPR did then we can't break them down and they stuff us on the break.

We need some guile from somewhere.
 
Our first goal on Saturday was a breath of fresh air: a ball into the box headed down by the big man. Sometimes we need to be able to do that instead of playing it through the defence. Liverpool allowed us to do both, but wiser managers will force us to do one or the other.
 
Mauricio lost his best players as Espanyol were forced to sell due to money problems. He likes this style of play and so do we!! Both MP and the players say there is more to come. Not every 'lower side' will manage to beat us or be lucky.
 
I think the main debate will be over whether we start Davis or Ramirez, with the former being more of a 4-3-3 and the latter being more of a 4-2-3-1.

Starting with Ramirez would mean going at the opposition from the start and if ahead, Davis can be brought on to help the midfield. Starting with Davis would be used to be more defensive and to tire out the opposition, and then bring on Ramirez against tired legs to get a goal. I think that the 11 against Liverpool (with Ramirez) is best for against the top teams, who are more vulnerable defensively at the start and more likely to score near the end (hence bringing on Davis to help out the midfield).

We aren't the most clinical, not consistently anyway, so I think it's wise to against the weaker teams to start Davis, tire out the opposition and then bring on Ramirez against tired legs to get a goal. It's too much of a risk going out and out attack as seen by the QPR game, where we were counter attacked quite often. The weaker sides are more likely to concede towards the end, which is why some "impact subs" may be needed, and are more likely to get on the scoresheet early, hence the need to be solid from the start and to take the game into half time not losing.
 
There's clearly been some added emphasis on shooting from range as well, as we've seen Rodriguez and Cork try a few times recently. We don't really have anyone who's any good at it, but clearly they're working on it.
 
Prefer the pressing style as opposed to sitting deep as its more exciting to watch but at the end of the day its all about results. Will be intersting to see how we fair against WBA, WHU and Stoke who will no doubt sit back and try and catch us on the counter. We struggled against QPR who sat back but I'd like to think we won't play that bad again.
 
Jose Fonte baby said:
I think the main debate will be over whether we start Davis or Ramirez, with the former being more of a 4-3-3 and the latter being more of a 4-2-3-1.

Starting with Ramirez would mean going at the opposition from the start and if ahead, Davis can be brought on to help the midfield. Starting with Davis would be used to be more defensive and to tire out the opposition, and then bring on Ramirez against tired legs to get a goal. I think that the 11 against Liverpool (with Ramirez) is best for against the top teams, who are more vulnerable defensively at the start and more likely to score near the end (hence bringing on Davis to help out the midfield).

We aren't the most clinical, not consistently anyway, so I think it's wise to against the weaker teams to start Davis, tire out the opposition and then bring on Ramirez against tired legs to get a goal. It's too much of a risk going out and out attack as seen by the QPR game, where we were counter attacked quite often. The weaker sides are more likely to concede towards the end, which is why some "impact subs" may be needed, and are more likely to get on the scoresheet early, hence the need to be solid from the start and to take the game into half time not losing.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. <ok>
 
I strongly maintain the 'Metodo' is the best formation. Used by Italy in 1934 and 1938 World Cups, of which they won both.

Link to image of formation: http://www.kyle-jackson.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/metodo_eng.png
Unorthodox, yes, but revolution is only generated through creativity.

Effectively 2-3-2-3, looks like 2 W's on the pitch.
When attacking the Defensive 3 push up to support the attack, then you have 2 playmakers playing behind 2 wingers and a centre forward.
However, there is fluidity; when defending the 2 wingers drop pack alongside the 2 playmakers to make a midfield 4, and the defensive 3 drop back alongside the 2 foundational centre backs, creating a defence of 5. The central defender of the 5 who was a central midfielder (alongside the 2 wing backs) when attacking fulfils a Libero role.
So, effectively, when attacking you play 2-3-2-3, and when defending players drop back to create a 5-4-1 formation. This fluidity means you can have men piling forward in attack, and you also have a solid defensive basis.

In terms of Southampton, I would play: Boruc - Fonte, Forren - Clyne, Schneiderlin, Shaw - Ramirez, Davis - Rodriguez, Lambert, Lallana
 
Not that any of our players is completely one-dimensional, but in general terms I look at it like:

Players who are direct and like to shoot: Puncheon, Rodriguez
Players who are creative, good with possession, and can create: Lallana, Ramirez
Useful players who can a little of everything: Do Prado, Davis (with Do Prado being maybe the slightly more offensive-oriented of the two).
Complete forward: Lambert
Complete midfielder: Schneiderlin

There are six slots: 1-3-2 or 3-3.

I think we all agree Lambert and Schneiderlin are a given. I prefer Lambert upfront as a target-ish striker. Maybe not quite the 1 in a freewheeling 1-10 but the guy who, when all else fails, you lump it to him and he's the pivot.

In the defensive-y midfield area, the starting options are probably Davis and Cork. They're pretty similar. So let's just say Cork.

That leaves just three spots. One of those should go to a direct guy. One should go to a pass-y guy.

Of the two direct guys, I think Rodriguez is better in an end-to-end more open game because of he has thinks like forward and likes to get behind the line. I think Puncheon is better against a packed in defense because he and Clyne work well together, and Puncheon has more of a winger/cut inside mentality so he doesn't clog up the middle like Rodriguez who clearly prefers the center part of the pitch. Puncheon's just always kind of lurking around. I like that about him.

Of the two passing guys, I think you have to take Lallana as he knows the team well and he and Shaw are working well together. Plus he's team captain and we all love him and he's comfortable on the left wing.

Then in that central midfield spot you can use Ramirez or Davis or Do Prado depending upon the situation. Ramirez for more offense, Do Prado for controlling possession/tempo (especially with the lead), Davis for a more defensive mode. And JWP if we are cruising to let him get some game time.

So for me it's

Cork Schneiderlin

J-Rod/Punch Ramirez/Davis Lallana

Lambert

In most situations, I would go with J-Rod, Ramirez, Lallana. But Punch would get almost full playing time, sometimes taking the place of Jay-Rod, being used a second half sub for either wing position, and on the odd occasion taking over for Lallana if we really feel like we just need to take a lot of shots.

Ramirez/Davis is not a conflict for me right now as apparently Ramirez can't go 90 anyway, and Davis with his workrate can go really, really nuts if he only plays 45. But that's also the position we are missing. Ramirez theoretically should be the complete AMC giving us a solid Lambert-Ramirez-Schneiderlin/Cork backbone through the center of the pitch but while he shown lots of flashes, he hasn't been consistent enough. And Davis is miscast as an AMC though he does his best and we can get by with it.

I wonder if Ramirez isn't still injured. It sounds like he might have had Compartment Syndrome when he initially got hurt. And in that case it would not be surprising if he suffered some nerve/muscle/tissue damage and while he may be recovered, he may have lost some strength and he probably can't get it back until he can get into a rehab/weight routine over the summer.
 
RickieRickie said:
We dominated QPR, Norwich and Wigan. 67% possession against QPR (21shots to 7), 59% against Norwich (15 shots to 6) and 55% against Wigan (17 shots to 7). I think the tactics were right for all those games and every game so far. Putting the ball into the net is not something Pochettino can do for them.
Click to expand...

I think we could do with a little training on finishing. I'm pretty sure once Lala scores again he'll go on to get a boat-load. Shaw's got to be due a goal soon, the way he's been playing.

We've dominated most games (Newcastle excepted) and showing that kind of quality we'll win more than we lose in the long run.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back