Fullbacks

Wow, Billy. So you want to be my girlfriend?

 

Seems to be a more common thing in the modern game, allowing crosses coming in and teams backing themselves to defend them.

 

It’s Edwards I’m pretty sure. The big striker will always peel onto him as he is small for a centre back and (as we are using Manning as the example would also fit) he is the furthest centre back away from the cross so the crosser can easily over hit every time to avoid Quarshie or Wood and hope their guy gets onto it

Think it’s noticeable that we haven’t said much about crossing danger coming from the right and I think a large part of that is due to Edwards then being the front post guy so not as much a liability

 

This is a good point and one I hadn’t considered. I do feel it is easier to get a cross in against Manning, but perhaps the fact that Quarshie and Woods will be less involved in heading away from this side is significant. I suspect there are also more quality right footed wingers in this league. The Derby right wing was absolutely excellent and whipped in numerous pinpoint crosses.

 

It makes the argument that it is absolutely essential that any crosses from the left are challenged and closed down though. No point backing off when their winger has about half the box to be able to aim at if they fancy their striker beating Edwards in the air most of the time

With big strikers coming more into fashion Edwards may become too much of a risk and the smaller ball playing centre back might be a thing of a few years ago and he is too young to be able to have appreciated it.

The other option is to have Edwards as the central defender in a three so he doesn’t get isolated as much but that comes with other issues and I don’t know if he’s good enough to warrant that over just not playing him ahead of Stephens/THB

 

Yep. If you have a tricky winger, you need a helping hand closing down, but if it is someone who likes to whip it in early you need to get there asap. And I have seen more of the latter in this league than the former.

 

The closing down would also be a lot more doable in a back 4 I think. Won’t have the wingback further up the field and unable to close down. The centre mid getting across is the only real option unless you want a centre back getting pulled out wide which most coaches usually hate.

Is also the issue with a back three where the centre backs are quite spread out to cover for the full backs going forward, which always leaves a channel for a pass in between middle centre back and left/right centre back if the attacking player gets their movement right

Basically three at the back makes you a lot more open defensively imo and is more of an attacking formation despite having the extra defender on

 

Yeah, playing three at the back will often both invite balls to be played into channels, and create 2-on-1 situations against your WBs.

I can never forget our trip to the Vitality under Koeman. For 45 minutes, Bmouth killed us down both sides incessantly; their FBs and wingers permanently doubled up on our WBs. It was so painful to watch.

 

We've got Jelert and Roerslev (along with Fraser) for that position. We really don't need Bree.

 

Brees better than all of them though and it’s just Spors trying to be clever and getting carried away that we have them and let Bree go

 

Are we going to blame Spors that not one Saints manager has made Bree a key player in his side?

 

Presume sarcasm?

Jelert I suspect is levels above Bree. Roerslev has had a bad game, but he's a very experienced and capable full back.

 

I mean, we had KWP, so its not really an argument.